Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Historicity of Jesus

351 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Davros of Skaro
9 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

Atheists as well as some of the spiritualy oriented people claim that Jesus was not a historical figure. I wonder what arguments support this claim?


I will make some points which support that Jesus was indeed a historical figure, and I am also very intrigued to hear the other side of the story from people who think He was not a historical figure.

Here's some advice to check out:

How to Successfully Argue Jesus Existed (or Anything Else in the World)

"In conjunction with my Critical Thinking course this month, and in light of a number of casual debates I’ve been in lately, I’ve drawn up this twelve step advice, which actually applies to all arguments for any conclusions in any subject whatever. But I’ll use defending the historicity of Jesus as the key example. The first rule is pretty obvious…"



9 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:


These are the some of the  points which support the thesis of Jesus being a historical figure:


1.      Virtually all New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain.

Have you checked their methods?

One argument this so called "consensus" uses is the "criterion of embarrassment".

They say Jesus's crucifixion is too humiliating for people to use as a religion. Therefore it's true.

This is fallacious. There's been an ancient Goddess  (Inanna) worshiped where she's slowly stripped naked, killed, and hung on a hook. There was a God (Attis) who was castrated. It was a common theme for a deity to go through a struggle, or passion.

Btw... I only use Wiki for making  minor points only out of convenience. 

9 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

2.      Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus in Books 18 and 20. The general scholarly view is that, while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation or forgery.

Read this:


And this:


9 hours ago, Mr. Argon said:

3.      The Roman historian Tacitus, in his Annals (written ca. AD 115), book 15, chapter 44.,[37] describes Nero's scapegoating of the Christians following the Fire of Rome. He says that their founder was named Christus (the Christian title for Jesus), that he was executed under Pontius Pilate, and that the movement of his followers, initially checked, then broke out again in Judea and even in Rome itself.[38]


This is evidence of Christians, and what they believed. Nobody doubts the existence of Christians believing Jesus crucified. 

I will forego the suspicious thing known about this passage.

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.