There is NO Historical Evidence for Jesus

[PearlSeeker]

There may be a possibility an ordinary man who was a Jewish zealot was crucified by the Romans for sedition against Rome but again no historian mentions one.

Historical evidence is extracted from NT Bible. Myths can also contain historical information.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Those who frenetically reject historicity as a valid case on inference to the best explanation should explain ...

• Acts,
• the Epistles,
• Josephus on James, and
• the apparent absence of a mythicist polemic against nascent Christianity,

that is not at heart a tortured conspiracy theory, i.e., they're all fabrications and those insidious Christians destroyed all evidence found to be problematic.

 

[Thrillobyte]

Historical evidence is extracted from NT Bible. Myths can also contain historical information.

Depends on what sort of historical evidence you refer to. Places, yes. The NT mentions Jerusalem. We know Jerusalem exists. The apostles? Can you find a single secular historical entry for a single apostle? I'd love to know it if you can. Even the Bible doesn't mention what happened to the apostles. All the church has is "Tradition says he was......" That's not historical evidence by any stretch.

 

[Thrillobyte]

One day there won’t be any so-called historical evidence that you exist either.

Yes, when our solar system supernovas. Until then, I have several artistic works registered with various agencies. My name is in the historic registry. Show me a single word Jesus wrote himself. Show me a single historian who says, "I witnessed Jesus' miracles, death resurrection and zombie saints who rose from their graves and walked through Jerusalem." Jesus appeared to 500 people according to Paul. Did a single one write about seeing a man risen from the dead? Did a single historian in the list below write a single word about Jesus?

 

[Thrillobyte]

People feel him. Most people rely on their feelings more than any physical evidence.
At least until they learn their feelings can't be trusted.

I feel Harry Potter when I read The Sorcerer's Stone. Is that evidence Harry Potter exists?

 

[Nakosis]

I feel Harry Potter when I read The Sorcerer's Stone. Is that evidence Harry Potter exists?

You obviously haven't heard of shifting.

 

[Windwalker]

Ok I guess your not interested in sensing his presence. That’s cool

Do you sense the presence of Krishna as well?

 

[Windwalker]

I feel Harry Potter when I read The Sorcerer's Stone.

You do? Describe it.

 

[Windwalker]

People often "sense" things that are not real.

For instance? Are you referring to hallucinations? Does that apply to a few who are having a brain malfunction, or most human beings who can 'sense' things, like sensing danger, sensing a presence of love, sensing a feeling a deep peace, sensing the presence of someone watching them, etc, etc.?

When the question arises of how one would support such clams how one would support those feelings that others can see if that belief is rational or not.

I'm not sure how you are equating 'feelings" with "belief" as a direct correlation like this. A belief is a mental idea about something. A feeling is a sensory experience.

We may have ideas about those feelings, which we could call beliefs. But the experience itself is not a mental conceptual experience. It's a visceral sensory experience or 'gut feeling'.

 

[ChristineM]

There is NO secular historical evidence for Jesus, son of God or the apostles, period. Despite all the propaganda Christians put forth about there being so much evidence for Jesus in the historical record, it is just disinformation disguised as truth to keep Christianity afloat. The truth is there simply is no secular historical evidence an avatar god man named Jesus as described in the gospels ever lived--nor did the 12 men he supposedly gathered around him and walked with them for 3 years before being crucified. NONE of this is supported by historical fact. No historian mentions all the supernatural events that the gospels claim occurred after Christ's supposed crucifixion, even though the Gospels claim Jesus' fame spread far beyond the borders of Israel. There may be a possibility an ordinary man who was a Jewish zealot was crucified by the Romans for sedition against Rome but again no historian mentions one.

The two passages by Josephus so often cited by Christians as mentioning Jesus are so mired in controversy that they are dismissed by mainstream historians as having little to no value in trying to prove Jesus existed. Here are some pertinent facts that Christians should consider before they try to pass off these passages as proof of Jesus:

* The Testimonium Flavianum is never quoted by anyone until the 4th century (c. 324), when Bishop Eusebius begins quoting it. Scholars believe it was Eusebius who doctored the passage with references to Jesus' supernatural nature.

* It is impossible that this passage is entirely genuine. It is highly unlikely that Josephus, a Jew working in concert with the Romans, would have written, "He was the Messiah." This would make him suspect of treason. Indeed, in Wars of the Jews, Josephus declares that Vespasian fulfilled the messianic oracles. Furthermore, Origen, writing about a century before Eusebius, says twice that Josephus "did not believe in Jesus as the Christ."

* Josephus is on record that the Emperor Vespasian was the messiah and had fulfilled prophecy.

* The second passage of Josephus, "The brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James.” is a scribal interpolation. There are several indications that the sentence fragment “who was called Christ” was not original to the text.

Here is a link to some research that will help to clear up the controversy surrounding the Josephus passages:

Josephus and Jesus: The Testimonium Flavianum Question

The gospels were NOT written by the apostles or anyone connected to Jesus or the fictional apostles. The gospels were written 50-100 years after Jesus purportedly was crucified in 30 AD by anonymous Greek scholars who couldn't have known Jesus and certainly were not familiar with Israel's geographic terrain as evidenced by the numerous errors they made about towns' proximity to each other and to other natural terrain. The Romans were excellent record keepers of their trials but a trial of Jesus ben Joseph or similar name who was crucified under Pilate's order simply doesn't exist. The name Yeshua ben Joseph or Yeshua Moshiach (Jesus Christ) doesn't appear anywhere in the historical record. A few historians like Tacitus made reference to a man referred to as "Chrestus" but we have no idea who that is nor can we know or reasonably ascertain if they were referring to Jesus, the son of God or another Chrestus who had a following. What we Do know is that Christians are constantly trying to pass off this passage and similar ones using the term, "Christ" as proof secular historians mention Jesus. But they don't. There were dozens of "Christs" in Jesus' time. Any of them could lay claim to being the Messiah.

If God had wanted us to believe Jesus is his divine son sent to earth to die for our sins, God would have left a mountain of evidence proving this that would be so compelling that no one in their right mind could argue otherwise.

But God left no such compelling evidence. The proof for this fact is truth No 1 above. That would mean the Christian god, if he even exists, doesn't give a tinker's damn whether or not we believe in Jesus. God, if he exists, shows himself to not interfere or participate in human affairs. Thus, he could not have left any evidence for this Jesus fellow and this is exactly what we see in the secular historic record--NO mention of Jesus or the apostles.

An unassailable truth: prayers do not get answered, in contrast to what Jesus promises in the gospels. Millions upon millions of people pray every day for their sick loved ones to get well and their loved ones do not recover. If a person recovers it is usually on the order of 10% and here is the key thing: it occurs across all demographics with the SAME rate of frequency. Thus, a small percentage of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists all recover from serious illness at exactly the same rate. This proves without a doubt that praying to God has nothing to do with it; some humans are going to recover from their illness but ALL terminally ill people are going to die at some point in the near future. No one is cured as a result of prayer. Study after study has borne this fact out.

There is no reason for people to believe in Jesus as the savior son of God when we haven't a single entry in the secular historic record testifying that he is. People who choose to believe in Jesus as their savior are doing so in ignorance of all the above, or they are doing it on pure faith without any evidence for Jesus. It's a crying shame that people can throw their lives away so carelessly for a myth, but it's a free country and people are permitted to squander their lives on anything they want, even the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

View attachment 77669

Hi. I too have done some research on jesus but from the point of view of the Roman occupation. You may find it interesting

My view on Jesus.

 

[Windwalker]

Oh great. Another Christian bashing thread.

I think it makes them feel safer.

 

[PureX]

What is "historical" evidence, as opposed to any other kind? Old?

 

[Jimmy]

Yup Brahma and shiva too

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

(I predict we'll get more than 100 posts.)

 

[Nakosis]

Do you sense the presence of Krishna as well?

Feeling the presence and absence of gods is common enough. To me, I see it as kind of amazing what the mind is capable of.

The IRES can be used among young people in the student age and maybe to older people as well, living in the Catholic religion environment. It can be used to diagnose how persons perceive their religious sense of God’s presence and God’s absence as affecting their life. It seems that the scale may be the most useful in studying individuals and religious groups that lead an intense religious life. The statements contained in it relate to certain aspects of deepened and mature religious life of an individual with its consequences regarding his personal and social life.
Psychological Analysis of Religious Experience: The Construction of the Intensity of Religious Experience Scale (IRES) - Journal of Religion and Health

 

[Jimmy]

Do you sense the presence of Krishna as well?

I sense the presence of all gods

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Good post, but you're cruisin' for a bruisin' on this forum, so welcome to weeks and weeks of bantering...
but thanks for enlightening those of us who don't know much Christian history.
Carry on sir.

@Thrillobyte has reinforced my belief that if Jesus existed, then he was just an ordinary man and a popular religious teacher of his time whose devoted followers fabricated some stories about him as well as adapted some stories from Greek mythology to make him appear godlike. I also believe that as time passed and his legend gained popularity, more of his followers altered and added additional stories from other pagan religions to his mythology.

Hi. I too have done some research on jesus but from the point of view of the Roman occupation. You may find it interesting

My view on Jesus.

Informative. Thank you for linking your thread.

 

[PureX]

I feel Harry Potter when I read The Sorcerer's Stone. Is that evidence Harry Potter exists?

Of course it is. The problem is that you don't seem to understand what it means to "exist".

 

[Windwalker]

Feeling the presence and absence of gods is common enough. To me, I see it as kind of amazing what the mind is capable of.

The IRES can be used among young people in the student age and maybe to older people as well, living in the Catholic religion environment. It can be used to diagnose how persons perceive their religious sense of God’s presence and God’s absence as affecting their life. It seems that the scale may be the most useful in studying individuals and religious groups that lead an intense religious life. The statements contained in it relate to certain aspects of deepened and mature religious life of an individual with its consequences regarding his personal and social life.
Psychological Analysis of Religious Experience: The Construction of the Intensity of Religious Experience Scale (IRES) - Journal of Religion and Health

You attribute this to the mind? That is a good article you linked to. This is what I speak of all the time regarding the validity of religious experience as "evidence" of 'something', but not necessarily a validation of one's ideas about their beliefs about God and such, as objective proofs. From the article you linked to:

Religious experience—according to Jung (1982, 2010)—cannot be identified with what is psychological. Psychological factors could be only carriers of religious content.​

​

.......​

​

A man who participated in the religious experience perceives the world as friendlier to him (Oman and Thoresen 2005), feels more integrated, more uniform, more efficiently organized (Rogers 2012), more creative, and characterized by the uniqueness of the self (Rogers 1975). Religious experience helps in searching for the meaning of life. It releases man from the old paths of life (Azari et al. 2005), which favors a positive influence on the further development of personality and religiousness (Rydz et al. 2017). A man who has had the experience of the Absolut, is more diligent, has greater satisfaction with a job (Fromm 1966). Researchers show that the religious experience also have therapeutic implications. It is able to change the views of a person to themselves, their own lives, the world and to other people. It liberate more creative power in man (Płużek 1986). Religious people discover in themselves the feelings of gratitude to God. It is expressed in prayer, adoration, thanksgiving, sacrifice, love for others and even in commitments (Shear 2005).​

There's lots of good stuff in that article, but I hightled the above as showing that there in fact a great deal of merit in the depths and varieties of religious experience, that a reductionistic, "it's all just in your head" approach utterly fails to recognize or appreciate.

And yes, that presence will be translated by individuals within the context of their religious symbols there are exposed to culturally. The Christian experiences the Christ. The Hindu, Krishna. The Buddhist, Avalokiteshvara, and so forth. Those are just the mind trying to find a language, a word, a symbol to related to an experience that transcends linguistics. So it's not just 'in their heads', or ideas or concepts. Those come after the fact.

 

[vulcanlogician]

It's a crying shame that people can throw their lives away so carelessly for a myth, but it's a free country and people are permitted to squander their lives on anything they want, even the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I loved your OP. It was well-written and well-argued. But just for the intellectual thrills, I'd like to disagree with your last sentence. Even though, more-or-less, I concur with the general thesis of your OP.

What's so "careless" about throwing one's life away for a myth?

I would argue that all the carelessness happens when people read the body of myths and fashion them into a doctrine. If people want to throw their lives away, or die, for a cause, that's fine by me. I even admire it sometimes, even when I don't admire the cause which was died for.

It's not only a free country, it's a free universe. That is to say, the choice of religion is free in this country because you don't incur any (legal) penalty because you profess certain beliefs. The same is true for the universe. The universe doesn't impose a penalty on someone simply for believing or not believing in God. Bot the universe doesn't impose a penalty for believing many falsehoods either. Sure, if you believe that the laws of gravity don't apply to you, you may be in for a rude awakening. But if you believe that Jupiter is made of cotton candy, you may very well make it through life unscathed.

The same is true of any myth. Hell, the universe may even be more psychologically hospitable to those who rely on myths to carry them through hard times. The way the Jesus myth is framed and used to coerce people is unfortunate. But that doesn't declare all myths "equally untrue" or "not worth dying for."