Non-Christian documents about the existence of Jesus Christ

[vasileturcu]

Non-Christian documents about the existence of Jesus Christ

Christian tradition bring as evidence about the historical existence of Jesus the mentions made by non-Christians, preserved until now, therefore those whose impartiality can’t be questioned. It’s about the mentions from the texts of three roman authors: Cornelius Tacitus, Plinius the Young and Suetonius. Also, the Hebrew historian Iosif Flavius.

Let’s begin with Tacitus, big historian and roman writer, patrician and consul (approx. 56-120). Around year 116 writes his most important work “Annales”. In the fifteenth book is described the famous fire, who started in the year 64 and who burned almost the entire Rome. We know that Nero (Octomber 54 – 9 June 68) was accused by his contemporaries that he would have personally ordered to set Rome on fire, in order to obtain free land where to build a new Rome, after his own imagination. Nero decided to fade the suspicions by blaming the Christians. In chapter 44 we read: “That’s why, to stifle the rumors, Nero sought some specific culprits who gave them the most cruel chastisement; the crazy called them Christians; because their iniquities, they were hated by everyone. Christ, from whom they took the name (Christians), was sentenced in the time of Emperor Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilatus. Their harming faith, suppressed for the moment, started again to spread not only in Judea, the birth place of this evil, but in Rome too, where it pours from everywhere all the atrocities and (where) everything that is reprehensible takes shape. Therefore at the beginning where grabbed Christians who confessed, then, after inmates, a lot of people from their ranks where proved not only that they were guilty of burning Rome, but for be beings who hated all mankind. And while walking to death, Christians were mocked in so many ways like: they were dressed in the skins of beasts then let them to dogs to tearing them down or crucified on the cross or bestowed burning at the stake, and when dusk, were burned alive in the form of a torches to light the night. Nero offered even his parks for this performances. He organized even circus games, took part dressed coachman, stand in a heap with plebs or a phaeton. Because of this, although Christians were condemned as guilty people, who deserved the most cruel punishments, yet the people started to pity the guilty ones, like the punishments were not given in the interest of the congregation, but because of the cruelty of one being: Nero.”

Plinius the Young (61 – 114) fulfilled the function of governor of the Emperor Traian (98 – 117) in Bitinia (province of Small Asia), between years 111 – 113. In a letter – statement he request clarifications from Trajan: “ I never took part in Christian investigation; so I don’t know which crime usually punished or investigated, or what exceptions they make… Meanwhile, this is the procedure who I adopted with the accused in front of me to be Christians. I asked them if they are Christians and asked them the second time and third time, under the threat of punishment. If they persevered, I ordered to execute them, because I have no doubt, regardless of their faith, they anyway deserved to be punished because of their stubbornness and uncompromising perseverance… As for those who say they are not nor have ever been Christians, I thought fit to let them go, after they recited a prayer to gods to my dictation and make offerings of incense and wine to your statue, who I ordered to be placed at the court for this purpose and, in addition, they cursed Christ – things that (so they say) the ones who are true Christians can’t be convinced to do them… they stated that all their fault is marginal to routinely gather in a certain day, before sunrise to sing alternatively a hymn to Christ as a god...”.

The most important commentary belongs to Suetonius (70 – 140). In his book “The twelve Caesars” written in the year 121, in “The life of Claudius” at chapter XXV, 4 writes: “As Jews, roused to Chrestus, provoked countless skirmishes, Claudius expelled them from Rome”. Orosius mentions that this expulsion took place in the ninth year of the reign of Claudius, in the year 49.

This is all we have about the echo awakened by Christianity in Roman writers texts. We conclude that they aren’t confessions from outside of Christian world to confirm the historical existence of Jesus. The three fragments analyzed appeared after more than 80 years after the death of Jesus and inform us about Christians, not about Jesus. The name Chrestus was spread among slaves and liberties, proof being the fact that the inscriptions in ancient Rome he was discovered more than 80 times.

The unique information about Jesus, that preserved in Jew literature, is the famous mention from “Jewish antiquities” by Iosif Flavius (37 – 117), written around the years 90 – 93, known in the circles of biblical scholars as the Testimonium Flavianum:

“At that time Jesus lived, a wise man, if it can be called a real man. He was the author of amazing miracles and teacher of people who were happy to find out the truth. Drew to his side a lot of Jews, but also a lot of Pagans. This was Christ. Even if Pilatus, due to accusations by leaders of our people, nailed him to the cross, the love didn’t ceased from the ones who loved him from the beginning. Because he showed before them the third day alive again, as predicted by the Prophets sent by God, accomplishing a thousand of miracles. From then until today Christian people lasts, which takes it’s name from him.” (XVIII,II,3).

Today we know that this unique Jew information about Jesus is an interpolation, a false, a later insertion counterfeit by a Christian copyist. Also, we know when took birth this PASSUS simulated. Origene from Alexandria (185 – 254) tells us that Iosif Flavius doesn’t believe that Jesus was Messiah: that means that in his copy “Jews antiquities” are not included the words Jesus and Christ. Church fathers: Clement (150 – 215), Minucius, Tertulian (second half of century II – 240) and Teofil from Antiohia, knew well Jews antiquities and not mention any word about information related to Jesus. So in the oldest copy of Jews antiquities this information doesn’t exist. Barely Eusebiu (263 – 340), the author of the first “History of churches”, quotes in the form given above. So we conclude that Testimonium Flavianum was made by some copyist and introduced to “Jews antiquities”, at the end of third century. From tenth century we have a short Arabic version, written by Agapios, bishop of Hierapolis (in Syria). And from XI-XII century there’s a Russian version or long review of Testimonium Flavianum, written in war of the Jews against the Romans in the disposal of Prince Yaroslav of Kiev.

In the XX book, chapter IX of Jews antiquities, we read that in the year 62 at Jerusalem High Priest Ananus:

“Convened a council to court and brought in front of him the brother of Jesus, called Christ (he was called James), along with a few others, accusing them for breaking the laws, and being sentenced to be killed with stones. "

This phrase has always attracted much less debate because it does not confirm the historicity of Jesus, but that of Jacob, that no one challenges. But the phrase can - that seems obvious - and was added at a further copying of the text. Only Paul and the apostles called James “the brother of the Lord”, and Jews “the Righteous”. Not in one case it is called "brother of Jesus".

Towards the end of the II century Origene publish his book “Against Celsus”. Greco-Roman philosopher Celsus, follower of Stoicism and Platonism, confidant philosopher emperor Marcus Aurelius (161 – 17 March 180), published in 177 treaty “The true word”. From the writings of Celsus we do not know today more than the quotes given by Origen, because “The true word” was not preserved. It can be read in “Against Celsus”, Book I, 62-63: “Jesus was surrounded by ten or eleven men blasphemed and indigent and walked with them far and wide with a shameful face and pathetic begging in order to survive”. And in the Book II, 9: ” As I have to believe God who, among other things He was reproached, has not met anything that promised, after we’ve accused, condemned, deemed worthy of torture while he was hiding and try running the most shameful, was caught and given from those he called diciples? Could not yet, if it was God, neither flee, or not to allow taken tied; and even less, if it was regarded as the Savior, the Son and Messenger of God, to be abandoned and betrayed by his companions, who were the closest and it kept him as they teacher”. But Celsus does not cause a moment of doubt about the historicity of the person of Jesus.

It can also be added the fact that, in 73 a Syrian historian named Mara sends to his son Serapion, who study at Edessa, a letter to remind him among others that Jews condemned "their wise king" who tried to give them new laws. Therefore, as a punishment, says Mara, Israel was took his kingdom, part of the population was massacred, and those who survived were scattered around the world. Mara wondered: “ What was of use for Athenians that they tortured their wise king? Rightfully God avenged the three wise men.” But here is not written the name Jesus.

We present further the very interesting testimony of the famous Karaite writer Ya’qub Al-Qirqisani, who lived in the first half of the tenth century. In the book “History of Jew sects”, Al-Qirqisani says that in the first century there is a so – called “the sect of the cave” in the Dead Sea region, meaning the Essenes from Qumran. “ As in those days, writes Al-Qirqisani, there appeared a doctrine of a sect called the cave. It was named like this because its religious writings were discovered in a cave. " The meaning of the expression " how on that time " does not raise issues because this information of Al-Qirqisani is placed between the story of the Pharisees, Sadducees and boetusei and story of Christ. After talking about "cave sect", Al-Qirqisani continues: "Soon there emerged Joshua, according to the rabbis, was the son of Pandera, he is known as Jesus, son of Mary. He lived in the days of Joshua, son Perahiei, who is said to be Jesus maternal uncle. This happened in the reign of Augustus Caesar, Emperor of Rome (between 30 B.C. and 14), meaning on time of the second Temple ". Karaite were members of a Jewish sect that appeared in the eighth century in Asia Minor, from where they spread to Egypt, Spain, Crimea, Poland, Lithuania.As their name says, "sons of the Bible" Karaite did not recognize anything else instead the Bible (Old Testament), rejecting the Talmud and rabbinic prescriptions introduced later.

In “The truw word”, Celsus gives the most space to the origin of Jesus. Relying of rumors he says that Mary was a woman of the country with a bad attitude. Her husband Joshep, a carpenter by profession, he expelled her from home because he find out that she betrayed him with some Pantera, Roman Army Soldier, of Greek origin. Rogue woman wandered around the country and in some stable gave birth to Jesus, illegitimate child. When he grew up. Jesus went to look for work in Egypt, where he learned the art of miracles, and when he returned to Galilee he used his conjuror skills to earn a living. He was so successful in this occupation that he became conceited and began to say he’s the son of a god. And in Zara Abode treaty is written the entire history of Mary’s adultery with the Pantera soldier.

Likewise, in the Talmud Jews kept different opinions about the person of Jesus. In a baraita from Talmud we read: << On the eve of Easter they hanged Joshua (of Nazareth). The soil had gone for forty days before him saying: "Here it is Joshua (of Nazareth) who will be killed with stones because he indulged witchcraft and that lured and made Israel to fall into error. All of you who have science that can exonerate him come to speak in his defense". But there was no one to defend him and was hanged on the eve of Easter. >>

Arabic Quran contains many signs (verses) with Jesus and his family. For example, in Sura II Cow: << and they gave Jesus, son of Mary, clarified signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit >> (81); Imrin family in Sura III: << Angels May said: "O Mary, God tell thee word that comes from Him, his name will be Messiah Jesus, son of Mary. He will be great in the world and then and will be close to God. He shall speak to the people in the cradle and aged man and will be devout ">> (40-41); in Sura XIX Mary: << This is Jesus, son of Mary, the word of truth, of which they doubt. It is not for God to give birth to a son. His glory! If decides something, He says "Be!" and is >> (36). There are many verses that contain the name of Jesus.

These are writings from non-Christian sources about Jesus.

Turcu Vasile

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Robittybob1]

You've done a great job here. It reads like English isn't your native language but it is still understandable and seems like its been a long project to tie it all together.

Thanks

[Moontanman]

This one is a known forgery:

The unique information about Jesus, that preserved in Jew literature, is the famous mention from “Jewish antiquities” by Iosif Flavius (37 – 117), written around the years 90 – 93, known in the circles of biblical scholars as the Testimonium Flavianum:
“At that time Jesus lived, a wise man, if it can be called a real man. He was the author of amazing miracles and teacher of people who were happy to find out the truth. Drew to his side a lot of Jews, but also a lot of Pagans. This was Christ. Even if Pilatus, due to accusations by leaders of our people, nailed him to the cross, the love didn’t ceased from the ones who loved him from the beginning. Because he showed before them the third day alive again, as predicted by the Prophets sent by God, accomplishing a thousand of miracles. From then until today Christian people lasts, which takes it’s name from him.” (XVIII,II,3).

 

 

 

All the rest of them are far after the life of Jesus and are not evidentiary support for anything but at best third hand tales of what some people believed...

[John Cuthber]

How much does it matter?

Imagine someone comes up with a verified contemporary Chinese account of a man called Jesus at that time who had a big following and was crucified.

So what?

There were lots of wannabee prophets at the time, the charismatic ones got successful. The Romans were not shy of crucifixion. Jesus wasn't a rare name.

 

It says nothing about him being the son of God or anything like that.

[Eise]

This one is a known forgery:

 

 

 

All the rest of them are far after the life of Jesus and are not evidentiary support for anything but at best third hand tales of what some people believed...

 

Says who? Richard Carrier?

 

It is true that we are not 100% sure (again) if the passage is authentic. What nearly every historian is sure of, is that following phrases are later additions:

• 'if it can be called a real man'
• 'people who were happy to find out the truth'
• 'due to accusations by leaders of our people'
• 'Because he showed before them the third day alive again, as predicted by the Prophets sent by God, accomplishing a thousand of miracles'

They fit too well in the Christian (and anti-Semitic) agenda. Interesting enough, later the same Josephus fragment was found in a 10th century manuscript. Obviusly this was not copied from Eusebius, and made its way independent through the Arabic world. It runs as follows:

 

Josephus the Hebrew spoke of this also in his books which he wrote about the wars of the Jews: "At that time there was a wise man named Jesus, whose life was perfect, his virtues were recognized, and many Jews and Gentiles became his disciples. And Pilate condemned him to death on a cross, and those who had become his disciples, preached his doctrine. They claimed that he appeared to them alive three days after his passion. Maybe he was the Messiah, about whom the prophets had spoken of miracles." This is the story of Josephus and his coreligionists concerning our Lord Christ, may He be glorified.

 

So even if the document as a whole is written by a Christian (Agapius of Hierapolis),he cites Josephus in a different way, without the later Christian additions. According to historian's criteria this makes the Testimonium Flavianum, without the Christian additions, probably authentic. (Even one may be in doubt about 'Maybe he was the Messiah, about whom the prophets had spoken of miracles').

[Moontanman]

 

Says who? Richard Carrier?

 

It is true that we are not 100% sure (again) if the passage is authentic. What nearly every historian is sure of, is that following phrases are later additions:

• 'if it can be called a real man'
• 'people who were happy to find out the truth'
• 'due to accusations by leaders of our people'
• 'Because he showed before them the third day alive again, as predicted by the Prophets sent by God, accomplishing a thousand of miracles'

They fit too well in the Christian (and anti-Semitic) agenda. Interesting enough, later the same Josephus fragment was found in a 10th century manuscript. Obviusly this was not copied from Eusebius, and made its way independent through the Arabic world. It runs as follows:

 

 

So even if the document as a whole is written by a Christian (Agapius of Hierapolis),he cites Josephus in a different way, without the later Christian additions. According to historian's criteria this makes the Testimonium Flavianum, without the Christian additions, probably authentic. (Even one may be in doubt about 'Maybe he was the Messiah, about whom the prophets had spoken of miracles').

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

 

Scholarly opinion on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum, varies.^[4][5][1] The general scholarly view is that while 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 expansion/alteration. ^{[5][6][7][8][9][10]} Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear,^[11] there is broad consensus as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like.^[9]

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" ^[12] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.^{[13][1][2][14][15][16]} However, critics point out that Josephus wrote about a number of people who went by the name Jesus, Yeshua or Joshua,^[17] and also speculate that Josephus may have considered James afraternal brother rather than a sibling.^[18]

 

[John Cuthber]

To be fair, asking for non-Christian contemporary eye-witness reports is a biassed question.

Anyone who was there at the time + saw a miracle would almost certainly believe in Christ's divinity precisely because they saw a miracle.

So the only group of people who you are going to believe (because they are not Christians who might be biassed) are those who didn't see anything.

 

If there really was a miracle, and a witness, they would be written off as "one of the gospel saint disciples and so untrustworthy".

 

 

But I'd still like to know why anyone cares if there was a man, by that name (or, at least, something fairly similar), who lived as a preacher and was executed.

 

Who cares.

Edited November 14, 2014 by John Cuthber

[Robittybob1]

To be fair, ....

 

Who cares.

About 4 billion people alive today.

[Eise]

Wow. You support me. Just accentuate some other passages, and you get exactly what I am saying.

Scholarly opinion on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum, varies.The general scholarly view is that while 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 expansion/alteration. Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear, there is broad consensus as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like.

The following does not refer to the Testimonium Flavianum, but you are also quite supportive here:

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity. However, critics point out that Josephus wrote about a number of people who went by the name Jesus, Yeshua or Joshua, and also speculate that Josephus may have considered James a fraternal brother rather than a sibling.

The critics are wrong. See the full citation:

Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others

 

The name James sure was very common. The name Jesus as well. So to be very clear which James Josephus meant, he extended his reference explicitly with 'who was called Christ'. Nobody was called 'Christ'. It comes from the Greek expression 'Christos', which means 'Messiah' in Hebrew. Please note that Josephus does not say he was the Messiah, only that he was called that way. So Josephus does not support Christianity in any way. He only states implicitly that he existed.

 

So, yeah, thanks for the support.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Eise

[Moontanman]

About 4 billion people alive today.

 

 

That is a inflated number to say the least... 2.2 billion is the real number.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

Wow. You support me. Just accentuate some other passages, and you get exactly what I am saying.

 

The following does not refer to the Testimonium Flavianum, but you are also quite supportive here:

 

The critics are wrong. See the full citation:

 

 

The name James sure was very common. The name Jesus as well. So to be very clear which James Josephus meant, he extended his reference explicitly with 'who was called Christ'. Nobody was called 'Christ'. It comes from the Greek expression 'Christos', which means 'Messiah' in Hebrew. Please note that Josephus does not say he was the Messiah, only that he was called that way. So Josephus does not support Christianity in any way. He only states implicitly that he existed.

 

So, yeah, thanks for the support.

 

 

Talk about cherry picking: from the same link:

 

 

Testimonium Flavianum[edit]

Testimonium Flavianum

Γίνεται δὲ κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον Ἰησοῦς σοφὸς ἀνήρ, εἴγε ἄνδρα αὐτὸν λέγειν χρή: ἦν γὰρ παραδόξων ἔργων ποιητής, διδάσκαλος ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἡδονῇ τἀληθῆ δεχομένων, καὶ πολλοὺς μὲν Ἰουδαίους, πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ τοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ ἐπηγάγετο: ὁ χριστὸς οὗτος ἦν. καὶ αὐτὸν ἐνδείξει τῶν πρώτων ἀνδρῶν παρ᾽ ἡμῖν σταυρῷ ἐπιτετιμηκότος Πιλάτου οὐκ ἐπαύσαντο οἱ τὸ πρῶτον ἀγαπήσαντες: ἐφάνη γὰρ αὐτοῖς τρίτην ἔχων ἡμέραν πάλιν ζῶν τῶν θείων προφητῶν ταῦτά τε καὶ ἄλλα μυρία περὶ αὐτοῦ θαυμάσια εἰρηκότων. εἰς ἔτι τε νῦν τῶν Χριστιανῶν ἀπὸ τοῦδε ὠνομασμένον οὐκ ἐπέλιπε τὸ φῦλον.[3]

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.

Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews,Book 18, Chapter 3, 3^[52]

A 1631 Testimonium page with commentary

The Testimonium Flavianum (meaning the testimony of Flavius Josephus) is the name given to the passage found in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 (or see Greek text) of the Antiquities in which Josephus describes the condemnation and crucifixion of Jesus at the hands of the Roman authorities.^[53][5] The Testimonium is likely the most discussed passage in Josephus.^[1]

The earliest secure reference to this passage is found in the writings of the fourth-century Christian apologist and historian Eusebius, who used Josephus' works extensively as a source for his own Historia Ecclesiastica. Writing no later than 324,^[54] Eusebius quotes the passage^[55] in essentially the same form as that preserved in extant manuscripts. It has therefore been suggested that part or all of the passage may have been Eusebius' own invention, in order to provide an outside Jewish authority for the life of Christ.^[56][57] Some argue that the wording in the Testimonium differs from Josephus' usual writing style and that as a Jew, he would not have used a word like "Messiah".^[58] For attempts to explain the lack of earlier references, see Arguments for Authenticity.

Of the three passages found in Josephus' Antiquities, this passage, if authentic, would offer the most direct support for the crucifixion of Jesus. The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to interpolation.^{[5][6][7][8][10]}James Dunn states that there is "broad consensus" among scholars regarding the nature of an authentic reference to Jesus in the Testimonium and what the passage would look like without the interpolations.^[9] Among other things, the authenticity of this passage would help make sense of the later reference in Josephus Antiquities of the Jews Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 where Josephus refers to the stoning of "James the brother of Jesus". A number of scholars argue that the reference to Jesus in this later passage as "the aforementioned Christ" relates to the earlier reference in the Testimonium.^[1][2][59]

^{I can get better evidence of alien abduction...}

Edited November 14, 2014 by Moontanman

[John Cuthber]

About 4 billion people alive today.

Really? Who?

Those people who already believe that Christ existed and was the Son of God will not change their opinion or actions just because someone finds a document that supports the idea that someone had that name and was killed at about the right time.

I (and many like me) don't believe that there was a Son of God and some paperwork showing that someone with the right name was killed at the right time.

 

So The world is full of lots of people who will not change their opinions or behaviour on the basis of the proof that Christ actually existed- because his existence proves nothing about God.

 

Like I said: who cares?

[Robittybob1]

Really? Who?

Those people who already believe that Christ existed and was the Son of God will not change their opinion or actions just because someone finds a document that supports the idea that someone had that name and was killed at about the right time.

I (and many like me) don't believe that there was a Son of God and some paperwork showing that someone with the right name was killed at the right time.

 

So The world is full of lots of people who will not change their opinions or behaviour on the basis of the proof that Christ actually existed- because his existence proves nothing about God.

 

Like I said: who cares?

I'd have to change that figure upwards now due to population growth over night. Who in their lifetime would not have wondered if Jesus was a real person?

[Eise]

Talk about cherry picking: from the same link:

 

Right. But again, most historians agree that the passage was changed in a Christian sense, but that in the core is mentioning Jesus (Christ). Do you see something different? What do you want to proof quoting us to death?

 

I can get better evidence of alien abduction...

 

Obviously you want more heavy proof of Jesus' existence. Sorry, this is the way antique history must be done. If you have not that many sources, you ask what is the most probable assumption. You analyse how Christian texts developed through the ages, the languages and styles in which they were written, etc etc, and see what remains after shifting everything. It is not much, but it is enough to take it for granted that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher who was crucified by Pilate. Add the Josephus fragments, and a few others, which fit the hypothesis, and you can get even more secure. James is mentioned in one of the (considered authentic) epistles of Paul, he is mentioned in an independently of Paul written Gospel, and he is mentioned by Josephus (which fragment comes to us in via two independent paths).

 

Now consider the hypothesis that it was all made up: where is the proof? Any proof? Found writings show how scribes intentionally invented Jesus? Any evidence that in those days Jews in Palestine already had resurrecting gods or humans? Any proof that Jesus did not fit in the context of Palestine Jews in those days? No, there isn't. There are just parallels, insinuations, and wild hypotheses from the side of mythisists.

[John Cuthber]

I'd have to change that figure upwards now due to population growth over night. Who in their lifetime would not have wondered if Jesus was a real person?

wondered =/= cares.

There were certainly lots of people called Jesus.

So, at that level, there's no question that Jesus was a real person.

There's a reasonable chance that one of those people as crucified.

That still makes them "a Jesus " rather than "the Jesus"

 

Seriously, who are the people to whom it would actually make a difference if, as I said, someone comes up with a verified contemporary Chinese account of a man called Jesus at that time who had a big following and was crucified.?

Edited November 14, 2014 by John Cuthber

[Robittybob1]

wondered =/= cares.

There were certainly lots of people called Jesus.

So, at that level, there's no question that Jesus was a real person.

There's a reasonable chance that one of those people as crucified.

That still makes them "a Jesus " rather than "the Jesus"

 

Seriously, who are the people to whom it would actually make a difference if, as I said, someone comes up with a verified contemporary Chinese account of a man called Jesus at that time who had a big following and was crucified.?

That person would be me. Show me your evidence of this account please.

When we talk about Jesus we are talking about one specific person regardless of his name. For others will tell us his name wasn't Jesus but something else.

 

past tense: wondered; past participle: wondered

1. 1.

   desire to know something; feel curious.

   "how many times have I written that, I wonder?"

   synonyms: ponder, ask oneself, think about, meditate on, reflect on, deliberate about, muse on, speculate about, conjecture;

   puzzle about, be curious about, be inquisitive about;

   informalcudgel one's brains about

Care is synonymous with ideas like wonder. "Speculate about" and "circumspection" are virtual similar.

 

 

Care:

serious attention or consideration applied to doing something correctly or to avoid damage or risk.

"he planned his departure with great care"

synonyms: caution, carefulness, wariness, awareness, heedfulness, heed,attention, attentiveness, alertness, watchfulness, vigilance,circumspection, prudence, guardedness, observance

Edited November 14, 2014 by Robittybob1

[John Cuthber]

That person would be me. Show me your evidence of this account please.

When we talk about Jesus we are talking about one specific person regardless of his name. For others will tell us his name wasn't Jesus but something else.

Care is synonymous with ideas like wonder. "Speculate about" and "circumspection" are virtual similar.

 

There are not 4 billion of you, just one.

When you talk about Jesus you are talking about a specific character. If there is evidence of someone with that name, it does not prove that the character you mean existed.

It may be evidence that there was someone called Jesus who was said to be the son of God, but that doesn't mean that those saying it were right does it?

No, I might wonder what the far side of the moon is like, but I don't care. It makes no difference to me.

On the other hand, I might wonder what the weather will be like on Monday, and I do care about that . I'd rather it was bright and sunny so I can read on the bus to work.

Did you not notice that those dictionary definitions didn't say the same thing?

[Ten oz]

To be fair, asking for non-Christian contemporary eye-witness reports is a biassed question.

Anyone who was there at the time + saw a miracle would almost certainly believe in Christ's divinity precisely because they saw a miracle.

So the only group of people who you are going to believe (because they are not Christians who might be biassed) are those who didn't see anything.

 

If there really was a miracle, and a witness, they would be written off as "one of the gospel saint disciples and so untrustworthy".

 

 

But I'd still like to know why anyone cares if there was a man, by that name (or, at least, something fairly similar), who lived as a preacher and was executed.

 

Who cares.

I care because I view the assumption of a historical Jesus an example of how problematic the study history is. Too often conclusive narratives are written as a matter of clutural history, religious believe, or to promote superiorty amongst certian groups. For some reason simply saying something is unknown seems offense or otherwise off putting to people. This goes for all sorts of historical things. I made a comment at work the other day that is it not fully known how the great pyramids were constructed. Within minutes co-workers were accussing me of believing that aliens built the pyramids. As if not knowing was equal to belief in any and all conspiracies. Rather my co-workers insisted that slaves had simply pulled the giant stones into position and that was that. They seemed to find comfort in their mutual certainty.

I guess looking to the past with uncertainty threatens the linear world many people believe they exist in. It is easy to just look at constitutions, commandments, and etc with a mind that they are somehow perfect. Order has already been realized and it is merely a formality now that we continue it. Jesus have already died for our sins, the founding fathers of our countries have already set up a perfect system, and we already know everything we need too. It is better to celebrate a history full of heros than acknowledge how ambigious our world can be and how little we understand about how we've gotten from point A to point B.

[Robittybob1]

 

There are not 4 billion of you, just one.

When you talk about Jesus you are talking about a specific character. If there is evidence of someone with that name, it does not prove that the character you mean existed.

It may be evidence that there was someone called Jesus who was said to be the son of God, but that doesn't mean that those saying it were right does it?

No, I might wonder what the far side of the moon is like, but I don't care. It makes no difference to me.

On the other hand, I might wonder what the weather will be like on Monday, and I do care about that . I'd rather it was bright and sunny so I can read on the bus to work.

Did you not notice that those dictionary definitions didn't say the same thing?

 

4 billion is the number who care and or wonder about Jesus generally, but I as an individual am interested in all sources of knowledge about my Lord Jesus. I have made him my Lord which is like making him my Leader.

So the Jesus I'm now interested in is the one who became the leader of the Christians.

I admit I use words at times to their extreme, but that is not wrong in itself but the way language develops. Language is an evolving concept.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Robittybob1

[John Cuthber]

4 billion is the number who care and or wonder about Jesus generally, but I as an individual am interested in all sources of knowledge about my Lord Jesus. I have made him my Lord which is like making him my Leader.

So the Jesus I'm now interested in is the one who became the leader of the Christians.

I admit I use words at times to their extreme, but that is not wrong in itself but the way language develops. Language is an evolving concept.

He may well be your leader, but if that's the case then you are already sure that He exists- in which case the documentation would add nothing.

There's little doubt that someone must have been the leader of the Christians- or they wouldn't exist.

What's not clear is that he is anything special.

A note from that time saying, for example, what colour hair he had wouldn't add anything.

As a great scholar once said

"Why is he different? You Jews produce "messiahs" by the sackful!"

(well, it's from "Jesus Christ Superstar rather than a scholar, but the point stands.)

 

 

There are a few scholars to whom the documentation would matter, there might even be a million of them, but 4 billion is jut silly.

 

If you use words in that way, you end up being incomprehensible.

Do you feel that helps?

Edited November 15, 2014 by John Cuthber

[Robittybob1]

He may well be your leader, but if that's the case then you are already sure that He exists- in which case the documentation would add nothing.

There's little doubt that someone must have been the leader of the Christians- or they wouldn't exist.

What's not clear is that he is anything special.

A note from that time saying, for example, what colour hair he had wouldn't add anything.

As a great scholar once said

"Why is he different? You Jews produce "messiahs" by the sackful!"

(well, it's from "Jesus Christ Superstar rather than a scholar, but the point stands.)

 

 

There are a few scholars to whom the documentation would matter, there might even be a million of them, but 4 billion is jut silly.

 

If you use words in that way, you end up being incomprehensible.

Do you feel that helps?

It was only after that it was pointed it out that "care" and "wonder" don't quite match that I realised it possibly wasn't the best choice of words, but inwardly I still believe in the case of Jesus to wonder and care are synonymous.

But moving on, to your next confusion, there may well be a million, maybe much more, that are interested in the new document one of you is going to reveal to the world. I never said there was going to be 4 billion interested persons. The 4 billion just represent those that might show some passing interest in Jesus over their lifetime.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/86514-non-christian-documents-about-the-existence-of-jesus-christ/#entry837512

But those that might be interested in new texts is a much smaller number, but I myself would be the most interested.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/86514-non-christian-documents-about-the-existence-of-jesus-christ/#entry837366

 

It was the resurrection of Jesus that made him special.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Ten oz]

 

It was the resurrection of Jesus that made him special.

Why the resurrection? If Jesus was God in human form resurrection shouldn't have been so difficult. I thought suffering and then dying was the miraculous aspect of his life? That someone so power who could've prevented any pain from following onto himself allowed it for the sake of example? Either way I think the existence of Jesus in religious terms is a contradiction to faith. It is widely argued that faith is about belief in that which is unseen and unknowable. If that were true why would God needed to have made himself known through miracles and resurrection to obtain the faith of his apostles? Surely he could've just inspired their hearts and souls spiritually through faith and steered them toward writing scripture.

[John Cuthber]

 

 

It was the resurrection of Jesus that made him special.

Let us know if there's any independent verification of that event.

[Robittybob1]

Let us know if there's any independent verification of that event.

Independent from what?

Why the resurrection? If Jesus was God in human form resurrection shouldn't have been so difficult. I thought suffering and then dying was the miraculous aspect of his life? That someone so power who could've prevented any pain from following onto himself allowed it for the sake of example? Either way I think the existence of Jesus in religious terms is a contradiction to faith. It is widely argued that faith is about belief in that which is unseen and unknowable. If that were true why would God needed to have made himself known through miracles and resurrection to obtain the faith of his apostles? Surely he could've just inspired their hearts and souls spiritually through faith and steered them toward writing scripture.

I refer myself as a "Christian", but in another age and time I might have been burned at the stake for being a heretic. OK I say the resurrection is what made Jesus different than the other Jewish Messiahs, and you disagreed and went and made the situation all theological, things that would not be apparent to the people on the ground at the time Judea in the days Pontius Pilate.

I don't have a complex definable theology. I just made Jesus my Lord. Right, that's done and the next step was "Jesus I am now your servant, use me." I don't get involved with arguments about theology. I am just a simple person, earning a living.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Ten oz]

Independent from what?

 

I refer myself as a "Christian", but in another age and time I might have been burned at the stake for being a heretic. OK I say the resurrection is what made Jesus different than the other Jewish Messiahs, and you disagreed and went and made the situation all theological, things that would not be apparent to the people on the ground at the time Judea in the days Pontius Pilate.

I don't have a complex definable theology. I just made Jesus my Lord. Right, that's done and the next step was "Jesus I am now your servant, use me." I don't get involved with arguments about theology. I am just a simple person, earning a living.

My post was meant to be more sarcastic than theological.

[John Cuthber]

Independent from what?

 

Non Christian, you know- like the thread title.