Did Jesus Exist? 2 of 4

http://nowheretorunradio.com
http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_history.html
In this section, we will examine 1st and 2nd century sources which verify Jesus
as an actual man of history (not a compilation of pagan myths as some critics
allege). Each of the following sections offer their own advantages: the
non-Christian sources are important as they had nothing to gain by their
admissions. On the other hand, the Christian witness had everything to lose-
many paying for their testimony with their lives.

The outline we will be following for this discussion is as follows:
1) Secular Sources (Documentary)
2) Secular Sources (Commentary)
3) Jewish Sources (Non-Christian)
4) Extra-Biblical Sources (Christian)
5) Answering Common Skeptic Questions Concerning Jesus' existence
6) Conclusion

Category:

Education

Tags:

• did
• jesus
• really
• exist
• was
• real
• person
• historians
• peer
• reviewed
• history
• scholars

[barakahasard]

Flavius Josephus!! A jew Historian!! A very credible source.

[CBALLEN]

Thank God that Jesus has saved Chris White.Love you Brother.

[YoBravaFrumAnuvaMuva]

@Kesky16 Exactly. A dead guy hanging on a cross that claimed to be eternal; promising eternal life to others, on top of your reasons.

Christianity is so riduclous in one sense, that the only reason it could have survived (let alone prosper) for the past 2000 years is because God is behind it and glorifies the name of Jesus (again, like Jesus said he would in the bible).

Man's idea of God is ruling, riches...not humility and dying for enemies. Man would never invent a God like this.

[Kesky16]

The best evidence for his existence does come from the bible:

If Jesus was a made up figure, it is unlikely early church fathers would include 4 gospels with different narratives in the bible.

Evidence for resurrection: People 2,000 years ago were still people. They weren't more gullible than people today are. Would you really follow a religion based on a man that died in shame, as a criminal, not proving his divinity thereafter by any means??

[doaftheloaf]

not ONE contemporary reference to jesus, and no shortage of people whose writings we do have that lived then and there and wrote about just the kind of things that jesus is said to have done.

face it, all you have is the biased gospels.

[doaftheloaf]

@barakahasard except that the jesus passge sticks out in his writings like a gay couple in the westboro baptist church. an obvious forgery.

[ShadyAbyss]

Wow ,very well put together and i am now a true believer. Also i am now subscribed for life. Thanks for the very well thought out documentary. You have taught me to open my heart to new life.

[slgilley]

@Rotebuehl1: I'm saying that sources that were written 80 or 150 years after the events they are describing can't be completely trusted. In Celsus' case, since we don't have the actual manuscript, it's even more difficult to assess validity.

No, I don't think that stating that a culture with only a verbal tradition, not written, is unlikely to have the exact facts of an event 80 years after the event took place is anything but realistic.

[Rotebuehl1]

@slgilley This is an argumentation insinuating what? That he may existed or that couldn't possibly have existed?

P.S.:

...that comment on illiterate traditions is really a tiny, little bit outdated, or how would you put it?

[slgilley]

Okay, Pliny the Younger wrote of Jesus in about 112 AD, meaning about 80 years after the death of Jesus, should he have existed. Celsus wrote 70 years later than that, and we don't even have the manuscript he wrote, just references to it.

With all our media, historical records, etc, we can't agree on what happened 50 years ago. How can one expect a primitive culture with a verbal tradition to accurately know what happened 80 years prior?