• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is there any other historical evidence besides the bible that proves Jesus existence?

A

Arkitech

Diamond Member
Through-out my years in school I don't recall covering any history that discussed Jesus. Although it may have been left out of school lessons intentionally in a effort to seperate church from state.
 
i remember hearing something about the time that jesus vanashed for 10 or 11 years that no one knew where he was Buddhism was developed during that timea and gained a following before he returned.


EDIT: it isn't hard evidence, but it suggests that if there was a jesus, he created the buddhism as well.
 
Jewish historian Flavius Josephus mentions Jesus briefly on two occasions in his "Antiquities" written about 93 C.E. That is the only record I know of. The passages in "Antiquities" are of course much open to debate and some of the translation was without a doubt augmented by Christian copyists. Most of Josehus' work is known from the copies made by Christians but there were also Arabic copies discovered later that contain the same references to Jesus but without the Christian additions to the text.
 
Originally posted by: jjones
Jewish historian Flavius Josephus mentions Jesus briefly on two occasions in his "Antiquities" written about 93 C.E. That is the only record I know of. The passages in "Antiquities" are of course much open to debate and some of the translation was without a doubt augmented by Christian copyists. Most of Josehus' work is known from the copies made by Christians but there were also Arabic copies discovered later that contain the same references to Jesus but without the Christian additions to the text.
Click to expand...

I may be wrong but aren't there some other Roman documents that make mention of Jesus in passing as part of a description of the uprisings that were occuring in that province during the Roman occupation? I do know there is not much in the way of detailed historical records which is not surprising given the time and the Roman view of this as being a backwater province.
 
It seems kind of odd that for a man who raised the dead, healed the sick, returned from the grave and was the world's greatest teacher that there are so few references about his life. I'm not saying this to sound like an anti-religious person, (as a matter of fact my parents raised me in a various religious household) it just seems odd to me that there is so little written about Jesus in terms of historical documentation.
 
Originally posted by: Arkitech
It seems kind of odd that for a man who raised the dead, healed the sick, returned from the grave and was the world's greatest teacher that there are so few references about his life. I'm not saying this to sound like an anti-religious person, (as a matter of fact my parents raised me in a various religious household) it just seems odd to me that there is so little written about Jesus in terms of historical documentation.
Click to expand...

there isnt a whole heck of alot of documentation from that era anymore. Just think about how much would have been lost over 2000 years.
 
Originally posted by: Cattlegod
i remember hearing something about the time that jesus vanashed for 10 or 11 years that no one knew where he was Buddhism was developed during that timea and gained a following before he returned.


EDIT: it isn't hard evidence, but it suggests that if there was a jesus, he created the buddhism as well.
Click to expand...

And Superman is really the return of Jesus, and the Catholic church never makes mistakes.

 
I don't even think that much documentation existed. You have to remember that the only people who admired him were his followers. The Jews hated him. The Romans maybe hated him a little. What do you think? Maybe they intentionally left him out of history to pass him off as another 'regular' teacher or person or even lunatic. I don't mean any offense to Jesus, btw I am a Christian, but that is what I think the people of his time viewed him. As some of you said, the Romans had a little documentation about him. So, I'm not sure, everything I typed is just my honest opinion.
 
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: Arkitech
It seems kind of odd that for a man who raised the dead, healed the sick, returned from the grave and was the world's greatest teacher that there are so few references about his life. I'm not saying this to sound like an anti-religious person, (as a matter of fact my parents raised me in a various religious household) it just seems odd to me that there is so little written about Jesus in terms of historical documentation.
Click to expand...

there isnt a whole heck of alot of documentation from that era anymore. Just think about how much would have been lost over 2000 years.
Click to expand...


Thats probably a true statement to a certain extent but its very strange that a man such as Jesus would'nt have enduring historical records. Just a few years earlier than Jesus there was Alexander the Great and his life and history are well documented. Also Jesus was alive during the pivotal years of Rome which are also well documented, then consider the fact that the Jews were a significant part of Roman history. So in that aspect Jesus should have been well known to the numerous scribes and writers during his time.
 
Originally posted by: esc
I don't even think that much documentation existed. You have to remember that the only people who admired him were his followers. The Jews hated him. The Romans maybe hated him a little. What do you think? Maybe they intentionally left him out of history to pass him off as another 'regular' teacher or person or even lunatic. I don't mean any offense to Jesus, btw I am a Christian, but that is what I think the people of his time viewed him. As some of you said, the Romans had a little documentation about him. So, I'm not sure, everything I typed is just my honest opinion.
Click to expand...

Actually I don't think the Romans cared about him in the least. Their main concern was putting down challenges to their rule and collecting taxes. The Pharisees on the other hand cared a lot about him since he was a challenge to their authority. They are the ones that demanded that he be arrested. The Romans obliged since from their viewpoint it removed a potential source of unrest.
 
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: jjones
Jewish historian Flavius Josephus mentions Jesus briefly on two occasions in his "Antiquities" written about 93 C.E. That is the only record I know of. The passages in "Antiquities" are of course much open to debate and some of the translation was without a doubt augmented by Christian copyists. Most of Josehus' work is known from the copies made by Christians but there were also Arabic copies discovered later that contain the same references to Jesus but without the Christian additions to the text.
Click to expand...

I may be wrong but aren't there some other Roman documents that make mention of Jesus in passing as part of a description of the uprisings that were occuring in that province during the Roman occupation? I do know there is not much in the way of detailed historical records which is not surprising given the time and the Roman view of this as being a backwater province.
Click to expand...
There aren't any other historical records that I know of, Roman or otherwise. Some of what you may think about being Roman records you may actually be inferring from Josephus' work. He was Jewish but his sympathy, or self-survival and selfishness, with the Romans cast him as a traitor to his people.

There may be other inferences to Jesus but I don't think so. I would, however, like to be corrected if I'm mistaken.

 
There are coins related to Jesus that go back to those issued under Roman emporer Constantine the Great (about 300 AD).
 
Here's another interesting thought, before and after Jesus existence there was much tension between the Jews and the Romans. There were numerous Jewish factions who attempted to rebel against the Roman goverments and its army. Probably on the most well documented cases of those factions were the Jews who destroyed a large Roman garrison and then barriacaded themselves in a mountain fortress. (I beleive the fortress was called Masada)

Basically all of this civil unrest was a genuine concern for the Romans. Jesus enemies played on the Romans fear to have him delivered into the hands of a Roman senator as a traitor. Jesus was eventually put to death and this touched off other significant events, surely this should have been documented by more than a few different historians.


 
Originally posted by: jjones
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: jjones
Jewish historian Flavius Josephus mentions Jesus briefly on two occasions in his "Antiquities" written about 93 C.E. That is the only record I know of. The passages in "Antiquities" are of course much open to debate and some of the translation was without a doubt augmented by Christian copyists. Most of Josehus' work is known from the copies made by Christians but there were also Arabic copies discovered later that contain the same references to Jesus but without the Christian additions to the text.
Click to expand...

I may be wrong but aren't there some other Roman documents that make mention of Jesus in passing as part of a description of the uprisings that were occuring in that province during the Roman occupation? I do know there is not much in the way of detailed historical records which is not surprising given the time and the Roman view of this as being a backwater province.
Click to expand...
There aren't any other historical records that I know of, Roman or otherwise. Some of what you may think about being Roman records you may actually be inferring from Josephus' work. He was Jewish but his sympathy, or self-survival and selfishness, with the Romans cast him as a traitor to his people.

There may be other inferences to Jesus but I don't think so. I would, however, like to be corrected if I'm mistaken.
Click to expand...

Looks like you had it correct. I have always found this topic to be interesting so I did a little searching on "Historical Jesus" and there is quite a bit out there. For those interested you may want to look at this
Frontline link and this Historical Jesus link.
 
Check this out. http://www.shroud.com/

It is the shroud of Turin. The wrappins Jesus was supposedly laid in after his death. The way they know that it was him was because he was the only one to have a crown of thorns laid on his head when he was crucified.

Regards
 
Originally posted by: Smithy18
Check this out. http://www.shroud.com/

It is the shroud of Turin. The wrappins Jesus was supposedly laid in after his death. The way they know that it was him was because he was the only one to have a crown of thorns laid on his head when he was crucified.

Regards
Click to expand...

I believe testing was done on this and dated it to the middle ages so I would not count on it to support an argument.
 
Originally posted by: BreakApart
Originally posted by: shurato
There isn't many historical documents about Jesus because he never existed 😉
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind if you never existed.
Click to expand...

Why?

I love the mentality of the human race. Here we had a guy that suggested that everyone be nice to everyone else...and what do we do? We nail his limbs to a cross. That'll show 'im 🙂

 
Well, you Have the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John), but those are in the Bible.

Then you have Josephus and the so-called Testimonium Flavianum in the Antiquities.
At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the trugh with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wonderous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.
Click to expand...
Scholars debate whether the passage was:
1. either made up by entirely by Christians
2. a Christian substitution for Josephus' original mention of Jesus
3. mainly written by Josephus with two or three insertions by a Christian scribe
4. entirely written by Josephus.

There is reference to Jesus by the Roman historian Tacitus in the Annals. Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, and Lucian wrote about early Christians, but not Jesus himself.

Then there is the agrapha, or unwritten sayings and deeds of Jesus found mainly in the apocryphal gospels of the early Church. These include the Protevangelium Jacobi, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of the Nazarenes, the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Thomas, the Egerton Papyrus 2, the Secret Gospel of Mark, the Gospel of the Egyptians, and Acts of Pilate.

There is Gnostic material found at Nag Hammadi in Egypt like the Gospel of Trugh, the Gospel of Philip, but they don?t contain much about the historical Jesus.

To answer the question, yes there is extra-biblical material pointing to a historical figure named Jesus. 🙂
 
Fritzo, I'm not sure why you quoted me? I was making fun of shurato's silly comment.

I have no doubt Jesus was a real person. Believing anything beyond that is in my opinion...your choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top