Did Jesus exist?

[Ponder This]

There are others but it is statistically impossible for anyone to fulfill 4 prophecies.

"statistically impossible"

 

[Repox]

We can never be sure what their characters were like. The Pagan Church that hijacked the message of Jesus pbuh tells us, the Disciples were persecuted and most were 'killed' for their beliefs.

In Matthew 3:11 John speaking of Jesus pbuh says, "I indeed baptize you with water to repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."

In Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. 25 For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it."

Clearly Jesus pbuh is letting his followers know they will face difficult times, the baptism of fire indicates martyrdom. In particular, he points out this would happen to John and James Zebedee in Mark 10:35-39. This is a future Prophecy and we all know the Church tells us, Emperor Nero Cesar wanted to be worshipped as God incarnate, (a popular theme of the era) so sought to make an example of the Apostle John, (the Apostle earmarked for martyrdom). He had him put into a cauldron of boiling oil and of course John survived. The Emperor wanting sole adoration from the people, let him walk away free of charge, so he could go onto write his memoirs in old age in perfect Greek, recalling word for word conversations that happened some 60 Years earlier :/

If you examine books of the time, you find there was an abundant use of fiction for stories, even stories claiming to be nonfiction. As for the gospels, historical evidence suggests the narratives were fiction. As an example, no prior gospel mentions a single NT gospel narrative. As an example, there is no historical evidence for Joseph and Mary.

 

[Repox]

They considered bearing false witness a sin against God. That is the only evidence I have. What makes you think they were not?

I have done a lot of research. Based on historical documents, including prior gospels such as The Gospel of Thomas, there is no evidence of one single narrative story about Jesus, it was all made up. As an example, there is no historical evidence for the existence of Joseph and Mary.

 

[RedDragon94]

Ok so, Heb 8:9 is about God's people falling short, and a New Covenant of Grace is now the order of the day. What verse from the Torah is Paul quoting?

None.

At the minute none whatsoever, as we don't know who they were. They could have been paid writers from the Roman Empire for all we know.

The Roman Empire persecuted Christians. Everybody persecuted Christians back when it first began. No one got paid to write.

 

[omega2xx]

"statistically impossible"

I don't think you know what it means.

 

[omega2xx]

I have done a lot of research. Based on historical documents, including prior gospels such as The Gospel of Thomas, there is no evidence of one single narrative story about Jesus, it was all made up. As an example, there is no historical evidence for the existence of Joseph and Mary.

We have 4 written records of eyewitnesses. That is abetter than all of your research that can't prove any thing they have said and which you accept by faith alone.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Yes. Seutonius and Tacitus don't say anything about Jesus. They say more about Christians and their beliefs. So they primarily allow us to say something about what early Christian thought and how the Romans viewed them. As such, they say *nothing* about Jesus himself.
Pliny also asks how to deal with early Christians that fail to pledge allegiance to the emperor. Again, Pliny says a bit about what the Christians believe, but he doesn't give great credence to those beliefs (neither do Seutonius or Tacitus).
The reason Aslan mainly uses Josephus is that he is interested in the historical context including other 'messiahs', both prior to and after Jesus. The passages in Josephus concerning Jesus of Nazareth are almost universally regarded as later additions and NOT actually due to Josephus.
But there is enough in the gospels and other apocrypha to get a decent story about Jesus and enough that is known about the times to put that story in context.

Thank you for your reply.
Didn't Tacitus say, " Christus, the founder of the name [Christian], had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus. - Annals XV,44 ?
Didn't Suetonius ( c.69-a122 C.E. (A.D.)) say, " ............Chrestus [Chrustus], he [Claudius] expelled Christians from Rome, thus showing Suetonius did Not doubt the existence of Jesus. ( Acts of the Apostles 18:2 )
Didn't Pliny say, "..... and who finally cursed Christ...... - Pliny - Letters, Book X,XCVI , thus showing Pliny did Not doubt the existence of Christ.
They don't have to say anything about Christ himself. That is why God has the gospel accounts provided for us.
The story about Jesus is the fulfillment of the old Constitution of the temporary Mosaic Law contract.
Jesus' NEW commandment is to have self-sacrificing love for others as he has according to John 13:34-35.
When people pick up the morning news they read about the bad news of men's kingdoms or governments.
Whereas, when people pick up the Bible they read about the good news of God's kingdom government in the hands of Christ Jesus. Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among people of goodwill.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'm of the opinion that the character commonly known as jesus, never actually lived or existed. The storybook character is simply an amalgamation of the existing cults of the time (Mithra and Baccus).

That is little more than regurgitated internet drivel. Read Clauss.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

We have 4 written records of eyewitnesses.

That is a worthless faith claim.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

...........As an example, there is no historical evidence for the existence of Joseph and Mary.

History shows us that that the Jewish Temple records were destroyed in the year 70 by the Roman armies.
So, the only historical account from those old records is found preserved for us at Matthew 1 and Luke 3.

 

[Polymath257]

Thank you for your reply.
Didn't Tacitus say, " Christus, the founder of the name [Christian], had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus. - Annals XV,44 ?
Didn't Suetonius ( c.69-a122 C.E. (A.D.)) say, " ............Chrestus [Chrustus], he [Claudius] expelled Christians from Rome, thus showing Suetonius did Not doubt the existence of Jesus. ( Acts of the Apostles 18:2 )
Didn't Pliny say, "..... and who finally cursed Christ...... - Pliny - Letters, Book X,XCVI , thus showing Pliny did Not doubt the existence of Christ.
They don't have to say anything about Christ himself. That is why God has the gospel accounts provided for us.
The story about Jesus is the fulfillment of the old Constitution of the temporary Mosaic Law contract.
Jesus' NEW commandment is to have self-sacrificing love for others as he has according to John 13:34-35.
When people pick up the morning news they read about the bad news of men's kingdoms or governments.
Whereas, when people pick up the Bible they read about the good news of God's kingdom government in the hands of Christ Jesus. Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among people of goodwill.

Tacitus mentions the beliefs of the Christians and relied on their beliefs when mentioning the death of their leader. He did this in similar ways for other cults.

Seutonius mentions that Nero accused the Christians of the burning of Rome and that Christians were expelled.

Pliny wanted the Christians to honor the 'genius' of the emperor, but did NOT require them to curse their leader. In fact, it was very clearly stated in his letters to the emperor that only their allegiance to Rome was required.

So, yes, there is evidence very early on (written in 2nd century AD) that Christians existed in the century and that their leader was believed to have been killed by Roman law.

It does NOT show the actual existence of Jesus, by the way.

Now, again, I don't seriously doubt that a preacher existed that taught what is attributed to Jesus in the gospels. It is even likely he was put to death by the Roman authorities. This was not the only time a leader of the Jews around that time was so punished.

However, the claims of his resurrection are NOT mentioned in any Roman sources. And, given their propensity to believe very strange things, it probably would not have been left out.

if anything, this suggests that the Jesus legend grew to include resurrection and that it wasn't in the original story.

 

[Repox]

History shows us that that the Jewish Temple records were destroyed in the year 70 by the Roman armies.
So, the only historical account from those old records is found preserved for us at Matthew 1 and Luke 3.

You cannot regard Matthew and Luke as historical records. They weren't even witnesses to Jesus.

 

[omega2xx]

That is a worthless faith claim.

That is worthless belief claim.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You cannot regard Matthew and Luke as historical records. They weren't even witnesses to Jesus.

I can't figure out how follower Matthew, who was one of Jesus' apostles, could never witness Jesus since he was with Jesus.

Luke had eyewitness accounts according to Luke 1:2; Acts of the Apostles 1:1.
Luke also had access to the public temple records. Those records were later destroyed by the Roman armies in the year 70.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Tacitus mentions the beliefs of the Christians and relied on their beliefs when mentioning the death of their leader. He did this in similar ways for other cults.
Seutonius mentions that Nero accused the Christians of the burning of Rome and that Christians were expelled.
Pliny wanted the Christians to honor the 'genius' of the emperor, but did NOT require them to curse their leader. In fact, it was very clearly stated in his letters to the emperor that only their allegiance to Rome was required.
So, yes, there is evidence very early on (written in 2nd century AD) that Christians existed in the century and that their leader was believed to have been killed by Roman law.
It does NOT show the actual existence of Jesus, by the way.
Now, again, I don't seriously doubt that a preacher existed that taught what is attributed to Jesus in the gospels. It is even likely he was put to death by the Roman authorities. This was not the only time a leader of the Jews around that time was so punished.
However, the claims of his resurrection are NOT mentioned in any Roman sources. And, given their propensity to believe very strange things, it probably would not have been left out.
if anything, this suggests that the Jesus legend grew to include resurrection and that it wasn't in the original story.

Please read post # 67 as to actual existence of Christ Jesus by secular sources.

 

[Repox]

I can't figure out how follower Matthew, who was one of Jesus' apostles, could never witness Jesus since he was with Jesus.

Luke had eyewitness accounts according to Luke 1:2; Acts of the Apostles 1:1.
Luke also had access to the public temple records. Those records were later destroyed by the Roman armies in the year 70.

According to historical records, "The Gospel of Matthew is anonymous: the author is not named within the text, and the superscription "according to Matthew" was added some time in the 2nd century."

Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia

The more you unravel the NT gospels the more you find them to not be genuine, they were concocted by authors who were not eyewitnesses to Jesus, didn't live in the holy land, hadn't even visited the holy land, and were not even Jewish.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

According to historical records, "The Gospel of Matthew is anonymous: the author is not named within the text, and the superscription "according to Matthew" was added some time in the 2nd century."
The more you unravel the NT gospels the more you find them to not be genuine, they were concocted by authors who were not eyewitnesses to Jesus, didn't live in the holy land, hadn't even visited the holy land, and were not even Jewish.

What I am posting is what I find the Bible ( Not secular sources ) teaches.
I find Scripture teaches that Matthew is the penman of the gospel according to Matthew.
Matthew was an apostle of Jesus. So Matthew was an eyewitness.
Who wrote that Matthew was Not Matthew was Not there (eyewitness) to say Matthew was Not Matthew.

 

[Repox]

What I am posting is what I find the Bible ( Not secular sources ) teaches.
I find Scripture teaches that Matthew is the penman of the gospel according to Matthew.
Matthew was an apostle of Jesus. So Matthew was an eyewitness.
Who wrote that Matthew was Not Matthew was Not there (eyewitness) to say Matthew was Not Matthew.

You state, "What I am posting is what I find the Bible ( Not secular sources ) teaches," then every word of the Bible is truthful. For a very long time Bible scholars have disputed the inerrancy of The Bible and they have found errors. I believe God is holy and perfect but men who wrote the Bible are not, they are human. Here is an excellent reference for gospel errors and misinformation, Who Wrote the New Testament? by Burton L. Mack. I have research Mark's book and find it to be accurate. I am a scholar, so I can authenticate research material.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No one knows for sure. But it's 100% for sure that that mythological character from the NT stories didn't exist.

 

[Twilight Hue]

According to historical records, "The Gospel of Matthew is anonymous: the author is not named within the text, and the superscription "according to Matthew" was added some time in the 2nd century."

Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia

The more you unravel the NT gospels the more you find them to not be genuine, they were concocted by authors who were not eyewitnesses to Jesus, didn't live in the holy land, hadn't even visited the holy land, and were not even Jewish.

Not to mention. Nobody even knows the names of any of the authors who actually wrote them.

Could be just about anybody.