There are- the Four Gospels. Those are contemporary.
It is not my responsibility to provide a cite for your claim.
I believe only Mark is contemporary and in Mark Jesus denies any miracles.
I still don’t see how that’s something that needs to be cited. Were there religious frauds and charlatans around during Jesus’s time? Of course there were, because there always are religious frauds and charlatans, in every era of human history. Did every charlatan get exposed? Almost certainly not, there must have been some who kept up the act their whole lives. Do we know the names of every fake miracle worker who died unexposed? Obviously not, our knowledge of history is nowhere near that complete.
If we can take those as givens, then we can see that, if there were a genuine miracle worker among the charlatans,* it would be trivially easy for contemporary evidence of his miracles to not survive in the historical record, just as we’ve lost the records of a great many successful charlatans.
I don’t think any part of that argument needs a cite.
*There was not. Miracles aren’t real
Did anybody ask for the name of every single fake miracle worker who died unexposed? I certainly didn’t.
And I didn’t say that you had.
The Gospels range from 66- 90 AD, in the Ancient world, that is “contemporary”. The last Gospel- John, was almost certainly dictated in part by that Apostle, who was the youngest and also is said to have lived until his 90th tear or so.
Context- [1} Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. … [4] Jesus said to them, ‘A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.’ [5]He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.
When Jesus went home, the people there did not accept him as a Prophet, and he only did a few healing “miracles” there.
According to Wiki, the Gospel of Mark probably dates from AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90, and John AD 90–110. Even if John was only a wee tyke as a disciple that would put him past his mid 90’s when he dictated part of his Gospel, wouldn’t it?
John was born about AD 6-9. He was said to have lived until around AD100. But altho he dictated most/some of John to his disciples, it appears to have reached it’s final form right after his death. Assuming 6AD and 90 AD, that would put him in his 80’s. Math.
The cite I went to (Wiki) said between AD 90-110 which, using your math, would put him somewhere between 80 and 100.
If you really need a cite for the existence of false Messiahs just around the time of Jesus, look at the works of the first century historian Josephus. There are quite a few mentioned.
Also keep in mind that at that time, the “Messiah” was someone who was supposed to be a divinely appointed king. If some religious whack-job runs around saying he’s related to God, most people aren’t going to give two hoots. But if you say you are appointed by God to be King, well, that tends to piss off the folks who are currently in charge. The Roman solution for dealing with these would-be-kings was to kill them. Crucifixion was only one of many options.
Not all Messiahs were like Jesus. Many (most?) wanted to raise armies and overthrow the current government.
On a quick Google search, I can find:
Simon, a slave who rose up around 3 or 4 AD, was crowned king by his followers, and burned down royal palaces and such.
Anthronges, a shepherd who led a Jewish insurrection around the same time as Simon.
An unnamed Egyptian who gathered up 30,000 followers before being killed by Roman soldiers.
Link to Josephus, which includes links to his works:
Antiquities of the Jews was written around 93 or 94 AD.
True, though there is a lot of debate about exactly when they were written.
It should also be noted that there is quite a bit more documentation around the existence of Jesus than there is for numerous other historical figures. Many Egyptian Pharoes, for example, are only known by a single reference carved into stone somewhere.
Based on the writings of Josephus, the four Gospels, the mention of someone called “Christus” being executed by Pontius Pilate in writings by Roman Senator Tacitus (written around 116 AD), it seems pretty likely that someone named Jesus who was called the Christ by his followers existed, and was executed. That’s not the same as saying he actually rose from the dead 3 days later, but it does seem likely that the dude did at least exist, and that he did have a bunch of followers.
I don’t see the point of arguing exactly when the Gospels were written.
Except that the age of a person retelling history can certainly be a factor when it comes to the accuracy of said history.
It sounds like you’re saying that because someone with the name of Christ may have existed, had followers, and was crucified, it somehow proves the gospels are true and that miracles and the resurrection happened. That’s a massive leap of faith based on very little, if anything, provable. And if it doesn’t mean that the miracles and resurrection happened, then who cares?
He’s explicitly not saying that:
So the resurrection didn’t really happen? That certainly changes the storyline a tad.
Actually, I have a small problem with the term “historical Jesus” when what is believed to be historical can differ from one person using the term to another. A person named Jesus (or one of many variations of said name) lived back then? No problem. A person (or people) using this name preaching? Again, no problemo. If anything more than this is being supported, either directly or by implication…I have issues.
Exactly this. As soon as Jesus does anything supernatural, and being crucified was fairly common during that time, so that doesn’t count, then all bets are off. If we can all agree that the gospels can’t be proven, and are organized mythology, then we are all on the same page.
Christ is not a name, it is a title.
You are correct. I misread this part in engineer_comp_geek’s post—emphasis mine.
Based on the writings of Josephus, the four Gospels, the mention of someone called “Christus” being executed by Pontius Pilate in writings by Roman Senator Tacitus (written around 116 AD), it seems pretty likely that someone named Jesus who was called the Christ by his followers existed, and was executed.
Only if Jesus was the only one called “Christ” (or "Christus) at that time.