shamrockhoax

Is it common knowledge that Jesus was a real person and not just some myth created by the authors of the gospels?

Here is a site that someone sent me to.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/kking/extern.html

I've done a search on the database here trying to find a thread that talked about this. Although I'm sure this has come up before, I couldn't find anything. I have not googled the questions yet but will get to that shortly.

Does anybody know if there is actual non-biblical proof that Jesus was real?

I was discussing this with someone else and they said that up until the 18th century the existance of Jesus was never denied. I don't know if this is true, but I sincerely doubt it. Has anybody ever heard this before.

Amaleq13

You might have better luck searching here for "Doherty" in the title and checking his website: The Jesus Puzzle.

Diogenes the Cynic

The linked website contains a number of spurious references or references which are selectively interpreted. The Josephus quote is almost universally regarded as being at least a partial if not total forgery. Do a forum search for "testimonium Flavianum" to find out more about it.

The Tactitus quote may refer to Christians in Rome but more than likely, the information about "Christ" came from Christians themselves so it isn't really all that helpful. It just shows (at most) that there were Christians in Rome under Nreo, which we already knew.

The Talmud refers to a different "Yeshu" who was hung (not crucified) for sorcery a hundred years before Jesus.

The rest of the site's references are spurious "documents" from the 2nd or 3rd century. Interestingly enough, it does not mention the passage of Josephus which describes the execution of James, "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ," but that passage has been severely challenged on authenticity as well.

The answer to your OP is that there is no smoking gun evidence that Jesus was a real historical person.

fjripit

There is no "knowledge" that Jesus ever lived. Other than religious texts, there is very little in the way of evidence that Jesus ever existed let alone the son of God, Messiah, or anything else.

If the historicity of Jesus was a proposition that had to pass a "beyond a reasonable doubt" test, such as in a court of law, it would probably fail.

Based on available evidence (or lack of) and other unbiased biblical scholarship, a belief that Jesus never existed is justified.

Reference the works of G.A. Wells or Michael Martin.

jonesg

I just read some interviews with theology prof's who say the sparse references to historical Jesus are not disputed by serious reputable scholars, I guess that excludes internet rantings.

The Talmud, writes of a false messiah, Jesus, born of a Roman soldier and Mary, he practised magic and was justly condemned to death.

Then theres the book of Thomas. It was rejected by most Christians, so its not likely to have been used as some sort of conspiracy to prove a myth.

Toto

This is a common tactic with theologians to avoid dealing with the lack of evidence.

If you wish to make an argument from authority, you should at least name the authority. Who was this theologian?

This was written in response to the Christian myth and well after it was current.

Conspiracies are hardly necessary. But the Gospel of Thomas does very little to establish Jesus as a historical figure. There are no biographical details.

jonesg

Sheesh, now I gots to look it up, ok

Bruce Metzger, PH.D , currently professor emeritus at Princeton theological seminary,
he is co-editor of the "NEw Oxford Annotated Bible with the apocrypha"
Plus a slew of other books, if you scan the footnotes of any authoritative book on the text of the New testament, odds are his name is there.

John MCray PH.D , former trustee and research associate of W F Fullbright inst of Archeological Research in Jerusalem, a current trustee of Near East Archeological Society.

Gregory A Boyd PH.D , Master of Divinity from Yale, Doctorate(magna cum laude) Princeton. Authored lots of books, Letters from a skeptic, God at war, Jesus under seige.

Yes, the Talmud was written after the fact, thats usually how facts are reported isn't it. hahaha

What sort of biographical details did you want to see, how tall he was?
The point I was making is Thomas's writing establishes Jesus was.
Its not the biography which is important, its the message he brought.

Sensei Meela

Not when the question is one of historical existence, the sorry apologetic notwithstanding.

Toto

So which of these three authored the quote, and where is a cite to the quote?

The Talmud was written centuries after Jesus supposedly lived, and seems to be a reaction to the Christians' stories, not to Jesus himself.

Any biographical details would tend to support your argument. But there don't appear to be any that can be traced to the time he apparently lived.

The Gospel of Thomas does nothing to establish Jesus' existence, anymore than "Jesus Christ Superstar" does.

So maybe it's not important if he existed or not? There appears to be little if nothing that was unique to Jesus.

NOGO

Can Christians even agree on what the message is?
Let's see.
Some humans long ago did something to offend Yahweh.
Yahweh needed a human sacrifice to put things right.
We know from the Hebrew bible or the OT that Yaweh needs blood in order to forgive. What the OT does not speak about at all is Yahweh's Son.
So he sent his Son, which noone knew anything about, in order to
get killed so Yahweh can have the blood and thus redeem humanity.
There is a catch. You need to believe this absurd story in order to be saved.

Is this the message?