• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

No overwhelming historical proof: Why I doubt Jesus

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
The Gospels are proof Jesus existed, Billions of Christians is proof too. The Bible is the greatest selling Book in human history. Movies, books written about just the Gospels.
So I assume that on the basis of sales, the fact that Tolkien's Lord of the Rings has enjoyed immense sales would mean you accept the existence of Orcs, Elves, Hobbits, Wizards and Ents? Are sales proof enough for you?

By the way, I can find you evidence that while the Bible is indeed a big seller, I can find very little evidence that many people actually read it. I can, in fact, provide evidence that the people who bought Lord of the Rings have read it far more, far more deeply -- and even far more often -- than any purchaser of the Bible. In fact, I'm an atheist and I don't personally know a single Christian who has read the Bible in more depth than I have. It usually surprises the bejeebers out of them.
]It's just too obvious to question. The Quran is another Book, authentic, which records Jesus life.
And if "authentic," as you say, then you accept that Jesus was not "the Son of God?" Because the "authentic" Qur'an is very explicit on that point.
 

g2perk

Member
So I assume that on the basis of sales, the fact that Tolkien's Lord of the Rings has enjoyed immense sales would mean you accept the existence of Orcs, Elves, Hobbits, Wizards and Ents? Are sales proof enough for you?

By the way, I can find you evidence that while the Bible is indeed a big seller, I can find very little evidence that many people actually read it. I can, in fact, provide evidence that the people who bought Lord of the Rings have read it far more, far more deeply -- and even far more often -- than any purchaser of the Bible. In fact, I'm an atheist and I don't personally know a single Christian who has read the Bible in more depth than I have. It usually surprises the bejeebers out of them.

And if "authentic," as you say, then you accept that Jesus was not "the Son of God?" Because the "authentic" Qur'an is very explicit on that point.
Please explain why Jesus is not the son of man.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
I personally don't believe Jesus ever existed, for if he did there would have been much written about him, like there was an earthquake when he was on the cross, many graves were opened and many of the dead walked though the land, walking on water and all the many other so called magic tricks he did. Lets face it, if all these thing truly happened they would have been written about by many historians, but they ain't, and the only so called proof by one historian, that is Josephus, has been proved a fake.
 

g2perk

Member
Because there is no more evidence for his historicity than there is for the historicity of Herakles, in fact, there is less.
Except one thing when you say the name JESUS you automatically place Him as God.

And Hercules associated with a myth.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
So I assume that on the basis of sales, the fact that Tolkien's Lord of the Rings has enjoyed immense sales would mean you accept the existence of Orcs, Elves, Hobbits, Wizards and Ents? Are sales proof enough for you?

By the way, I can find you evidence that while the Bible is indeed a big seller, I can find very little evidence that many people actually read it. I can, in fact, provide evidence that the people who bought Lord of the Rings have read it far more, far more deeply -- and even far more often -- than any purchaser of the Bible. In fact, I'm an atheist and I don't personally know a single Christian who has read the Bible in more depth than I have. It usually surprises the bejeebers out of them.

And if "authentic," as you say, then you accept that Jesus was not "the Son of God?" Because the "authentic" Qur'an is very explicit on that point.

The greatness of the Bible and Jesus is Their spiritual reality. This is only understood by the spiritually minded. Materialists have no share in this bounty.

Son of God

This is a misinterpretation by Christians which the Quran corrects. It does not contradict the Bible.

Quran

Sura 19:34

35. It is not for God to have a child-glory be to Him. To have anything done, He says to it, "Be," and it becomes.

The Bible

In the Bible it says 'God is Spirit' so how can Jesus be the physical son God?

John 4:24
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

The Son of God is a spiritual title in the Bible not applying only to Jesus.........

Romans 8:14
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

John 1:12
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

1 John 3:1

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

1 John 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Both the Quran and the Bible are in agreement that Christ is a spiritual reality born of the Holy Spirit.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Billions of Star Wars fans do not make those characters real.



There is nothing obvious about virgin births, defying gravity and returning to life. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and in this case, basic, ordinary evidence is lacking. Someone said "If you believe in a Virgin Mary, you will believe in anything". It is a just a different level of credulity that I cannot understand.



Do you know for a fact that the Quran author did not get his account of Jesus from the Bible - like everyone else did?

Christ and Bible can only ever be truly appreciated by the spiritually minded. The atheist and materialist are deprived of knowing their true value because they see with material eyes only.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
According to Gospel

Jesus was well known in the vicinity of Jerusalem in the first decades of the CE. He had grown up in nearby Nazareth. He had preached to large crowds. He had been to parties with rich folks. He had healed desperately ill people, even after they died. Then He made a big altercation in the Temple. By the week of the Passion of Christ, many if not most of the inhabitants of Jerusalem knew about Him. Many knew Him by face. He had lots of followers, including The Twelve.

Then He did something that got Him the ire of the local Jewish authorities. Likely the big deal in the Temple, but who knows. They hired one of His own to turn Him in. They turned Him over to Pilate. Apparently the evidence was weak, Pilate tried to foist the problem off onto Herod. Herod wasn't buying it, so Pilate summarily ordered Jesus to be tortured and crucified, the way Jewish terrorists/ freedom fighters generally were at the time. He was scourged to within an inch of His life. Then dragged naked through the streets of Jerusalem on the busiest day of the year(last shopping day before Passover) , carrying His own execution device, then nailed to the Cross to die in front of God and everybody. Then a Roman stabbed Him with a spear.
There is also mention of a solar event and an earthquake strong enough to damage the Temple. But not all the gospel writers remember that.

If the story had ended there(as it did in the original version of the oldest gospel, Mark), nobody would remember. Jesus would be just another troublesome Jew executed by the Romans before they leveled the Temple, and kicked the Jews out of Judea. It happened often.

But the story goes on. Jesus reappeared a few days later. Better than new, only a few scars as proof that He actually was the one crucified last Friday. Thomas checked it out for himself.
Given the facts, the place and time, and human nature, there are a few things a rational observer would expect.
The first would be crowds. A bunch of people saw that Jesus guy dragged through the streets to His death. Then they spent the next couple of days eating and hanging out with family, as people do on holidays. So lots of people, regardless of how they viewed Jesus, knew about the events of Friday. Jesus, Alive!, would be a huge big deal. A secret like that cannot be kept. People would care, even if they didn't believe in the Trinity. And Jesus was around for almost 40 more days. Then He Ascended to Heaven. The crowds would be wild.
People would hang on His every Word. They would want to know everything possible about His prior life and lineage and teachings and Everything. The spot He was born, His girlfriends, the spot from which He ascended. .... People would have wanted to know everything. And would have done anything to please Him. Throw themselves against the Romans in His Name. Erect statues and monuments, take in His Holy Mother, follow The Apostles around insufferably, pass stories about seeing Jesus's own sandal once with my own eyes to the grandkids...

But none of that happened. Nothing. It is impossible to find a credible reference to Jesus's existence before the Jewish diaspora. The Romans didn't notice. The Jewish authorities didn't notice.
Hardly anyone remembered anything until Paul came along. By then, nobody even remembered where Jesus ascended. A few decades after that, people started writing things down. But the writings were vague, not terribly consistent, and extremely incomplete. The earliest ones were pretty barebones, later ones had lots more supernatural details. But there is nothing like accounts of Jesus and His story anything like contemporary with Jesus.
Nothing.
And here is the biggest gap of all. What did The Risen Lord teach, do, or say during the 40 Days? Did everyone just forget? Didn't they care? It is like Jesus went on vacation during the most momentous time He was on earth! He could have explained Trinitarianism. Produced a code of Christian behavior that would exclude the Crusades, EuroChristian colonialism, and slavery in the Americas.(just to name a few)
But none of that happened. Absolutely nothing of interest is recorded as happening during The Risen Christ's 40 days with us fallible humans.

The remarkable lack of historical evidence, when it should exist in piles, is why I doubt that the character in the New Testament is more than a legend created later, for the purposes of humans. Nothing to do with God.
Tom

Fascinating. Up front, i am not a christian, /Also, do not consider myself in the ''New Covenant''.

That being said, you have clearly created a fictional ''version'' of the Scripture. In the Bible, Jesus not only performs miracles, so forth, He doesn't even have a human father. Where are you getting this ''average'' character from? Not the text.
 
Last edited:

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Christ and Bible can only ever be truly appreciated by the spiritually minded. The atheist and materialist are deprived of knowing their true value because they see with material eyes only.
This reminds me of a story I heard once about an ancient and powerful Emperor. He apparently wore magical Empirical robes that were so beautiful that they could only be perceived by people who saw with spiritual eyes. Those who saw with only material eyes could not see them at all.
 
Last edited:

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
That being said, you have clearly created a fictional ''version'' of the Scripture.
Which part is fictional? I am absolutely confident that everything I described can be found in the NT.
In the Bible, Jesus not only performs miracles, so forth, He doesn't even have a human father. Where are you getting this ''average'' character from? Not the text.
What "average" character? Just the parts I mentioned make Him quite beyond ordinary. Adding in all the less plausible parts just makes my OP even more pointed. How could such astonishing events go so unnoticed by the people of the day?

The combination of portents, solar eclipse and earthquake on the eve of Passover, would itself be momentous. We know to within a few years when it had to be. The Gospel authors had to have as well. But not only do they give no date, but no such event is recorded by anybody at all.
Tom
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Which part is fictional? I am absolutely confident that everything I described can be found in the NT.

What "average" character? Just the parts I mentioned make Him quite beyond ordinary. Adding in all the less plausible parts just makes my OP even more pointed. How could such astonishing events go so unnoticed by the people of the day?

The combination of portents, solar eclipse and earthquake on the eve of Passover, would itself be momentous. We know to within a few years when it had to be. The Gospel authors had to have as well. But not only do they give no date, but no such event is recorded by anybody at all.
Tom

I would contend that is highly unlikely that /deified teacher cult could have started in the timeframe that it did, without clear reasons, for the adherents, to be adhering to Jesus. We have the problem of area, /religion was prominent in the very area that Jesus taught, and you have the timeframe which doesn't allow for that amount of 'fiction', concerning Jesus. The deified somewhat average teacher just doesn't make sense, to me. The eclipse, so forth, it's difficult to tell if it would be recorded outside the religious texts/of the adherents.
 
Last edited:

ukok102nak

Active Member
~;> probably youve just mistook someone as jesus then you compared unto christjesus our lord and saviour
the only begotten son of god

as we have said this things we can very certain that it came from our conscience
nothing more nothing less


:ty:



godbless
unto all always

So do I. That's why I made the distinction between Jesus and "the character in the New Testament "
Tom
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
According to Gospel

Jesus was well known in the vicinity of Jerusalem in the first decades of the CE. He had grown up in nearby Nazareth. He had preached to large crowds. He had been to parties with rich folks. He had healed desperately ill people, even after they died. Then He made a big altercation in the Temple. By the week of the Passion of Christ, many if not most of the inhabitants of Jerusalem knew about Him. Many knew Him by face. He had lots of followers, including The Twelve.

Then He did something that got Him the ire of the local Jewish authorities. Likely the big deal in the Temple, but who knows. They hired one of His own to turn Him in. They turned Him over to Pilate. Apparently the evidence was weak, Pilate tried to foist the problem off onto Herod. Herod wasn't buying it, so Pilate summarily ordered Jesus to be tortured and crucified, the way Jewish terrorists/ freedom fighters generally were at the time. He was scourged to within an inch of His life. Then dragged naked through the streets of Jerusalem on the busiest day of the year(last shopping day before Passover) , carrying His own execution device, then nailed to the Cross to die in front of God and everybody. Then a Roman stabbed Him with a spear.
There is also mention of a solar event and an earthquake strong enough to damage the Temple. But not all the gospel writers remember that.

If the story had ended there(as it did in the original version of the oldest gospel, Mark), nobody would remember. Jesus would be just another troublesome Jew executed by the Romans before they leveled the Temple, and kicked the Jews out of Judea. It happened often.

But the story goes on. Jesus reappeared a few days later. Better than new, only a few scars as proof that He actually was the one crucified last Friday. Thomas checked it out for himself.
Given the facts, the place and time, and human nature, there are a few things a rational observer would expect.
The first would be crowds. A bunch of people saw that Jesus guy dragged through the streets to His death. Then they spent the next couple of days eating and hanging out with family, as people do on holidays. So lots of people, regardless of how they viewed Jesus, knew about the events of Friday. Jesus, Alive!, would be a huge big deal. A secret like that cannot be kept. People would care, even if they didn't believe in the Trinity. And Jesus was around for almost 40 more days. Then He Ascended to Heaven. The crowds would be wild.
People would hang on His every Word. They would want to know everything possible about His prior life and lineage and teachings and Everything. The spot He was born, His girlfriends, the spot from which He ascended. .... People would have wanted to know everything. And would have done anything to please Him. Throw themselves against the Romans in His Name. Erect statues and monuments, take in His Holy Mother, follow The Apostles around insufferably, pass stories about seeing Jesus's own sandal once with my own eyes to the grandkids...

But none of that happened. Nothing. It is impossible to find a credible reference to Jesus's existence before the Jewish diaspora. The Romans didn't notice. The Jewish authorities didn't notice.
Hardly anyone remembered anything until Paul came along. By then, nobody even remembered where Jesus ascended. A few decades after that, people started writing things down. But the writings were vague, not terribly consistent, and extremely incomplete. The earliest ones were pretty barebones, later ones had lots more supernatural details. But there is nothing like accounts of Jesus and His story anything like contemporary with Jesus.
Nothing.
And here is the biggest gap of all. What did The Risen Lord teach, do, or say during the 40 Days? Did everyone just forget? Didn't they care? It is like Jesus went on vacation during the most momentous time He was on earth! He could have explained Trinitarianism. Produced a code of Christian behavior that would exclude the Crusades, EuroChristian colonialism, and slavery in the Americas.(just to name a few)
But none of that happened. Absolutely nothing of interest is recorded as happening during The Risen Christ's 40 days with us fallible humans.

The remarkable lack of historical evidence, when it should exist in piles, is why I doubt that the character in the New Testament is more than a legend created later, for the purposes of humans. Nothing to do with God.
Tom

The interesting thing of course is that it makes little difference whether Jesus existed or not. For two thousand years, people did and still do belief he existed, with massive historical consequences as people try to spread Christianity or establish the "pure" Christian faith amongst Christians. Christianity was reinvented many times in that period and so was the image and story of Christ. ( I think the virgin birth was a Byzantine invention. )

It's clear that people wanted to believe in Jesus and what he represents and that this idea had the power to mobilise people around the world, bringing the Roman Empire to the Christian fold within a few centuries. Whether it's for a fictional character or not- Christianty will not be destroyed purely by doubting the validity of the scriptures. It is a political reality with a lot of power and influence that could just as easily be reinvented to a liberal Christianity or Christian atheism to fit with the mood of the times. The only thing that would eliminate Christian beliefs is a crisis in Christian beliefs combined with a new and "superior" religion in terms of its ability to fulfill people spiritually. An AntiChrist maybe. :D
 

buddhist

Well-Known Member
@columbus, I'd go a step further. To my knowledge, none of us can claim to have personal, direct knowledge of anything in so-called "recorded history". This includes the stories of Jesus.

I would imagine a true "Almighty God" would possess both the power and intent to deliver it's/his message directly to all beings, throughout space and time (and in a sense, I believe this is what the Dharmic religions teaches, more or less). None of this "well, this thing happened sometime in history, to a specific someone(s), and you just gotta believe it happened".
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
columbus, I'd go a step further. To my knowledge, none of us can claim to have personal, direct knowledge of anything in so-called "recorded history". This includes the stories of Jesus.
I understand what you are saying. Lots of our beliefs about history is based on inferences. But some things and people and events are far better evidenced than others.
Take Jerusalem. There isn't any question about it's existence. And while much of the history is likely embroidered there is no doubt that the spot has been inhabited for thousands of years and much of the recorded history did happen as described. Similarly there are people in history who are really well evidenced. Alexander the Great and Mohammed are two people who had such gigantic influence on history and culture across vast areas. If we didn't know who they were, historians would have to posit their existence to explain the explosion of the culture.

That is not true of Jesus. The character Jesus left no mark at all. The legend did, but that is different.
If half of what was described by the Gospel writers was true, one would expect a ton of people to notice. Including the sorts of people who kept records, like the Sanhedrin and the Romans. One would expect some of the details about His life to be remembered. And the spots where super important things happened, like where He grew up, the tomb, and especially the Ascension spot.
But there is none of this sort of evidence.
Nothing.
So I can only believe that the implausible parts of the stories were invented later.
Like the Resurrection.
Tom
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
The point is not about appreciation - or lack thereof.

It is about evidence - or more accurately, lack thereof.

That's what I'm trying to explain to you.

Christ was not the head of a multinational organisation or a CEO but a spiritual being and you can never hope to see any evidence that satisfies your materialistic demand by searching for physical proof. Christ's proof is His Spirit and teachings and if your inner ears and eyes are closed you will never see that.

It takes spiritual eyes and ears to understand Christ and to those whose spiritual eyes and ears are open and hear we don't require any evidence. To us its as clear as day.

Until you learn to use your inner perception, your inner tools you will always think this way like all other materialists who cannot see spiritual realities because their spiritual faculties have not been developed.

You have been born with spiritual faculties but have not developed them so you cannot see the reality of Christ.

We can and it is as obvious as the sun to us. It's not our fault if you haven't yet developed the spiritual ability to see these things as its your life and responsibility if you choose to ignore you have such abilities.

A blind man can deny the sun exists no matter how often people may tell him and no matter what evidence given he will be able should he wish, to deny it. Until he has sight he will not accept its existence.

That is the position you are in.

Just be because we can see something you cannot doesn't mean we are wrong and you are right or that it does not exists.

The assumption that you are right and we are wrong is the major flaw because we see and perceive with the eyes of the spirit so we can see things and truths that materialists are blind to.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Just be because we can see something you cannot doesn't mean we are wrong and you are right or that it does not exists.
But nearly always it does. Ive been around plenty of people who sincerely believed that they could see things nobody else did. Usually the result of heavy drug abuse, but sometimes it just happens for no discernible reason.

On the other hand, there is evidence I would expect if Christian people were really experiencing something beyond my ability. They would behave differently from the rest of us, better than the rest of us. But they don't. One would expect that after 2000 years of being led by Jesus and the Holy Ghost towards God, Christian culture would be superior.
But it is not.
Tom
 
Top