NO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE OF JESUS

According to Remsburg, “Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ.” Nor, we may add, do any of these authors make note of the Disciples or Apostles; increasing the embarrassment from the silence of history concerning the foundation of Christianity. In other words, the only information of the life of Jesus comes from Christian believers.

Logic would dictate that if all the miracles which Jesus performed or surrounded him:

1. Being born of a virgin mother;

2. Three Magi following the brightest star forever to see the demigod;

3. The slaying of the innocent babies;

4. Raising the dead, healing the blind and lame;

4. Having the sky turn to blackness when Jesus died;

5. Earthquakes in the region;

6. The dead Jewish saints coming out of their graves going to Jerusalem; and

7. The Resurrection.

that at least one of these world headline news events would have at least a small mention by at least one of the foregoing historian and writers. But, NO, they are totally silent!

Only Christian writers wrote about this. Do you think they were biased? Were the stories true or did these writers just continue the myth? Were they trying to promote a new religion, based upon Paul using the Jesus’ myth?

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/nohistoricalevidenceofjesus.html

Discuss...

when i die i doubt there will be any historical evidence of me 2,000 years after.....i don't know about youselfs.

about the miricals, jesus was thought of by the leaders of the time to be nothing but a con man, they thought everything he did was fake. he was seen as a loon and sentanced to death....only a few people seen him after death, the marys and the disciples. jesus was basicly somebody thought of as a pesky criminal, they killed him, burried him and thought no more of it.

Ther's already a thred open on this subject that has loads of discussion



fullywired

You guys can't even spell am I'm supposed to take your word over theirs?

lol

I'm assuming the forged jewish author you are referring to is Flavius. I don't know what evidence there is to support this claim. Having read the antiquities of the jews and the wars of the jews(where jesus the christ and the christian tribe are mentioned), i remain unconvinced that there is any forgery.
I found the relevant paragraphs as candid and consistent as the rest of flavius.
My only critisism of his writngs is his back and forth with chronolgy mainly due to his apparent inability to stick to one topic for long.

Ah, Remsburg's List
Look up on wikipeida or google the names in the list. Most of them aren't historians. Most are poets, playwrights, teachers of rhetoric. One guy wrote about trees and agriculture.

sorry about that .just not a good typist .I can type it's my fingers that can't (I assume it was meant for me)

The only valid writings apologetics can offer come from decades after Jesus' death. It's quite funny. Thousands of people watched him perform miracles but none of them made any record of such an amazing occasion.

There's not even any historical evidence for the existence of the town of Nazareth in Biblical times. No Archaeological or historical evidence has been found.

There's a site that elaborates on the topic of Jesus' existence: http://jesusneverexisted.com - although a warning, some Christians may find it offensive.

The four gospels were written by anonymous authors beginning with Mark (70-75 CE) and ending with John (95-100 CE). They were written some forty plus years after his crucifixtion and are considered faith documents, midrash. Their purpose was to address the numerous questions being asked by various communities--hence the term "Gospel" or "Good News". They are not eye-witness accounts, not biographies and it is readily apparent that there is much theological editing already occurring. They were promoting Jesus to the communities they were addressing. And it doesn't mean they were lying. They obviously believed Jesus to be divine so forth and so on.

From Jesus to Christ is considered one of the top sites dealing with Biblical scholarship.

What are the Gospels is based on one of the seminal works From Jesus to Christ, by Professor L. Michael White
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...ry/gospels.html

Here is an excellent discussion from various Biblical scholars, with varying viewpoints, regarding the Gospels ...

HOUR THREE follows the story of the first attempts to write the life of Jesus--the Gospels: The Gospels were products of social and religious reconstruction in the period after the war, ranging from roughly 70 to after 100 C.E. The program looks at how these stories were passed down before they were written. And how the writing of each Gospel reflects the experiences and circumstances of early Christians. They do not all tell the same story of Jesus because each one is responding to a different audience and circumstances. For example, Matthew's gospel is clearly written for a Jewish Christian audience; it is the most Jewish of all the gospels.

During this time, a growing tension appeared between the emergent Christian groups and their Jewish neighbors. The result was a process of debate, identity, and separation that shaped both religious traditions forever. And there were still other external forces, including a second, devastating Jewish war, the Bar Kochbah revolt, which erupted in 132 C.E.

SOURCE: From Jesus to Christ
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...c/synopsis.html

My personal view of Jesus ... Did Jesus exist? IMHO, yes. However, the Jesus described in the NT is almost wholly fictional, the product of Paul and later the evangelists.

I believe Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. I can see Jesus growing up in a time of extreme religious fervor--almost unprecedented in human history--seeing the terrible cruelty of the Romans on a daily basis, hearing the constant mutterings of a coming messiah (a widely held belief at that time) that would deliver the Jews from their despair. Such dramatic events would have had a major impact on anybody--particularly a youngster. Later on in his life, I believe Jesus became convinced that it was he and John the Baptizer were somehow involved with the end of the age and the coming Kingdom of God. A little later on, Jesus goes to the Temple, flies into a fiery rage, starts whipping money changers and overturning tables (I believe this event did, indeed, occur), and gets arrested for it. Now seen as troublemaker and a rabble-rouser, he is executed by the Sanhedrin/Romans--who cannot afford any mischief with so many pilgrims in the city. Jesus becomes a symbol of what not to do during Passover.

Then there’s the gentle Jesus. I sometimes can’t help but wonder if the Jesus as characterized in the Gospel of Thomas (sometimes referred to as the 5th gospel) is not the real Jesus. This Gnostic figure is very much human, was no miracle worker, and preached a message of spiritual enlightenment. I would like to think that this was the real Jesus. I don’t know, it just rings true to me. Of course, the fact that early bishops/fathers--particularly Iraenaeus--went out of his way to try and squash the Gnostics (calling them heretics), makes me wonder if their [Gnostics] view of Jesus was, indeed, the correct view.

I believe that Christianity is “...essentially a reflection of the worship of Attis, Osiris, Dionysos, Orpheus, and Adonis. All are built around the theme of a Savior-god who takes human form, teaches, suffers, dies, and rises again. The minor divergences from this theme lend no greater authority to one than another.” (Orpheus, A History of Religions, Reinach, Salomon, 1930, p.228). I think the major characteristics of the popular ancient saviour-gods and divine heroes were applied to the NT Jesus: the virgin birth, born by the power of a holy spirit, miracle worker, raising the dead, dying, resurrecting, and salvation, ascending to heaven and returning, claim to be the son of a god etc. Such stories were numerous and well known. For example, Alexander the Great, Pythagoras, Plato were supposedly born of women and conceived by the power of a holy spirit. Heracles was the child of the Zeus and a human woman. Julius Caesar (48 BCE) was proclaimed “god manifest, savior of human life, and divine man.” August was said to have been sent by God, Himself. Livy claimed that Romulus was conceived by a god, born of a virgin, and left no bodily remains after his death. Like the much later Jesus, he reappears to “commission his successors”. And then there’s my personal favorite, Apollonius of Tyana. He was said to be the son of Zeus, perform incredible miracles--including raising the dead. He had quite the following. On and on and on.

I think such popular stories would have easily found themselves woven into the Jesus story. Jesus became a new god constructed from the most popular characteristics of the old gods.

Kindly,

Sean

Another interesting part of this is that if Jesus had truly been the messiah predicted in the Old Testement, then there would be no wars since his time to this one. Also, there would be no doubt in anyones mind as to who the messiah was/is. Sort of like there is no doubt as to who the last president was. You could go to the library and look it up. That there is legitamate doubt as to Jesus messiahship is proof that he was not the messiah.