JESUS CHRIST: Myth or Historical Person?

[Alter2Ego]

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

A favorite argument by non-believers is that Jesus Christ's existence is confined to the pages of the Judeo-Christian Bible. When presented with documentary evidence of his historical existence, Bible critics then use another ploy: they attack the credibility of those who confirmed the existence of Jesus Christ and/or they attack the credibility of what was written about Jesus Christ.

Below are three non-Christians from the 1st Century AD who mentioned Jesus Christ in their secular writings. The questions for debate are at the end of this post.

PERSON #1:
Name and Occupation: Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Historian

DOB to Date of Death: A.D. 55 to A.D. 120

Attitude Towards Christianity: Hostile

What He Said: He confirmed that CHRISTUS (a common misspelling of Christ at the time) was executed by Pilate.

Highlights on Tacitus: A Roman historian who lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors, Tacitus has been called "the greatest historian of ancient Rome."


PERSON #2:
Name and Occupation: Flavius Josephus, Jewish Historian

DOB to Date of Death: 37 AD -- Died after 100 AD

Attitude Towards Christianity: Apathetic (could care less about them)

What He Said: He confirmed that Christ who performed miracles was executed by Pilate.

Highlights on Josephus: A Jewish historian of priestly and royal ancestry who recorded Jewish history, with special emphasis on the 1st century AD (the century in which Jesus Christ lived and died). He has been credited by many as recording some of the earliest history of Jesus Christ outside of the gospels. Flavius Josephus belonged to the group of Jewish religious leaders--the Pharisees--responsible for Jesus' death.

Flavius Josephus joined the zealots who rebelled against Roman rule between 66 and 74 AD, becoming a leader of their forces in Galilee, and living through the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. He was captured by the Romans, and would have been executed, but he went over to their side and ended up becoming the Roman emperor's Adviser on Jewish Affairs.


PERSON #3:
Name and Occupation: Pliny The Younger (born Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus), Roman Governor

DOB to Date of Death: 61 AD to 112 AD

Attitude Towards Christianity: Hostile. He executed Christians

What He Said: Referred to Christ as a "god of the Christians."

Highlights on Pliny: Pliny condemned Men, Women, and children to death if they refused to curse Christ and if they refused to deny they were Christians.


DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. All three of the individuals described above were people in powerful positions who were anti-Christian and belonged to groups that actively killed Christians. All three individuals belonged to organizations that were responsible for Jesus' death. What did they have to gain from mentioning the existence of Jesus Christ in their writings--thereby confirming his earthly existence?

2. Flavius Josephus, a Jew, was born a mere four years after Jesus was executed. He became a Jewish Pharisee as an adult, in addition to becoming a respected historian and advisor to the Roman emperor. Do you see anything significant to his being a Pharisee, a historian, and Roman emperor advisor--and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?

3. Cornelius Tactitus was known as the greatest historian of his time, during which he lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors. Do you see anything significant to his resume and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?

 

[hjmick]

Speaking for myself, a borderline Atheist, I believe Jesus lived. I do not believe he was born of a virgin, nor do I believe he was "the son of GOD" as that would require a belief in a god. If pressed, I would say that he was a rabbi who wandered and preached. He was probably the inspiration for the Jesus in the Bible. As for the tales of Jesus' exploits in said Bible, parable.

But hey, that's just me.

To each his own...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Speaking for myself, a borderline Atheist, I believe Jesus lived. I do not believe he was born of a virgin, nor do I believe he was "the son of GOD" as that would require a belief in a god. If pressed, I would say that he was a rabbi who wandered and preached. He was probably the inspiration for the Jesus in the Bible. As for the tales of Jesus' exploits in said Bible, parable.

But hey, that's just me.

To each his own...

Except for the historical fact we have at least one confirmed living person during the time writing of Jesus Miracles.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Both.

 

[SayMyName]

Yet, Paul, the most prolific writer of the New Testament, and who wrote shortly after the time that Jesus perportedly lived, says nothing of an actual life of the spiritual being he professes to have encountered. Meanwhile, we are led to believe that the gospels, which contain much about Jesus and his early life, were written no earlier than four decades and more after his supposed lifetime on earth, and when done so, in Greek, a language not even known by the disciples by way of mouth or pen.

As for Josephus, the Jewish historian, the one reference he made to Jesus living has now been debunked. It is generally agreed that the one reference between chapters that is normally cited as proof of a historic Jesus was added centuries later by order of the new christian church.

Imagine someone writing today as fact about someone who lived 150 years ago with as little evidence. The closest example could be Mormons, and see how much they are villified?

 

[konradv]

None of the historians mentioned were alive during Jesus' life, making all of their accounts second-hand. Unfortunately, there are no first-hand sources, even the New Testament.

 

[Dragon]

Both.

Agreed.

While we have no final, definitive proof that such a person ever existed, his existence is the most economical explanation for the existence of Christianity, and so I'm inclined to believe he was a real person. That does not, of course, mean that what Christians believe about him was true.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jesus was real.

I grew up RCC and my conclusion is that his message got garbled in translation.

I'm a Gnostic and I'm weary of these "debates".

Worship as your heart tells you

 

[amrchaos]

Speaking for myself, a borderline Atheist, I believe Jesus lived. I do not believe he was born of a virgin, nor do I believe he was "the son of GOD" as that would require a belief in a god. If pressed, I would say that he was a rabbi who wandered and preached. He was probably the inspiration for the Jesus in the Bible. As for the tales of Jesus' exploits in said Bible, parable.

But hey, that's just me.

To each his own...

Except for the historical fact we have at least one confirmed living person during the time writing of Jesus Miracles.

Have you seen how old that person was at the time of Jesus cruxificition?

less than the age of 5!
One would also have to question the sources of these esteemed historians as well. I bet it was from christian sources, such as believers and the bible.

Thus we go full circle back to the original criticisms that the op tries to disprove.

 

[vlad]

Totally real....open your heart

 

[amrchaos]

By the way.

It is not wise to try to disprove the existance of a person due to "legends" that surround him.

Ceasar was born of a wolf and a Snake
Gilgamesh was two parts god, one part man.


Such tales are usually meant to raise the individuals stature, but not necessarily true.

 

[catzmeow]

[DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. All three of the individuals described above were people in powerful positions who were anti-Christian and belonged to groups that actively killed Christians. All three individuals belonged to organizations that were responsible for Jesus' death. What did they have to gain from mentioning the existence of Jesus Christ in their writings--thereby confirming his earthly existence?

2. Flavius Josephus, a Jew, was born a mere four years after Jesus was executed. He became a Jewish Pharisee as an adult, in addition to becoming a respected historian and advisor to the Roman emperor. Do you see anything significant to his being a Pharisee, a historian, and Roman emperor advisor--and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?

3. Cornelius Tactitus was known as the greatest historian of his time, during which he lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors. Do you see anything significant to his resume and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?[/COLOR]

Actually, all of the sources you've cited are strongly suspected of being corrupted by later authors.

This is a good summary of the evidence against their credibility:

Historicity Of Jesus FAQ

You ought to at least read it, so as to examine the subject objectively and to ensure that your future posts are more accurate.

My own position is that he's was probably both...there may well have been a person called Yeshua, from Nazareth, son of Joseph, who was a teacher and political figure. However, much of what is written about him in the New Testament appears to have been heavily embellished over the period of time in which Yeshua is supposed to have lived, and the 100-300 years after his death which is when the earliest versions of the New Testament books/letters date to.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Yet, Paul, the most prolific writer of the New Testament, and who wrote shortly after the time that Jesus perportedly lived, says nothing of an actual life of the spiritual being he professes to have encountered. Meanwhile, we are led to believe that the gospels, which contain much about Jesus and his early life, were written no earlier than four decades and more after his supposed lifetime on earth, and when done so, in Greek, a language not even known by the disciples by way of mouth or pen.

ALTER2EGO -to- SAY MY NAME:
The last book of the Bible that was written is the Book of Matthew--which was written in 41 AD (nine years after Jesus left the earthly scene). The claim that the four gospels were written decades after Jesus' return to heaven are made by people calling themselves "scholars" who have no evidence to prove what they are saying.

As to your claim that Greek was unknown by Jesus' disciples, that statement is false. Jesus' apostles who wrote the New Testament were bilingual, as were many of the Jews at the time. However, because Greek was the international language of the time (just as English is today's international language), the New Testament writers used Greek so that outsiders who most likely spoke Greek could read their writings. This is confirmed by the two sources below.

"In Judea at the time of Christ Aramaic was the dominant language (hence the filming of The Passion of the Christ in Aramaic), but most people were bi-lingual; Aramaic, Latin, and Greek were all common. Greek was considered the "international language" of the day (kind of like English is today) and proved to be the most fitting language for the books of the Bible because they were intended for an international audience."
View topic - What language was spoken at the time of Christ - Greek or Aramaic?

"The Old Testament was translated into the Greek language 250 plus years before Christ by the 70, Sanhedrin. This Greek translation was first done by Jews for Greek-speaking Jews in Alexandria Egypt. The Pentateuch was first translated, than later the rest of the Old Testament books were added to the translation.... All Jews in Jesus day spoke at at least 2-3 languages and the language of the day was Greek like english today- they wrote it to reach the whole world. There is every indication during New Testament times Jesus and the disciples were multi-lingual."
Was the Bible written in Greek, and why?

As for Josephus, the Jewish historian, the one reference he made to Jesus living has now been debunked. It is generally agreed that the one reference between chapters that is normally cited as proof of a historic Jesus was added centuries later by order of the new christian church.

ALTER2EGO -to- SAY MY NAME:
Joseph made more than one mentioning of Jesus Christ in his historical writings. I intend to quote him in this thread soon. Meanwhile, what evidence can you present to prove that what Josephus said about Jesus is fabricated?

ANSWER: None. Not a shred of evidence. Nothing but the speculations of Bible critics who will write anything to give some validity to their own existence.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Speaking for myself, a borderline Atheist, I believe Jesus lived. I do not believe he was born of a virgin, nor do I believe he was "the son of GOD" as that would require a belief in a god. If pressed, I would say that he was a rabbi who wandered and preached. He was probably the inspiration for the Jesus in the Bible. As for the tales of Jesus' exploits in said Bible, parable.

But hey, that's just me.

To each his own...

Except for the historical fact we have at least one confirmed living person during the time writing of Jesus Miracles.

Have you seen how old that person was at the time of Jesus cruxificition?

less than the age of 5!
One would also have to question the sources of these esteemed historians as well. I bet it was from christian sources, such as believers and the bible.

Thus we go full circle back to the original criticisms that the op tries to disprove.

I made it clear in my OP that all three of the historians I listed were hostile to Christianity. In other words, they had nothing to gain from confirming the existence of the founder of Christianity. This makes their testimony all the more credible.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, considering that there are Roman coins minted with the image of Jesus (and they didn't mint coins with the image of someone not real), as well as the recent discovery on the plain of Meggido where a prison was being expanded and they found a church dedicated to Him with a picture of His portrait, I'd say the odds were pretty good that He existed.

However, the Jesus as Christians recognize Him today? Not so much, because Christians have edited and changed the Bible many times over the years.

 

[Alter2Ego]

None of the historians mentioned were alive during Jesus' life, making all of their accounts second-hand. Unfortunately, there are no first-hand sources, even the New Testament.

ALTER2EGO -to- KONRADY:

The same can be said about modern historians who write about the founding fathers of the USA. They get their info from government records and other credible sources. Let me remind you that Cornelius Tacitus lived through the reign of at least four different Roman emperors and earned the reputation as "the greatest historian of his era." He had to have been an outstanding historian in order to be singled out and given such recognition.

A historian does not have to live in the same century as the people he or she is reporting on. All that's required is access to credible documentation such as government records and the like. This was the case with Cornelius Tacitus. Below are some of the sources from which he got his historical data, quoted verbatim, along with the weblink to the website where I got the info from.


WHERE DID CORNELIUS TACTITUS GET HIS INFO?
"The sources of Tacitus
"Tacitus used the official sources of the Roman state: the acta senatus (the minutes of the session of the Senate) and the acta diurna populi Romani (a collection of the acts of the government and news of the court and capital). He read collections of emperors' speeches, such as Tiberius and Claudius. Generally, Tacitus was a scrupulous historian who paid careful attention to his historical works. The minor inaccuracies in the Annals may be due to Tacitus dying before finishing (and therefore final proofreading) of this work. He used a variety of historical and literary sources; he used them freely and he chose from sources of varied opinions."

Tacitus


CONFIRMATION THAT TACITUS WROTE ABOUT CHRIST:
"The Annals
"The Annals was Tacitus' final work, covering the period from the death of Augustus Caesar in 14 AD. He wrote at least sixteen books, but books 7–10 and parts of books 5, 6, 11 and 16 are missing. Book 6 ends with the death of Tiberius and books 7–12 presumably covered the reigns of Caligula and Claudius. The remaining books cover the reign of Nero, perhaps until his death in June 68 or until the end of that year, to connect with the Histories. The second half of book 16 is missing (ending with the events of 66). We do not know whether Tacitus completed the work or whether he finished the other works that he had planned to write; he died before he could complete his planned histories of Nerva and Trajan, and no record survives of the work on Augustus Caesar and the beginnings of the Empire with which he had planned to finish his work. The Annals is also among the first-known secular-historic records to mention Jesus (see Tacitus on Christ), which Tacitus does so in connection with Nero's persecution of the Christians."

Tacitus

 

[Alter2Ego]

Actually, all of the sources you've cited are strongly suspected of being corrupted by later authors.

This is a good summary of the evidence against their credibility:

Historicity Of Jesus FAQ

ALTER2EGO -to- CATZMEOW:
I could care less that scholars that are guided by atheistic thinking have raised doubt about these historical writings.

When did the speculations aka personal opinions of "scholars" equate to evidence? Since everybody on this planet has an opinion, why should I take their opinion above the opinions of other scholars who agree that the writings of Josephus, Tacitus, and Pliny are authentic? It comes down to who one wants to believe.

You ought to at least read it, so as to examine the subject objectively and to ensure that your future posts are more accurate.

My own position is that he's was probably both...there may well have been a person called Yeshua, from Nazareth, son of Joseph, who was a teacher and political figure. However, much of what is written about him in the New Testament appears to have been heavily embellished over the period of time in which Yeshua is supposed to have lived, and the 100-300 years after his death which is when the earliest versions of the New Testament books/letters date to.

Notice that your statements above are nothing but speculations/personal opinions. This is a public forum where everybody has an opinion. The point being, opinions don't count for much. Evidence will earn you points, not opinions.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

A favorite argument by non-believers is...

ahem, myths are often built upon historical figures.

how's that home schoolin'/religious schooling/conservative ba-da-bing theory workin' out fer ya?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

By the way.

It is not wise to try to disprove the existance of a person due to "legends" that surround him.

Ceasar was born of a wolf and a Snake
Gilgamesh was two parts god, one part man.


Such tales are usually meant to raise the individuals stature, but not necessarily true.

ha, but lacking real proof............................

 

[Atheist_Vision]

You've gotten so much wrong in this post it isn't even funny