JESUS CHRIST: Myth or Historical Person?

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

A favorite argument by non-believers is that Jesus Christ's existence is confined to the pages of the Judeo-Christian Bible. And since—according to them—the Bible is full of nothing but fairy tales/myths, that amounts to Jesus Christ did not really exist. When presented with documentary evidence of his historical existence, Bible critics then use another ploy: they attack the credibility of those who confirmed the existence of Jesus Christ and/or they attack the credibility of what was written about Jesus Christ.

Below are three non-Christians from the 1st Century AD who mentioned Jesus Christ in their secular writings. The questions for debate are at the end of this post.

PERSON #1:
Name and Occupation: Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Historian

DOB to Date of Death: A.D. 55 to A.D. 120

Attitude Towards Christianity: Hostile

What He Said: He confirmed that CHRISTUS (a common misspelling of Christ at the time) was executed by Pilate.

Highlights on Tacitus: A Roman historian who lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors, Tacitus has been called "the greatest historian of ancient Rome."


PERSON #2:
Name and Occupation: Flavius Josephus, Jewish Historian

DOB to Date of Death: 37 AD -- Died after 100 AD

Attitude Towards Christianity: Apathetic (could care less about Christians)

What He Said: He confirmed that Christ who performed miracles was executed by Pilate.

Highlights on Josephus: A Jewish historian of priestly and royal ancestry who recorded Jewish history, with special emphasis on the 1st century AD (the century in which Jesus Christ lived and died). He has been credited by many as recording some of the earliest history of Jesus Christ outside of the gospels. Flavius Josephus belonged to the group of Jewish religious leaders--the Pharisees--responsible for Jesus' death.

Flavius Josephus joined the zealots who rebelled against Roman rule between 66 and 74 AD, 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 their side and ended up becoming the Roman emperor's Adviser on Jewish Affairs.


PERSON #3:
Name and Occupation: Pliny The Younger (born Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus), Roman Governor

DOB to Date of Death: 61 AD to 112 AD

Attitude Towards Christianity: Hostile. He executed Christians

What He Said: Referred to Jesus Christ as a "god of the Christians."

Highlights on Pliny: Pliny condemned Men, Women, and children to death if they refused to curse Christ and if they refused to deny they were Christians.


DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. All three of the individuals described above were people in powerful positions who were anti-Christian and belonged to groups that actively killed Christians. All three individuals belonged to organizations that were responsible for Jesus' death. What did they have to gain from mentioning the existence of Jesus Christ in their writings--thereby confirming his earthly existence?


2. Flavius Josephus, a Jew, was born a mere four years after Jesus was executed. He became a Jewish Pharisee as an adult, in addition to becoming a respected historian and advisor to the Roman emperor. Do you see anything significant to his being a Pharisee, a historian, and Roman emperor advisor--and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?


3. Cornelius Tactitus was known as the greatest historian of his time, during which he lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors. Do you see anything significant to his resume and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?

 

Not a single one of your writers was a contemporary of the character of Christ, and what they wrote were brief blurbs based on the claims prevalent during their lifetimes.

There are no records of the alleged man; only of the Christians and their beliefs. The rest is religious writings, many of which also were written years after the sun hero allegedly floated skyward.

 

The Jesus character is complicated because he was originally a figment of Paul's imagination. Later on, when the Gospels were written, he took on some of the attributes of the three main Jewish rebel leaders. So Jesus is a mixture of an imaginary character and three real people mixed up into an ethnocentric religious fairy tale.

 

That's the first I've heard about him being based on rebel leaders.

 

John of Giscala, Simon bar Giora, and Eleazar ben Simon were the main rebel leaders. Their actions were incorporated in the Jesus character originally started by Paul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Giscala

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleazar_ben_Simon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Bar_Giora

Read about them and you can see the incidents in the Jesus story.

 

Ahh.. Of the three, Eleazar ben Simon shows some particularly poignant similarities..

Historical evidence of Eleazar arises in 66 CE, when he crushed Cestius Gallus' Legio XII Fulminata at Beit-Horon. Yet prior to this encounter, little is known about his early life and rise to power. It can be inferred, however, from the geopolitical scene of ancient Israel in the first century CE. that he grew up in Galilee, the center of Zealotry. Zealots were shunned by the High Priesthood in Jerusalem prior to the revolt. This disunity with other sects of Judaism confined Zealotry to its birthplace in Galilee . Yet when the revolt broke out in 66 CE, the Galilean zealots fled the Roman massacres and sought refuge in the last major Jewish stronghold: Jerusalem . Since Eleazar was placed in command of a large army of Jews in the battle against Cestius' Legio, he had already risen to a position of power in the priesthood prior to his military success.
---

Josh Christ is indeed like this fellow warped into a solar hero, i.e. they took Eleazar (and the "zealotry" of Galilee in general) and combined their attributes with those of the Persian savior Mithras. Saul would have been familiar with those religious traditions, too, having grown up in what is now Turkey, where that religion was prevalent.

...

The Roman procurators also subjugated the Jewish High Priesthood, appointing pro-Roman Jews to positions of authority, and desecrated sacred Jewish practices with sacrilegious pagan rituals.

...

Of course, we know how the zealots felt about that! I believe it was called the "abomination of desolation" . .

 

In 39 AD, the Roman Emperor Caligula declared himself divine and ordered his troops in Jerusalem to place his name on the Temple .

Cheee-rist!! It's no wonder the Bible was full of nonsense about the Abomination of Desolation and a "beast" who would cause people to receive his name on their foreheads, yadda yadda. Caligula was stirring them up in the worst possible way!

So, there ya go. You want to know who the "antichrist" is? Caligula!

 

I think the pertinent question is whether any of these referenced 'historians' recorded a dude walking on water or turning water into wine and rising from the dead while zombies started walking around and angels formed marching bands.

 

The most amazing thing is that the Gospels were written during that time of major trouble. Yet the writers don't directly mention the revolt. The Old Testament writers were more honest in that regard. The New Testament writers resorted to romanticized fiction.

 

The texts we know and adore today must have grown out of whatever the zealots were using to fire up support among the Jews at the time.. The Gospels came later, though, since the destruction of the temple and all that is mentioned. Much came after.. probably in response to the destruction of the temple! Imagine: The people at that time would have been quite devastated.. Their god had failed them, their religion was in ruins along with their temple. Then, along come men with a new message of hope based (though the commoners don't know it) on the everlasting immortal sun. The old messianic promise is "fulfilled" in an unexpected way. Yahweh was triumphant after all! It's just not apparent yet.. Fear not, people! The destruction of the temple was foretold by Joshua of Nazareth, your savior.

You know... Something like that...

And I can just imagine the Roman reaction when even the destruction of the temple didn't shut those religious zealots up Oh, how they must have been P.O.'ed! No wonder they started persecuting Christians....

 

As i wrote in a previous thread Christus (actually Chrestus) is NOT a spelling error and it completely changes the meaning of the title (since it is a title not a name) , Tacitus even gets Pilate 's title wrong (lol)

Let's take Josephus

So a Jew recognises Christ as the guy who fulfils the prophecy , how NOT possible

What Pliny The Younger wrote is that there were some christians in Asia Minor , how this explains the historicity of Jesus is beyond me .

 

Wasn't one of those three a confirmed forgery? Ah, yes. Flavius.

 

The historical existence of Jesus is pretty well attested and only nutcases dispute it.

 

It is odd that this Jesus in his lifetime caused such an uproar, such controversies that still go on today. Wow. People pray on Him and yet curse His name when they swear. How hilarious would it be if someone blew a golf shot and said…Mahatma Ghandi. No they take Jesus' name and use it in vain.
What a life this Jesus had eh? Not a single person in the history of the planet has had the influence that Jesus has had. Moral teacher? God? Jewish leader? Carpenter? Rebel? Manipulator?
If He lied and manipulated all this…it certainly is the greatest con job ever carried out. I don't think so…however.

He claimed to be God…that is why He was crucified. His followers were also for the most part crucified and beheaded. For what? A lie? How many of you would follow someone around….purposely putting your life in danger, for someone you thought was a hoax, a liar and not the real deal? But yet they did. Wouldn't you demand evidence…wouldn't you want proof enough to know the one you follow is legit?

Jesus was either a hoax, a heretic, lunatic or the Lord. This decision for everyone if Jesus was telling the truth is a monumental one…because if His Words are true…our answer will determine our destiny….our eternal destiny.

The Bible is the best selling book of all time…hands down. Always has been. Why? Scientists, theologians, doctors, teachers….have believed. Is everyone stupid that has believed? Isn't it amazing in a world that seems to reject Him today (certainly our country and government does)..that its people would still buy this book? Hospitals are named after Christian Saints, schools as well….organizations that tend to the poor….musicians write songs about Christ and singers sing them. Artists draw and paint Christ….the greatest artists in the World paint scenes centered around Christ. Why? ARe they all idiots too?

Jesus a lie, not real? His followers a lie? The entire story a lie? It all never happened?

I believe after having researched this in the past that there are many secular documents that were written roughly at the same time the New Testament was written.
If you look at these secular documents individually…. There are only 7 copies Plato's Tetrologies, ten copies of Caesar's Gaelic Wars and 643 copies of Homer;s Iliad. Compare these numbers to that of the Bible which has over 5,000 ancient manuscripts…of just the NT. Add to that..we have over 10,000 manuscripts or parts of one…of the OT. The fact is…the more manuscripts you have the easier it is to verify the truth. There has never been a book so hashed over as the Bible has. I think it has reliably been proven that Jesus did exist. Now you can determine for yourself whether or not His claims are true…but his identity as a person has been proven. Jesus did exist.

Oh also take into consideration the Dead Sea Scrolls which were found in the mid 1940's. They were stored in sealed jars and have survived through the ages so well that today you can actually read them. What was amazing about this finding is that they were one thousand years OLDER than the previous NT manuscripts. It is no wonder that the Bible has had the influence it has had on the world. It has had profound impacts on society….the family, race relations, politics, labor, education…morality.

All this rests on the reliability of the Bible however. For those who don't believe the Bible and its teachings you have no way of knowing anything for sure about God and the meaning of life. Without it we can only guess how this all has played out and will play out. And each persons guess is as valid as the next. For those who do believe and have faith that this is all true…have the blessed assurance that what God said will happen.

http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

 

Me thinks the OP is in over his head.

 

roughly at the same time .... 1000 freaking years apart

0/10

 

Churchmouse.. the Dead Sea Scrolls date from 250 BC to 68 AD... and most of them hav nothing to do with scripture.

 

I think Jesus was a real person.. although some of the miracles attributed to him may not be.. or may be misunderstood.

All thru the Bible people are "fed" by the word and have their thirst quenched by living water.

So.. when Jesus fed the multitude with a few fish and a bit of wine, did they leave "spiritually hungry"?

I think most of Jesus' ministry was around Galilee because he was out of reach of the Sanhedrin..

I also know that Galilee was more affluent because of trade and more cosmopolitan than Jerusalem.

I don't think that Jesus was a rebel or a zealot... because of his Sermon on the Mount which was revolutionary theology. So, while the people around him may have had expectations that he would drive out the Roman occupation, I don't think that was his mission.

 

Didn't James, Jesus half brother play a prominent role in the conference of Acts 15 and didn't write the New Testament epistle that bears his name (James 1:1) ( not to be confused with other James in the Bible.)

 

here's the thing -- if this is a fake, why are people hanging the whole idea of Christianity on the notion that the events literally happened on Earth, in Judea? If there was no person, why are there debates about what it all means? Why would such things happen on a fiction? Why would people be willing to die for something that couldn't be put in history if the event must be in history for it to make sense?

 

You mean it's pretty well assumed and almost never questioned.

Simple question: Did John Frum exist?

 

Good question. Might be answered here:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/james.html

1. The cultured language of James is not that of a simple Palestinian. Sevenster's evidence that the Greek language was much used in Palestine at that time and could be learned does not prove that a Jew whose mother tongue was Aramaic could normally write in literary Greek. Most of those who defend the thesis that James was written by the Lord's brother must assume that it achieved its linguistic form through the help of a Hellenistic Jew, but there is no evidence in the text that the assistance of a secretary gave shape to the present linguistic state of the document, and even if this were the case the question would still remain completely unanswered which part of the whole comes from the real author and which part from the "secretary."

2. It is scarcely conceivable that the Lord's brother, who remained faithful to the Law, could have spoken of "the perfect law of freedom" (1:25) or that he could have given concrete expression to the Law in ethical commands (2:11 f) without mentioning even implicitly any cultic-ritual requirements.

3. Would the brother of the Lord really omit any reference to Jesus and his relationship to him, even though the author of JAmes emphatically presents himself in an authoritative role?

 

I think modern Christians are very much failing to appreciate historical events right at the time when the Christ myth was being birthed. Jewish zealots were at war with Rome for independence; Rome to them was "Babylon the Great," the Roman Emperor was the "man of perdition," etc. (Caligula declared himself divine and was threatening to have his name put on the Jewish temple), Joshua bar Joseph was based on both real men and mythology: Eleazar ben Simon and other rebel leaders, plus Mithra/Osiris/perhaps other such characters, who were solar heroes and promised salvation and eternal life to people. That is why there are so many Christ parallels in the ancient world, but no actual recorded man Christ..

 

Jesus theology was revolutionary... but not in line with the zealots. I tried to explain it in post #18.

The Jews were very divided on how to deal with the occupation.... and matters were worse since Herod's building projects were complete and there was a lot of unemployment.

Some were collaborators, some were rebels and zealots, some were sicarri who wntto kill other Jews.. They disagreed.

 

Jesus and Jim Morrison have a lot in common. Everyone you asked had a different opinion of the man. You know, Morrison was a shaman, a drunk, a southern gentleman, an intellect, a singer, a poet, a muscian a frontman, a loser, the greatest, mentally ill, the worst...you get the drift. Everyone has a different opinion about Morrison had HE died in 1971.

How can anything truly be accurate about a person/event some 2,000 years ago when the body that lies in Pere Lechaise is the stuff of legends? I mean, c'mon.

If you want to believe...it's up to you. The reality? One can and shall never know.