RUmike

Sorry, I don't have any references offhand. But the opinion I gave was from doing my own reading of different scholars' opinions. I don't know of one major scholar who doesn't think Jospehus mentioned Jesus (e.g. Meiers, Sanders, Crossan, etc.)

Wisdumb

The Quran mentions Jesus. He is called Issa ibin Mariam. Which translates into english as Jesus son of Mary. It even provides certain details about his life.

A friend of mine, who happens to be Hindu, told me one christmas that his family celebrates the holiday because certain Hindus believe Jesus (called ishu) visted them during his lifetime and through his actions revealed himself to be a divine figure. He in considered almost like a saint in their religion. There are many writings about Ishu in the hindu religion.

These two sources are huge if you accept them as credible. We musn't forget that these holy books, although plagued with inconsistencies were essentially earlier man's version of history books. Plus there have been many gospels that weren't included in the new testament, such as that of Mary Magdeline's (which was found in Alexandria Egypt), that discusses Jesus. We also should keep in mind that for a document to make it through a 2,000 year period is a feat in itself. There could have been countless recordings we never found due to weather, fires, etc.

So the question remains: with so little historical proof of Jesus outside of the religious texts, how is it Christianity has become what it is now? The answer is basically that oral tradition was responsible for it. These stories were passed down from generation to generation through word of mouth. You ever wonder why many europeon cathedrals have so many icons in them even though Jesus spoke out againt it? Well images were the only way to communicate the story of Jesus to a predominantly illiterate public. People couldn;t even read the Bible let alone care about historical records.

premjan

Did Jesus speak out against icons?

gregor

Wisdum,

So the Koran, written 600 years after Jesus' death, is evidence of what again?

The remainder of your post is below the level of discourse of this forum.

spacejunkie

Don't be sorry. Just by mentioning the names you've given me much to look into. Thank you for your insights.

countjulian

No, that translates as Esau son of Mary, which is a reall howler considering how unlikely it would be for a Jew, especially of that time, to namer their child "Esau." Although Isa is somewhat similiar to the Jesus tales (and the Muslim scripture says the Christians worship Isa) the two characters are actually somewhat different.

premjan

I think the Romans would have written his name 'Iesus' (without the J) so Issa could be the same as Jessa.

countjulian

No, if the Romans had had access to his original Aramiac name, Yeshua, they would have written ieshua; the Greeks could not do thise because these is no "sh" sound in Greek.

S.C.Carlson

There's no "sh" sound in Latin either.

Wisdumb

Nope sorry Issa or Essa, however you want to spell it, is Jesus in arabic. Yesuh is another name for him in arabic. Even practicing muslims and religious leaders such as imams agree with this. Jesus of Nazareth is a prophet in Islam.
Perhaps if Jesus catered to the rich elites they would have mentioned him more in their writings, but he instead spent his time with common people. To say that since he wasn't included in historical documents written by romans is proof that he wasn't important at the time is proof you missed the entire point of his mission. He set out the fix the things he felt Judasim was doing wrong at the time, such as being too ritualistic. He set out to show people that to find God you could do it yourself and not necessarily through a religious leader. So in this sense, he was more of a problem to the Jewish authorities than to the romans. I believe he set out to persuade the Jewish people first, hence his apostles and followers, and after his death use them to spread it around the world. The romans did not view him as an important enough figure because he was more about challenging the Judaism than anything else while alive. Maybe that may explain why he is seldom ever mentioned.