First off, I have been agnostic for only a few years now. Yet I have always thought that Jesus was a real person. Granted I thought maybe he was a great illusionist or something. Recently I’ve started looking into the question of, was there an actual jesus? Is there any actual recorded history from non-believers?
Someone told me that Pontius Pilate had some notes written about jesus from that time, only to later find out the notes were from a work of fiction by W. P. Crozier in 1928. A friend tried to use the “Shroud of Turin” as proof, PUH LEEEES!
So please if you don’t mind, can someone tell me of some actual evidence that proves he was real? It does not have to be physical. I will take any historical writings. For example, in Luke 23:44-45 "about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour, and the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent. An outside account of a THREE HOUR ECLIPSE. I know someone must’ve kept track of these things. Especially one so long!
It’s the right spot, but we have this conversation frequently and, in fact, very recently. Let me look for a link so we don’t have to go through that again.
right. In a recent thread we had a fairly extensive discussion of this subject. A few believe evidence indicates he never existed. Others believe the evidence is inconclusive and the myth of JC may well have been based on an actual individual. The end result is , we don’t know either way with any real certainty.
The mainstream scholarly consensus is still near universal that Jesus was a real person, even if the supernatural claims about him are not accepted as historical.
The data points most relied on to support historicity are:
Paul’s writings, in particular Paul’s reference to James as “the brother of the Lord,” which implies that Jesus had a physical brother who Paul knew personally.
Two mentions (albeit one of them at least partially interpolated) by Josephus.
A mention by Tacitus that the founder of the Christians was one named “Christus” who was put to death by Pilate (quite similar to what Joesphus says).
That’s pretty much it for hard evidence. There really isn’t any smoking gun, but scholarly consensus is that historicity is at least more likely than not.
There are arguments against the meaning, usefulness and/or authenticity of all of these data points, by the way - but the counterarguments are basically speculative and cannot be properly substantiated, at least not until I get my time machine working and can go back and ask Paul, Josephus, and Tacitus what they really knew and meant.
That’s correct, but he and Josephus are the closest non-Christian writers to him historically. The source of their information is, of course, unknown, but they presumably had access to Roman records, and Josephus, at least was actually from Galilee, and lived there well within living memory of the alleged time of Jesus.
If you’re looking for eyewitness information about Jesus, there isn’t any.
No, there’s not very much evidence. But then, there’s not very much evidence for any individual who lived that long ago. There’s a fair bit more evidence for the existence of Jesus than for, say, Socrates (whom we know of mostly just from the writings of Plato).
There is no absolute proof that a guy named Jesus actually existed - but it would hardly be surprising. Would-be messiahs were plentiful in Judea in that era.
Much more significant in his own time than Jesus was Simon Bar-Kokhba, who lived almost exactly a century later:
He lead a revolt, was declared the messiah by the great rabbi Akiva, created an independant state that lasted three years and took “between one-third and one-half” of the Roman army to crush.
Thanks for exploring this with me! I appreciate it.
Does anyone know of any records of eclipses from that time so I can check my earlier statement about the verse in luke? I’ve done a bit of searching but my google-fu is weak.
We have more for Socrates than Plato. Plato is a primary witness, and Sophocles wrote about him too. We do not have that kind of direct, contemporary corroboration for Jesus.
It’s a pity Jesus wasn’t much of a writer, eh? Still, between feeding the 5,000, regenerating arms on lepers, and the public orator circuit, I suppose he was just too busy.
ps. You’d have thought his Dad would have advised him to keep a diary of his thoughts and stuff, wouldn’t you?
There was no solar eclipse, nor could there have been. The crucifixion allegedly trook place during Passover, when the moon is on the opposite side of the earth from the sun.
Literalist Christians just tend to say it was a miracle.
I’m hardly a theologist, or a religious historian or whathaveyou, but it seems eminently reasonable to me to assume that Jesus did exist. Or rather, Jesuses existed. I’ve no doubt that there many “messiahs” roaming around at the time, and I’m sure some were better than others.
I just can’t subscribe to the thought that there was this one guy, named Jesus, or Joshua, or whatever, and he did everything that it says he did in the bible, miracles notwithstanding. I think it more likely that there was a movement that sprang up around a rabbi (and his followers) who, after the fact, was annointed the Christ and everybody just glommed on to that.
Professor G.A. Wells of the University of London has written a number of books arguing against the historicity of Jesus. He builds up an interesting case that goes far beyond the mere lack of direct citations (and criticizes the few we do have). His books are worth reading, even if you don’t agree with him:
I should point out that Wells is a professor of German, not of Biblical Studies. But then again, I’m inclined to cut people writing outside of their disciplines some slack.
