Evidence Jesus existed: Why do people ignore it?

[NICOLEKS]

The Majority of the New Testament was written by 60 AD. Mark was written around 50 A.D and the epistles were written around the same time. The latest works were written around 80 AD.

Now, let’s just use logic here: if Jesus was crucified and buried 33 AD. that mean’s eyewitnesses were still alive when the gospels were being written. Now for ancient history, that’s pretty dang good. In fact that’s incredible, especially for a guy that never existed. The only thing that makes sense is Jesus did exist. Also the gospels are historically and culturally accurate and it’s accounts of places and events that occurred around that time have been confirmed. It also mentions big names like Pontius Pilate and Herod…now for people to create a huge lie then claim that famous people at the time were involved…that takes balls.

Also, what are the odds that 12 disciples decided to get together and fabricate a story, then risk being killed for it? We have not a single documentation of any early Christian giving in and saying it’s all made up. Not even Christians who were being impaled or fed to lions admitted to it being a fabrication.

Also, why do we not have a single ancient manuscript refuting the gospels? If Jesus never existed, performed miracles, then you’d think all Roman and Jewish leaders of the time would have aggressively refuted the claims. But they didn’t…the Pharisees just tried to get him killed because Jesus told them they were religious hypocrites and a brood of vipers.

gregboyd.org/essays/apologeti…
gregboyd.org/essays/apologeti…
carm.org/when-was-bible-written-a…
probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/…
articles.cnn.com/2002-10-21/tech/…http://www.keyforex.info/pet.gif

 

[snarflemike]

I never thought about the question of what percentage of atheists, in particular, deny the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth. I wonder if most deny that existence, or accept it?

 

[ASimon]

The Majority of the New Testament was written by 60 AD. Mark was written around 50 A.D and the epistles were written around the same time. The latest works were written around 80 AD.

Now, let’s just use logic here: if Jesus was crucified and buried 33 AD. that mean’s eyewitnesses were still alive when the gospels were being written. Now for ancient history, that’s pretty dang good. In fact that’s incredible, especially for a guy that never existed. The only thing that makes sense is Jesus did exist. Also the gospels are historically and culturally accurate and it’s accounts of places and events that occurred around that time have been confirmed. It also mentions big names like Pontius Pilate and Herod…now for people to create a huge lie then claim that famous people at the time were involved…that takes balls.

Also, what are the odds that 12 disciples decided to get together and fabricate a story, then risk being killed for it? We have not a single documentation of any early Christian giving in and saying it’s all made up. Not even Christians who were being impaled or fed to lions admitted to it being a fabrication.

Also, why do we not have a single ancient manuscript refuting the gospels? If Jesus never existed, performed miracles, then you’d think all Roman and Jewish leaders of the time would have aggressively refuted the claims. But they didn’t…the Pharisees just tried to get him killed because Jesus told them they were religious hypocrites and a brood of vipers.

gregboyd.org/essays/apologeti…
gregboyd.org/essays/apologeti…
carm.org/when-was-bible-written-a…
probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/…
articles.cnn.com/2002-10-21/tech/…http://www.keyforex.info/pet.gif

To address the central question, the reason people ignore the evidence for Jesus’s existence is because they think this is necessary for refuting the stuff that really matters - that he was the Son of God, performed miracles, rose from the dead, etc.

 

[7_Sorrows]

i am not sure that people do not believe he existed, but many probably feel that he was an ordinary man, a prophet, perhaps. they do not believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
if you watch some of the shows on the history channel or discover, many of them do their best to disprove Christianity, so you have to be careful what you are watching.

 

[Hokomai]

I never thought about the question of what percentage of atheists, in particular, deny the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth. I wonder if most deny that existence, or accept it?

I have never seen any reason to doubt the existence of Jesus, on the balance of probabilities, as any theory that he did not exist requires elaborate and complex explaining away of known facts. I think most non-believers are the same, although many of us would consider that while he existed, there is no reliable evidence that he was God, able to do miracles, ascended bodily into heaven, born of a virgin, breathed life into clay birds etc. I also think there is a ‘social reality’ of the Jesus that existed in the minds of his early followers, and it is this ‘imagined’ Jesus who is presented in the Gospels. I admit, though, that were I able to time travel, just once, I would probably head to Palestine, cAD 29, and stay for a few years with my solar-powered video camera! Should I ever manage it, I promise to let CAF have the clips first!

 

[po18guy]

The apostle John saw this even by the late first century.

John 1:4-5
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
In him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Peter saw it as well:

2 Peter 2:1
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

Jude saw it:

Jude 1:4
For certain men are secretly entered in, (who were written of long ago unto this judgment,) ungodly men, turning the grace of our Lord God into riotousness, and denying the only sovereign Ruler, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Old Testament writer of Proverbs saw it:

Proverbs 30:9
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
Lest perhaps being filled, I should be tempted to deny, and say: Who is the Lord? or being compelled by poverty, I should steal, and forswear the name of my God.

 

[LostChemist]

There are many reason that people believe that He did not exist. From my work on comparative religions here are some examples:

1. 
   *]Most of the New Testament is overshadowed by the Old. It’s important to note that the Old Testament is harsh and the idea of a God who’s wrath knows no bounds is not easily swallowed by some. Also, some think that the OT is a 100% accurate historical account which it isn’t. Many, many cultures have stories that mimick those of the OT that preceded the writings of the OT. The have a hard time accepting that the NT is more believable if they can’t believe the former.
   *]There is no historical proof outside the Bible that Jesus existed. If you can’t believe the Bible, then you can’t accept His existence.
   *]There exists the possibility that the Gospels were NOT written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, but rather others that then used more reputable names to have their work “published”. This isn’t to say that the there is any less truth to them, only that the odds are that more of the disciples probably couldn’t read or write (these were commoners for the most part).
   *]The Bible was written by men. It may have been inspired by God, but still written by fallible human beings. The Church kept these writings and swear to their authenticity. However, let’s be honest… There are many that harbor distrust against the Church for past transgressions.
   
   These are only some of the reasons that I have come across. The important thing to remember is that we take most things on faith because there is no irrefutable proof.

 

[Bezant]

I think you’re seeing the trees and ignoring the forest, so to speak.

I know few people, even non-believers, who don’t think Jesus existed. The main issue is, and will always be, is Jesus who Christians say he is? That question is more significant and tougher to answer than whether or not he existed, and you may want to focus on it instead of proving Jesus’ existence.

The Majority of the New Testament was written by 60 AD. Mark was written around 50 A.D and the epistles were written around the same time. The latest works were written around 80 AD.

Are these estimates a little early?

Now, let’s just use logic here: if Jesus was crucified and buried 33 AD. that mean’s eyewitnesses were still alive when the gospels were being written.

Maybe. You might have to explain that a reliable witness could be found, and was used.

The only thing that makes sense is Jesus did exist. Also the gospels are historically and culturally accurate and it’s accounts of places and events that occurred around that time have been confirmed.

Some of these events and facts are disputed.

Also, why do we not have a single ancient manuscript refuting the gospels? If Jesus never existed, performed miracles, then you’d think all Roman and Jewish leaders of the time would have aggressively refuted the claims. But they didn’t…the Pharisees just tried to get him killed because Jesus told them they were religious hypocrites and a brood of vipers.

The problem is that any documentation surviving from that time is precious. Even so, you’re assuming that Jesus’ ministry was threatening enough to the authorities they would have felt the need to denounce him on paper and distribute it. If they didn’t feel the need to do so, they wouldn’t have done it.

 

[Perplexity]

The Majority of the New Testament was written by 60 AD. Mark was written around 50 A.D and the epistles were written around the same time. The latest works were written around 80 AD.

These dates are on the most extreme side of the conservative spectrum. The vast majority of scholar disagree with you here. But, more importantly, even if they didn’t, there’s nothing at all irrational about adopting a minimalist position and accepting as historically probable only what passes the most stringent scrutiny to preserve us from false beliefs.

Now, let’s just use logic here: if Jesus was crucified and buried 33 AD. that mean’s eyewitnesses were still alive when the gospels were being written. Now for ancient history, that’s pretty dang good. In fact that’s incredible, especially for a guy that never existed. The only thing that makes sense is Jesus did exist.

This is explicitly circular reasoning. Jesus couldn’t have been crucified at all unless he existed.

Also the gospels are historically and culturally accurate and it’s accounts of places and events that occurred around that time have been confirmed.

First, it’s unclear what you mean when you claim the Gospels are ‘accurate’. Do you mean the majority of each Gospel is accurate, or that the majority of Gospels is accurate? etc. Regardless, the amount of effort that you’ll have to put into justifying this claim is remarkable. Especially considering the position you’re arguing against, which probably will not grant you this.

It also mentions big names like Pontius Pilate and Herod…now for people to create a huge lie then claim that famous people at the time were involved…that takes balls.

This assumes that there was a significant chance of these writings becoming known by these big names. But, the Christian communities were nobodies at the time of their writing composed for small secretive sects, and even if they did get into the hands of some higher ups, it doesn’t mean they’d give 2 cents about them.

Also, what are the odds that 12 disciples decided to get together and fabricate a story, then risk being killed for it? We have not a single documentation of any early Christian giving in and saying it’s all made up. Not even Christians who were being impaled or fed to lions admitted to it being a fabrication.

Why assume there were even 12 disciples? I’m getting the feeling you’re familiar with some of the more academic arguments for Jesus’ non-existence because they address a lot of your concerns.

Also, why do we not have a single ancient manuscript refuting the gospels? If Jesus never existed, performed miracles, then you’d think all Roman and Jewish leaders of the time would have aggressively refuted the claims. But they didn’t…the Pharisees just tried to get him killed because Jesus told them they were religious hypocrites and a brood of vipers.

Why? Why would they have aggressively attacked these documents? The culture within which the early Christians found themselves was extremely superstitious with all sorts of cults around. Why would anyone care enough about this one to try and refute it?

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Why? Why would they have aggressively attacked these documents? The culture within which the early Christians found themselves was extremely superstitious with all sorts of cults around. Why would anyone care enough about this one to try and refute it?

Nero, Trajan, Pliny the Younger and Tacitus would disagree with you.

Anyway:

[BIBLEDRB]Proverbs 26:4[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Maryann_C]

I think that you will find the following link facingthechallenge.org/josephus.php
lays out quite well some of the reasons that historians do believe there is evidence that Jesus - certainly the historical man Jesus - did exist.

Here is an excerpt for those who do not click on links :
"Flavius Josephus was a Jewish historian. He wrote around the end of the first century AD, and his two most significant works were the ‘Jewish War’ and the ‘Antiquities of the Jews’.

Josephus was born around 37 AD, and became a Pharisee. He then joined the zealots who rebelled against Roman rule between 66 and 74AD, becoming a leader of their forces in Galilee, and living through the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. He was captured by the Romans, and would have been executed, but he went over to them.

Josephus became the Roman emperor’s adviser on Jewish affairs, and died in about 98 AD. ‘Josephus’ was his Jewish name, and he took the name ‘Flavius’ in honour of the family of his imperial sponsor. His ‘Jewish War’ was largely based on his first-hand experiences. It focuses on the period AD 66 to 73. ‘Antiquities of the Jews’ covers the whole of history up to AD 66. Out of twenty books, six cover the period from the reign of Herod the Great to AD 66 - i.e. the period when Jesus lived.

In his writings, Josephus mentions the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Herodians. He mentions Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, John the Baptist, Jesus (twice) and James the brother of Jesus. He also mentions the Essenes - the strict religious sect within Judaism that founded the Qumran community, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. In fact, Josephus says that he spent some time with the Essenes. …

there is a second reference to Jesus in the works of Josephus. In Antiquities 20.200, he describes how, in AD 62, the high priest Ananus was deposed because he had illegally
convened the Sanhedrin [the highest Jewish religious court / governing body]. He had brought before them the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, who was called James, and some other men, whom he accused of having broken the law, and handed them over to be stoned.

Notice the following points from this quotation from Josephus:

Jesus had a brother called James
James was executed by the Jewish leaders in AD 62
There were claims that Jesus was the Messiah (that is, the Christ).

There is one other important point to notice from this quotation. Most scholars do not doubt the authenticity of this second reference to Jesus."

 

[Perplexity]

Nero, Trajan, Pliny the Younger and Tacitus would disagree with you.

Anyway:

[BIBLEDRB]Proverbs 26:4[/BIBLEDRB]

I actually believe that Jesus existed. But, I don’t think the vast majority of people who think likewise have good grounds for thinking so.

I mean, look at the names you’ve listed. Did Nero or Trajan say anything at all about Jesus? We have not a shred of document indicating they did. What about Pliny or Tacitus?

Pliny just talks about Christians being persecuted for their beliefs, he doesn’t tell us Jesus existed.

Granting that the Tacitean passage is authentic, it’s merely reporting Christian claims.

John Domminic Crossan (Co-Founder of the Jesus-Seminar, and world-renowned Jesus scholar) says the only reason he thinks Jesus exists is because the Gospels portray two images of Jesus: an earthly, revolutionary moral preacher and a heavenly, Divine Judge. He thinks if Jesus was invented the first image would never have been recorded.

He mentions Tacitus and Josephus as reason to believe Jesus existed but says there’s no reason to think they’re not just uncritically reporting common Christian claims.

 

[_Abyssinia]

There are many reason that people believe that He did not exist. From my work on comparative religions here are some examples:

There is no historical proof outside the Bible that Jesus existed. If you can’t believe the Bible, then you can’t accept His existence.

There are extra Biblical sources for Jesus from secular, Jewish and Christian sources.

There are many atheist, agnostic and non-Christians Historians who trust that Jesus was a real historical person. Here are some quotes from modern day historians:

bede.org.uk/price1.htm

 

[_Abyssinia]

I actually believe that Jesus existed. But, I don’t think the vast majority of people who think likewise have good grounds for thinking so.

I mean, look at the names you’ve listed. Did Nero or Trajan say anything at all about Jesus? We have not a shred of document indicating they did. What about Pliny or Tacitus?

Pliny just talks about Christians being persecuted for their beliefs, he doesn’t tell us Jesus existed.

Granting that the Tacitean passage is authentic, it’s merely reporting Christian claims.

Pliny wrote that he tortured and executed Christians, that is not evidence alone that Jesus existed, but then the question becomes where that Christian belief came from.

John Domminic Crossan (Co-Founder of the Jesus-Seminar, and world-renowned Jesus scholar) says the only reason he thinks Jesus exists is because the Gospels portray two images of Jesus: an earthly, revolutionary moral preacher and a heavenly, Divine Judge. He thinks if Jesus was invented the first image would never have been recorded.

He mentions Tacitus and Josephus as reason to believe Jesus existed but says there’s no reason to think they’re not just uncritically reporting common Christian claims.

Tacitus was a trusted ancient historian, he was known for his examination of historical documents. Tacitus was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and pronconsal of Asia, does this sound like somebody who would uncritically report a Christian claim? Tacitus also spoke condescendingly about Jesus, does not sound like he would of got that from a Christian source.

Josephus wrote a little about Christians in his history of Jews. Josephus was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in first century AD. He should be taken seriously.

Here is theologian Dr William Lane Craig commenting on how seriously scholars take The Jesus Seminar:

youtube.com/watch?v=wLKCvcg6M_4

Dr William Lane Craig’s view on John Dominic Crosson’s view of the Resurrection:

youtube.com/watch?v=aw9jvJp_nAo

Fr. Barron comments on John Dominic Crossan’s Strange Jesus:

youtube.com/watch?v=KRgkG9QxGC0

 

[7_Sorrows]

I have never seen any reason to doubt the existence of Jesus, on the balance of probabilities, as any theory that he did not exist requires elaborate and complex explaining away of known facts. I think most non-believers are the same, although many of us would consider that while he existed, there is no reliable evidence that he was God, able to do miracles, ascended bodily into heaven, born of a virgin, breathed life into clay birds etc. I also think there is a ‘social reality’ of the Jesus that existed in the minds of his early followers, and it is this ‘imagined’ Jesus who is presented in the Gospels. I admit, though, that were I able to time travel, just once, I would probably head to Palestine, cAD 29, and stay for a few years with my solar-powered video camera! Should I ever manage it, I promise to let CAF have the clips first!

i have to agree with you that i would love to travel back in time to 29AD also to what we now know as the Middle East live there for about 20 years. since i am a believer, i would want to experience what it was like before Jesus began his ministry, during his ministry,
his crucifxion, his resurrection and i would like to observe the apostles after pentecost.
so if you make it before i do, send the clips, please!

 

[clmowry]

I never thought about the question of what percentage of atheists, in particular, deny the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth. I wonder if most deny that existence, or accept it?

I would suspect most do not deny He lived, they just deny that anything we know about Him is true. i.e. He was just a criminal executed by the Romans that alot of myth developed around.

Chuck

 

[chosen_people]

The Majority of the New Testament was written by 60 AD. Mark was written around 50 A.D and the epistles were written around the same time. The latest works were written around 80 AD.

Now, let’s just use logic here: if Jesus was crucified and buried 33 AD. that mean’s eyewitnesses were still alive when the gospels were being written. Now for ancient history, that’s pretty dang good. In fact that’s incredible, especially for a guy that never existed. The only thing that makes sense is Jesus did exist. Also the gospels are historically and culturally accurate and it’s accounts of places and events that occurred around that time have been confirmed. It also mentions big names like Pontius Pilate and Herod…now for people to create a huge lie then claim that famous people at the time were involved…that takes balls.

Also, what are the odds that 12 disciples decided to get together and fabricate a story, then risk being killed for it? We have not a single documentation of any early Christian giving in and saying it’s all made up. Not even Christians who were being impaled or fed to lions admitted to it being a fabrication.

Also, why do we not have a single ancient manuscript refuting the gospels? If Jesus never existed, performed miracles, then you’d think all Roman and Jewish leaders of the time would have aggressively refuted the claims. But they didn’t…the Pharisees just tried to get him killed because Jesus told them they were religious hypocrites and a brood of vipers.

gregboyd.org/essays/apologeti…
gregboyd.org/essays/apologeti…
carm.org/when-was-bible-written-a…
probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/…
articles.cnn.com/2002-10-21/tech/…http://www.keyforex.info/pet.gif

Well to begin with although Matthew,Mark;Luke and John are the putative authors of their respective Gospels, only Matthew and John are mentioned as disciples and witnesses to to events in the life of Jesus. Mark and Luke did not claim to be eyewitnesses to events in Jesus’ life.

Now we know that the Gospel of Mark (who was not an eyewitness) was the first synoptic Gospel since Matthew copied about 90% of the Gospel of Mark (600 out of 660 verses) and Luke copied over 50% of the Gospel of Mark. Now if Matthew really was a disciple and a witness to events why would he need to copy Mark and rely so heavily of Marks version of events ? (why would he refer to himself in the third person in Matthew 9:9?). Which leaves us with John which contains material not found in Mark, contradicts events reported in Matthew and Luke and contains none of the" historical material" contained only in Matthew and Luke such as infancy and childhood.To make matters even more complicated, whenever they reported "historical material"l not found in Mark (on whose Gospel they obviously relied) and although they were not eyewitnesses, they contradict each other and make alterations and additions to Mark’s Jesus story.

The Epistles make no mention of the Gospels which strongly suggest that the Gospels did not exist until after the Epistles were written. Although this earliest Christian document was written much closer to the alleged lifetime of Jesus, the Epistles speak of a divine being with virtually no reference to physical events on earth or in history. There are no sayings of Jesus, or parables, or miracles or details about his life. There is no crucifixion mentioned, no empty tomb, no alleged rising from the tomb.

Although Christian scholars put forward that the Gospels existed in some form by the late first century of the common era, the first time there is a written reference to a Gospel is a reference to the Gospel of Mark in 125 c.e. and the first written reference to all four Gospels is in 175 c.e.

Now although Christians believe that a god had literally come down to earth, this was missed by every one of the 41 historians who lived during the first and early second century, who wrote about Judea and Rome and whose works have survived. Not a single one of them mentioned Jesus, his alleged disciples, his apostles or any of the miraculous events described in the Gospels.

The lack of sources outside of Christianity has led to reliance on forged passages from Josephus and even trying to interpret Talmudic passages as somehow referring to the Jesus figure. Now Jesus may have existed historically but there is little or no credible evidence supporting his existence.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Well to begin with although Matthew,Mark;Luke and John are the putative authors of their respective Gospels, only Matthew and John are mentioned as disciples and witnesses to to events in the life of Jesus. Mark and Luke did not claim to be eyewitnesses to events in Jesus’ life.

Now we know that the Gospel of Mark (who was not an eyewitness) was the first synoptic Gospel since Matthew copied about 90% of the Gospel of Mark (600 out of 660 verses) and Luke copied over 50% of the Gospel of Mark. Now if Matthew really was a disciple and a witness to events why would he need to copy Mark and rely so heavily of Marks version of events ? (why would he refer to himself in the third person in Matthew 9:9?). Which leaves us with John which contains material not found in Mark, contradicts events reported in Matthew and Luke and contains none of the" historical material" contained only in Matthew and Luke such as infancy and childhood.To make matters even more complicated, whenever they reported "historical material"l not found in Mark (on whose Gospel they obviously relied) and although they were not eyewitnesses, they contradict each other and make alterations and additions to Mark’s Jesus story.

The Epistles make no mention of the Gospels which strongly suggest that the Gospels did not exist until after the Epistles were written. Although this earliest Christian document was written much closer to the alleged lifetime of Jesus, the Epistles speak of a divine being with virtually no reference to physical events on earth or in history. There are no sayings of Jesus, or parables, or miracles or details about his life. There is no crucifixion mentioned, no empty tomb, no alleged rising from the tomb.

Although Christian scholars put forward that the Gospels existed in some form by the late first century of the common era, the first time there is a written reference to a Gospel is a reference to the Gospel of Mark in 125 c.e. and the first written reference to all four Gospels is in 175 c.e.

Now although Christians believe that a god had literally come down to earth, this was missed by every one of the 41 historians who lived during the first and early second century, who wrote about Judea and Rome and whose works have survived. Not a single one of them mentioned Jesus, his alleged disciples, his apostles or any of the miraculous events described in the Gospels.

The lack of sources outside of Christianity has led to reliance on forged passages from Josephus and even trying to interpret Talmudic passages as somehow referring to the Jesus figure. Now Jesus may have existed historically but there is little or no credible evidence supporting his existence.

What historic evidence is there for Moses? Of course I believe he existed, but prove it if you can.

 

[chosen_people]

What historic evidence is there for Moses? Of course I believe he existed, but prove it if you can.

This will help answer your question:

aish.com/h/sh/se/48943936.html

 

[Hokomai]

i have to agree with you that i would love to travel back in time to 29AD also to what we now know as the Middle East live there for about 20 years. since i am a believer, i would want to experience what it was like before Jesus began his ministry, during his ministry,
his crucifxion, his resurrection and i would like to observe the apostles after pentecost.
so if you make it before i do, send the clips, please!

Working on the transchrono flange drive now …