CelticChic

Question, friend of mine knows someone that describes themselves as an 'agnostic christian' who believes in Jesus but not in god because there's some historical proof that Jesus lived. I had thought that this idea (the historical proof) was untrue. Can anyone point me to some (reliable) material?

achristianbeliever

Can I ask according to who? As far as I know the overwhelming historical and scholarly opinion is that he existed. I'm sorry but Wells, Bruno Bauer and Doherty do not constitute reputable enough to make the Jesus myth credible enough for me. So before I continue would you tell me what you've heard the overwhleming historical and scholarly opinion is?



Howard Marshall-I believe in the historical Jesus
Michael Grant-Jesus: A historian's review of the gospels
Will Durant-Caesar and Christ
Rudolf Bultmann-Jesus and the Word
Rober Van Voorst-Jesus outside the New Testament

Biff the unclean

There is no record of an historic Jesus, nor anyone else at the time that the character might have been based on.
If there were Christians would be constantly throwing him in your face instead of the tap dance you see them doing now.

achristianbeliever

Then why are historians and scholars so adamanent against the Jesus myth?

Jakanapes

hmm, I thought the area was crawling with prophet types around that time and that's what led to the rise of the Jesus myth?

Bright Life

achristianbeliever,

When one is looking for "proof" of a historical figure, contemporary records and writings are considered evidence.

For example, Roman records of taxes or censuses, like the one that supposedly drew the Holy Family to Bethlehem.

Another example would include writings of historians who lived at that time.

(And a late welcome, BTW.)

achristianbeliever

thank you.

I'm sorry but could you explain how that's relevant to my question?

p.s. sorry adamanent = adamant

Biff the unclean

The ones you cite are adamant because they make their livings selling Jesus.

Biff the unclean

It was, but no one was recorded who might have the Jesus stories pinned on him. To be "historic" you have to be included in history.
Since Jesus in the stories does little more than repeat the doings of several Hellenist demigods you can find your "original" for Jesus in them without speculating someone unknown on the ground at the time

Mountain Man

They are not. Only biblical "historians and scholars" claim jesus was real. It's just confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias is a type of statistical bias describing the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions. In inductive inference, confirmation bias is a type of cognitive bias toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study. To compensate for this observed human tendency, the scientific method is constructed so that we must try to disprove our hypotheses.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias