Did Jesus exist?

[Insuperable]

The best reference comes from Tacitus, roman historian and senaor, written in 116AD.

[Awebo]

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

He did but i think alot of the stuff said about him are exaggerated and some of the stories about him probably didn't happen.

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

Lmao

[Also]

The Josephus quotes have already been shown to be a hoax. None of the other people were contemporaries of Jesus.

This guy claims Jesus never existed:

lol, did you see my previous post?

There are several non-Biblical historical pieces on Jesus, however the film maker later calls these into question. Indeed, there are several people who are just like Jesus, in fact Apollonius of Tyana is a very famous one, which the film surprisingly does not mention [74]. Of course the known historical accounts of Jesus are pretty vague and do refer to him as "Christus", which does mean "anointed one" in Greek, so this isn't a real piece of undeniable proof. However, Lucian who lived shortly after Jesus, does mention him directly [75]. The film also shows a list of other known historians of the time that do not mention Jesus or Christianity, that seems pretty obvious because at the time nobody knew who Jesus was, and his followers were a very small group.

Saying that the fourth source of Josephus has been "proven to be a forgery for hundreds of years" over simplifies the situation, and is wrong. Josephus mentioned Jesus twice, the first time is too pro-Christian to be original work and it is obvious it was changed by Christians at some point, however the second time Josephus mentions Jesus, he mentions him in a negative way. Therefore, while the first time may have been changed by Christians and can be discarded, the second time was likely not changed, and cannot be discounted [76]. However, it may come down to a situation where belief in Jesus and his life is an act of faith, and regardless of the situation, the above paragraph as stated by the film maker, really has nothing to do with the rest of his claims. It appears as though he just wants to prove badly that Jesus didn't exist.

http://conspiracies.skepticproject.c...eist/part-one/


That Jesus existed as a historical person is a fact, I am baffled that people can deny that. This is ridiculously absurd. The scholars are virtually unanimous in saying he existed.

[wvwvw]

The Josephus quotes have already been shown to be a hoax. None of the other people were contemporaries of Jesus]

Josephus quote:

FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS (37 - 100 A.D.) Josephus was a first century pharisee and historian of both priestly and royal ancestry who provided important insight into first-century Judaism. Josephus was born only three years after the crucifixion of Jesus, making him a credible witness to the historicity of Jesus.

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him. For he appeared to them alive again the third day. As the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribes of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day." Antiquities XVIII, 3:2

Arguments for and against its Authenticity:

Spoiler!

ARGUMENTS FOR AUTHENTICITY

1: The vocabulary found in the Testimonium is consistent with
the vocabulary used in other passages in Antiquities. The phrase
Now about this time is used at the beginning of this passage as
well dozens of other passages. It's also doubtful a Christian
forger would have referred to Jesus as simply a wise man but
then go on to assert claims of His divinity. Yet, Josephus uses
this word to refer to many other notable (and purely human)
figures. Josephus also uses the description of Jesus' miracles as
wonderful [astonishing, surprising] works. Lastly, Josephus
refers to Christianity as a tribe- just like he does many other
times in reference to both major and minor sects.

2: Once the disputed words (printed in regular font in the above
passage) are removed, Josephus' though process flows just as
well. This lends credence to the possibility the passage wasn't
wholly interpolated but perhaps altered. When we omit the
disputed words, the passage seems consistent with what an
orthodox Jew would say concerning Jesus:

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, for he was a
doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the
truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews
and many of the Gentiles. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of
the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross,
those that loved him at the first did not forsake him. And the
tribes of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this
day."

3: Greek and Arabic translations of the Testimonium contain
disclaimers preceding the suspicious declarations such as "Jesus
who was believed to be the Christ" and "It has been
reported that He appeared to them alive again on the third
day." If anything, this could lead to the speculation that
Christian authors did not add to the text but edited it by deleting
the disclaimers!

4: The earliest versions of Antiquities contain the passage as it
is presented above. Objection: The earliest surviving copy
dates from 10th century A.D. (plenty of time from the
publication of Antiquities to alter or interpolate the passage).
Answer: This is true. We do not have an extant copy of
Antiquities dating from before 10th century A.D. What we do
have however, is several citations of this passage by other
authors prior to the 10th century).

5: Many defenders of the Testimonium's authenticity speculate
that if it had been wholly interpolated by a Christian, they most
likely would have inserted the passage next to the John the
Baptist references. Though I understand their reasoning, I feel
this argument is based on conjecture instead of evidence. The
alleged Christian forger could have had just as much reason to
insert this passage next to the John passage, the Pilate passage,
or the James passage.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST AUTHENTICITY

1: This passage seems to interrupt the continuity of Josephus'
thought process in the previous and subsequent verses.
Answer: Interruptions are frequently found in Josephus' works
since he composed his histories during different sittings.
Furthermore, Josephus was known to use the assistance of
scribes during his writings which could easily resolve this issue.

2: The passage contains proclamations an orthodox Jew would
not make such as Jesus being the Christ. Answer: In other
translations (Greek and Arabic) the suspicious statements
contain disclaimers such as "Jesus who was believed to be the
Christ" and "It has been reported..." This presents the theory
Josephus was recording the beliefs regarding Jesus and not
necessarily his personal opinion (as a responsible historian
should do).

3: Early Christian authors like Origen and Justin Martyr do not
mention this passage in their writings. Answer: I'm not sure
what the motive is behind this objection because Origen does
reference the other passage by Josephus yet critics claim the
reference is "too late" to be reliable! But, for argument's sake if
we assume this passage did exist in the form most scholars
believe it did, the early church fathers might not have felt the
need to refer to it. The [original?] passage serves as evidence
for the historicity of Jesus- a topic not hotly debated at this point
as the burden of proof revolved around His divinity. Objection:
Origen attests to the historicity of John the Baptist in his work
Contra Celsus when it wasn't even being debated. He could have
cited this passage too. Answer: In Origen's Contra Celsus the
divinity of Jesus was being debated- not his existence. Though
Josephus allegedly admits to Jesus performing miracles, he does
not state how. It would have made no sense for Origen to cite
the Testimonium since it doesn't either dispute or confirm
Celsus' claims. Furthermore, even if the original Antiquities still
existed in Josephus' own handwriting, critics would say he either
drew his information from Christian sources or was to late to be
considered reliable!

4: Josephus' Jewish Wars also contains this passage so it must
be a forgery. Answer: This is false- the Testimonium is not
found in the Jewish Wars. To the contrary- Skeptics criticize that
the Testimonium is not found in The Wars but should have
been!

5: Josephus should have written more regarding Jesus if the
passage was genuine. Answer: What topic or how much an
author writes about a topic is their prerogative. Also, since
Josephus believed Jesus was just another messianic pretender
and false prophet, it would have made little sense for Josephus
to have written volumes concerning His life and actions. It would
be similar to a modern a Christian author exhaustively recording
the life of Jim Jones or David Koresh. Josephus most likely held
Jesus in the same regard and felt he warranted little mention.

After weighing the evidence for myself, I personally agree with the consensus of scholars that Josephus did make some mention of Jesus in
this passage but that the text was later altered. Because opinions differ so greatly, I will leave the final conclusion up to the reader. For a more
in-depth discussion on this topic, I suggest reading this non-biased article which details both sides of the on-going debate (although this author
believes the passage was wholly interpolated).

We'll now examine the second passage given to us by Josephus. Fortunately, it is not surrounded in as much controversy!

"So [Ananus] assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together
with some others, and having accused them as lawbreakers, he delivered them over to be stoned." Antiquities XX 9:1

Skeptic Interjection: Is it possible this passage was interpolated by early Christians?
Answer: It must be noted that no copy of Antiquities has ever surfaced without the above text quoted as it is above. Critics are suspicious of
the so-called Christ statement yet this reference (rather than the Christ) shows Josephus was not condoning the belief but simply
documenting it. Also, this passage concerns the actions of the priest Ananus- Jesus and James were not even the primary focus of this verse!
Lastly, this passage is cited in other early works which attests to its authenticity.

Even if we dismiss the disputed words in Josephus' Testimonium, we still see he testifies to a number of things in the above two passages:
Jesus lived in the first century
He performed wonderful works (miracles)
Some believed Jesus to be the Christ
He was a teacher
He had many followers
He was tried by Pilate
He was crucified
He was the founder of Christianity
James was the brother of Jesus
http://thedevineevidence.com/jesus_history.html

[wvwvw]

8 Reasons Jesus Definitely Existed

#8
For all his reported ability to kill things with the power of words, Gospels’ Jesus is basically the Aquaman of Biblical figures. Compared to, say, King David, his awesomeness-to-piousness ratio is sadly lacking. And that’s important, because the Messiah was prophesied to be a warrior king who would flush the scum out of Jerusalem and bring about God’s kingdom on Earth. By contrast, Jesus rides around on a donkey and is executed before he can get anything done. Remember the criterion of embarrassment? In the first century, crucifixion was a humiliating way to die. Anyone writing Jesus from the ground up would have had him go out in a one-on-one fistfight with Julius Caesar or something. As scholar Bart Ehrman puts it: “The Christians did not invent Jesus. They invented the idea that the messiah had to be crucified.” Basically, early Christians were so embarrassed by the crucifixion they did everything they could to turn it into a victory. Hell, they probably wished they had just made him up—it would’ve saved them all a lot of trouble.

[wvwvw]

#3 The Ossuary



If you’re above a certain age, you might remember the 2001 discovery of an ancient bone box inscribed with the words ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.’ For those of you that aren’t—you should know that the world went nuts. Here was undeniable proof of Jesus’s historical existence. Then, in 2004, Israeli police arrested the Tel Aviv collector who found it on suspicion of forgery. So much for that, huh?Not exactly. Last year, an Israeli court threw out the case when it became apparent most of the ‘expert witnesses’ were either lying or just plain wrong. The ‘smoking gun’ was a fake inscription that turned out to be nothing of the sort, and more tests are now being done to figure out (again) if the box is genuine. Now, we still currently don’t know if it’s real—only that it’s not a deliberate, modern fake. But if it turns out to be the real deal, it could yet prove to be the most important religious find of the century.

# 4 Tacitus


Tacitus was the Roman equivalent of The History Channel and National Geographic all rolled into one brainy, cynical guy. Over a stupefying number of books, his Annals describe life under Tiberius, Nero and other lunatics, while also dealing with day-to-day existence in Rome. Significantly, that includes the period surrounding the Great Fire. For those of you who hate clicking on links, the important bit goes:“Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”That’s the first reliable account of the crucifixion in history. Although he doesn’t cite his source, Tacitus had access to a heck-load of official documents and almost always noted when he was using hearsay. Since everyone but the most-insane of scholars accept this passage as genuine, it establishes the crucifixion as a historical event—one widely known even by A.D. 64. Furthermore, recently physical evidence was found proving the existence and presence of Pilate just where the Gospels say he was.

[wvwvw]

6 The Baptism


Like a birthplace in the sticks, the Baptism is another feature of Jesus’ story that doesn’t tally with Biblical prophecy. At the time, the idea of a spiritually inferior person baptizing a superior one was completely unheard of. Having the messiah baptized by anyone would be seen more as humiliation than humility. Nowadays, we see it as an early sign that Jesus was the humble guy he later turned out to be—but in ancient Judea, that would’ve been a hard sell. A writer looking to recruit people to his newly made-up church would have probably had Jesus flying over the river, shooting fire and doing backflips while giving John the finger. The fact it’s such a step down for the ‘son of God’ suggests it’s probably based in fact—even if it’s been distorted in the centuries since.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

The Josephus quotes have already been shown to be a hoax. None of the other people were contemporaries of Jesus.

This guy claims Jesus never existed:

Yes, they are hoaxes just like the nordicist jews made fake historical references to jesus as blond.

He looks like a trustworthy person to me.