neglesaks

Hope this is the right forum.

Anyway:

Is there any solid evidence that the person Jesus Christ of Nazareth ever existed?

One of the historical pieces of "evidence" that christians espouse (apart from the Bible, as if that's a dependable source on this matter... ) are the writings of the historian Josephus, who was a contemporary of the mythical Jesus.

Only problem is that skeptics claim that the Josephus writings were christian forgeries - "historical implants" if you will.

Read on:
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/josephus.html

So, are there any evidence whatsoever that the mythical Jesus Christ EVER existed?

DanBZ

It's really difficult to find an answer to this question, since the evidence is pretty inconclusive in either direction. If you want to read more about this subject, there are numerous threads about it in the Abrahamic Scripture section.

Bodhi

I consider the Christian religion itself to be evidence that a Jesus existed. He may not have been exactly like the Jesus that Christians believe in today, but I think there was probably a Rabbi named Jesus or Yeshua who was crucified and inspired the Christian religion.

Tiberius

Do you consider Islam to be evidence that Allah exists then?

There are many curious things about the existence of Jesus.

There are no writings about him from the time that he lived, there are no examples of any of his works, there are no eyewitness accounts of him, and many aspects of the story of Jesus (such as being born on December 25, being killed and rising again a little later) come from other myths that predate the Jesus story. not to mention the writings that mention jesus, yet had actually been tampered with in order to make him seem more plausible.

I have not seen any relaiable evidence that jesus ever existed, which is curious when you think about it. Such evidence should exist if Jesus was as widely known as the Bible makes him out to be, yes? All those people who saw him in person, and none of them them thought to write it down?

Bodhi

No, but I consider it evidence that it's founder Mohammed probably existed.

I know there's no contemporary evidence, but if you think about it it makes sense because at the time there were lots of faith healers, self proclaimed messiahs, and rabbis teaching similar things as Jesus... he didn't really become a note worthy figure until after he died and developed a large following.

Gooch's dad

In a previous thread, I pointed out that Jesus-Mythers have the insupportable criterion of "eyewitness accounts" to show that Jesus existed. Another poster, I don't recall who, said "what Jesus Mythers demand that?"

Post #4 is a great example. It's based on ad hoc nonsensical rubrics for historical inquiry.

Me, I think the fact that both Paul and Josephus independently refer to James, the brother of Jesus, is pretty damned good evidence.

(waits for the next JM'er to confuse Antiquities 20.9.1 with the Testimonium)

RAFH

<edit>

jsygirl

I think there was a historical figure (let's call him Yeshua) who existed in the first century CE. My own reading has led me to believe that if he existed, he would have been "freedom fighter" of sorts against the romans. (At least two Disciples can be interpreted as being "terrorists" or freedom fighters - Judas Iscariot and Simon Zelotes)

The mythical Jesus-the-Christ, however: No. This figure appears to be a fabrication, based on a little (a very little) history - Yeshua - some old pagan myths (Tammuz, etc), and some other extras from St. Paul, St. Peter and co.

And to clear up a few points:

a) There is no evidence for a town called Nazareth existing in Galilee at that time. the earliest date for Nazareth is in the third century, long after Jesus' death. "Nazareth" is most likely a corruption of "Nazarene" - a rather popular cult-ish group at the time.
b) I doubt that Josephus is fake. He was a Jewish general who switched sides to fight for the Romans. if the early Christians wanted to fake some convincing comtemporary accounts, they wouldn't have made him a Roman.
c) There is no record of a census occurring at the time mentioned in the Nativity. Even if a census had occurred, it would not have required Joseph to go to the birthplace of an ancestor who died a thousand years previously to be counted.
d) (my personal favourite) - The mythological Jesus is supposed to be "of the line of David", right? Um, If Jesus is the Son of God, he is NOT a descendant of David. (No-one ever mentions Mary being a David-descendant, and I think that sort of "title" would be passed down father-to-son).

TheGreaterForce

yes, i'm in agree with above poster on the "historical jesus" aka yeshua. i feel much more comfortable refering to this "possible" historical figure during the first century. i doubted the existance after i was introduced to some of the jesus myther's works, then i got to start thinking and reading some more.

books like "john d. crossan and g.a wells convinced me enough. no. yeshua never insisted he was "god" or advocated any of the garbaged conjoured up in the NT. a simple pesant and "possible" leading freedom fighter trying to lift the bands of roman ruler ship leading a small revolt against them. the jews simply lost the war. yeshua must have been a major problem against the romans. thats why they killed him or crucified him. a "freedom fighter" if you will. a jew. a "warrior".


after his death, a few decades rolled around. josephus was told to re account the jewish war to the romans. afterwards, he probably had secert records of a "warrior" that was giving the romans hell. the romans decided to take this figure and roll him up witht he other dying and rising mythological pagon "gods" and bang!. theirs your christ of faith.


TGF

aa5874

Jesus Christ cannot be placed in history. Even Nazareth, the place where Jesus is said to have lived, is not prophesied in the OT. The author of Matthew completely mis-reads the OT and erroneously thinks that living in Nazareth is equivalent to being a Nazarite. In fact there is no 'Nazarene' in the OT, there is 'Nazarite' and this word has more to do with a life style rather than a location. See Matthew 2:23 and Numbers ch6.

As you will see that any reference to a Jesus Christ from Nazareth can not be the real Jesus, since no prophesy supports Jesus being a Nazarene or from Nazareth.

In any event, without going much further, there is no prophesy in the entire OT to support anyone named Jesus Christ in the NT. All the prophecies were taken out of context, and it is for that reason the Jews are still wating for the true Messiah.

Jesus was mythical and his fabrication was through mis-interpretation of the OT.