Do Historians Believe Jesus Existed?

William Lane Craig, Bart Ehrman, Paul Maier, Gary Habermas and John Lennox respond to the inane objection that Jesus never existed.
Maier audio: http://apologetics315.blogspot.com/2010/12/historian-interview-paul-l-maier.html

Intro music is Red-Breath into Me

Category:

Education

Tags:

• did
• Jesus
• exist
• do
• historians
• scholars
• Richard
• Carrier
• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Bart
• Erhman
• Paul
• Maier
• Gary
• Habermas
• John
• Lennox

[Ryakki]

There is no direct historical evidence of jesus. It's all assertion from later christians.

Just because they wrote a lot of it doesn't make any of it impressive evidence.

He might have existed, he very well might not have. The degree of certainty on it is very slight.

This video is nothing but cheap religious propaganda.

[52blades]

@Ryakki, name a single NT or Historical Jesus scholar in the world holding an academic position at any university who believes Jesus never existed.

[Ryakki]

@52blades

So you want scholars in a field who specifically base their career on the presupposition of Jesus' existence to say he doesn't exist? Why not ask me to find an atheist who believes in god?

The fact is, outside the bible, there's only one document (from Josephus), which appears to be an obvious forgery, that talks about jesus in any capacity in the time of his existence. And a host of historical writings that SHOULD mention him, assuming he was real... that simply don't.

[52blades]

@Ryakki, You cannot name a single New Testament Studies or Historical Jesus scholar on earth holding an academic position at any university who believes Jesus never existed. Your only response is inane speculation that the current Third Quest for the Historical Jesus unilaterally takes for granted the existence of Jesus in its methodology. Get off the internet and pick up Ludemann, Bultman, Schweitzer, Price or anyone residual of the religionsgeschichtliche schule and stop vomiting ignorance.

[52blades]

@Ryakki, We have writings mentioning Him from his brother and Paul knew his disciples and family. In 1 Corinthians 15 we have a creed about Jesus dating to the mid 30's. We have more non-biblical early sources for him than the contemporary Roman emperor (cf. R.T. France, Habermas, Licona).  As for Josephus, scholarship universally agrees the testimonium flavianum is an *interpolation,* not a forgery, and no one disputes that his second mention of Jesus (and later his brother) is inauthentic.

[2educated2Breligious]

This video demonstrates NO evidence for 'jesus'. It avoids that and just shows religious people talking about how they believe in 'jesus'. Why haven't they presented even a shred of evidence? It's because there is no evidence. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch.

[ottotechnica]

@52blades Belief does not equal evidence or facts. The question is... Where are the third-party corroborations or physical evidence?

No real argument, just a request.

[Gnomefro]

@52blades The problem with this retelling of Christian myth should be obvious to anyone. We already know Christians and Christian myth exists. You're not trying to prove their existence. What you're trying to prove is if they say anything that's true regarding Jesus, and then it doesn't help to point to people who couldn't possibly have had a shred of first hand information about him.

[Gnomefro]

@52blades "As for Josephus, scholarship universally agrees the testimonium flavianum is an *interpolation,* not a forgery, and no one disputes that his second mention of Jesus (and later his brother) is inauthentic."

It doesn't matter if it's authentic or not(And yes, an "interpolation" is in fact a forgery). Josephus is not an extra biblical source. He wasn't even alive at the time of the alleged events. he is merely retelling christian mythology, same is true of all Roman sources.

[Gnomefro]

@52blades It's quite clear that there is a heavy bias of scholars to accept this view even if they don't believe in the Magic Jesus of the bible. This is incredibly hypocritical, because these people believe the authors of NT must be compulsive liars to the point where it's ridiculous to take anything they say seriously.

[Gnomefro]

@52blades "Get off the internet and pick up Ludemann, Bultman, Schweitzer, Price or anyone residual of the religionsgeschichtliche schule and stop vomiting ignorance."

Rather than spewing insults and throwing out names of authorities, you'd do well to recognize that the evidence for Jesus is next to worthless. In fact, to get most of these scholars on board the meaning of "Jesus" is essentially reduced to "One person or several hypothetical people being the basis for Christian myth"

[Ryakki]

@lion575

Well it's a lack of acceptance of theistic claims either way :P

Agnostic is where you can't decide if you accept them or not, I'd say.

[lion575]

@Ryakki Yes that is Atheism "to view god as fantastically unlikely and without evidence but not impossible... the same as fairies, santa, or the easter bunny."

However that differs drastically from your original statement "a lack of acceptance of various extraordinary claims ... without evidence". which I would consider Agnostic. Their is no evidence Aliens exist but that doesn't mean they dont. Their is no known evidence that their wasn't a second gunman in the JFK assassination etc.

[Ryakki]

@lion575

Atheists tend to view god as fantastically unlikely and without evidence but not impossible... the same as fairies, santa, or the easter bunny.

No prominent atheist I can recall has ever claimed god to be impossible... there's just no reason or evidence to think something like that exists.

A lack of belief in unreasonable claims is what atheism is.

The difference between agnostic and atheist is the amount of merit you give theistic claims... atheists think they're ridiculous.

[lion575]

@Ryakki I just listed the dictionary definition for you below. Your early examples "a lack of acceptance without divine knowledge" is agnosticism and not Atheism:

Agnosticism:

a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable;

As far as Satanic movements, Satanism is a Secular Humanist movement that focuses on selfishness (or simply doing what you want to do). Anton Lavey is the Author of the Satanic bible which is a philosophy not a religion.