Alleged historical evidence for Jesus

Give me a break IceAgeCivilizations.

You and I know that some muslims would die for they beliefs too, and that does not make their belief the absolute and complete truth.

Think about it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Cheers

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Those Christians knew Jesus, or learned about Him from those who did, Islamists' motivations are beyond me, except just doing what they're told.

Those 1st century Christians would have known it was all a farce if it was.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I believe early Christians believed that there was a Jesus, but I don't think that was what they were dying for. Rather, they were dying for the right to believe in Christianity. It is supportive of the idea that there really was a Jesus, but I don't know if that counts as historical evidence, since it was about 100 years after the fact.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

They were dying for Jesus just months after the fact.

 

I don't deny that Christians were persecuted, but that is more proof of Christianity as a religious idea than proof of the existence of Jesus as a person.

 

So they just decided to martyr themselves for some guy who really didn't do what they thought he did in their lifetime?

 

How many of those people met Jesus? I think many people felt compelled by his story, which may or may not have been true. They obviously had a strong faith that it was. Most of this persecution would not have happened until Christianity became popular and separated from Judaism, that is, many years after Jesus.

 

The Apostles were Jews (Judaism) who came to believe then and there.

 

The Apostles are supposed to have met Jesus, so you have only deferred the question as to wether the Apostles existed, and if they did, did they really meet Jesus, or did they make him up?

 

And did Jerusalem really exist then?

 

Give me another break IceAgeCivilizations.

You and I know that there are other texts/books that list true historical and verifiable places in their texts but that does not prove that everything contained in the texts are the absolute and complete truth.

 

None come close to the Old and New Testaments in scope and detail of accurate ancient history.

 

IceAge,

Can you provide ONE written first-hand account of any of the hundreds of miracles which Jesus performed in the Bible? There must have been thousands of people who witnessed these miracles, right in front of their own eyes. So at least ONE person must have written something down, or at least drawn a picture, about their experience.

If you can find one, just one, first-hand written account, I will be truly amazed.

Note: And you can't use the Bible itself obviously because the point is to try to prove the Bible's validity in the accounts it gives of Jesus's miracles.

 

Even the gospels aren't written by first-hand witnesses. From the time of the death of Jesus to the time the first so-called 'gospel' was written, there was a span of about four decades. During this gap, another man wrote that Jesus came to him in a "vision" (the apostle Paul). He said he was told to spread the word, which he did. In none of Paul's letters about Jesus did he mention any of the things Jesus did or said during his life as is relayed in the gospels.

Jesus doesn't seem to exist until we're told he does by Paul and the anonymous authors of the 'gospels,' who appear to mostly copy one another. The Mark and "Q" documents are the primary sources, with information in both of these documents showing up in Matthew and Luke, but Mark and "Q" seem not to have read each other.

For those that aren't familiar with the term, the "Q" document is a hypothetical lost text from which certain elements of Matthew and Luke are derived. "Q" stands for quelle, which is German for "source." That the document existed is near certainty since there are elements within both Matthew and Luke which are identical in style and context, but not present in Mark, the source of the remainder of their texts.

 

I think so. What does that have to do with anything? I could write a revisionist history of America, and it could still contain many factual historical truths, landmarks, characters, ect.

 

But there's nothing revisionist in the Bible, same text through the centuries, and the history therein lines up with modern archaeological discoveries.

 

http://quinnell.us/religion/reasons/history.html

 

They say that Nazareth didn't exist at the time of Jesus on Earth, that link is a bunch of b.s.

 

Oh, you said it's BS, that's all the proof I need. :bugeye:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Greetings,

Really?
Where?

Please quote the exact passage.


The Talmud also says that "Jesus" was the bastard son of a Roman soldier, and that he was stoned to death in Lydda.

Do you beleve that?

Or do you only believe what supports your prior faith?

Hmm?


Iasion