Jesus Christ

[DaRk-OnE]

Is there any Reliable proof that a man called Jesus ever lived ?
ie. any historical documents from the period.

[freakazoid]

Later I will post about the proof.

[Cryotank Screams]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2006 05:20 pm
Later I will post about the proof.
Keep in mind he said historical proof, meaning secular proof, and said proof should be reliable and definitive meaning without a doubt it is him, and the reason why I say this is because there is little to no actual historical evidence proving his existance, there is more historical evidence for Santa Claus, so I would be interested in seeing said proof.

[MrDoom]

I'm still waiting for freakazoid's proof that there is a God.

Though there is a material capacity for Jesus to exist, at least.

[RedCommieBear]

As far as historical records, some of the oldest documents are those of Josephus (about year 93) and Tacitus (about 116). Wikipedia has a pretty good article on whether or not Jesus ever existed... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_jesus#Non-Christian_writings)


Originally posted by Tacitus+--> (Tacitus)But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.[/b]

Josephus, a Jewish historian, isn't quite as neutral as Tacitus.


Josephus
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

[Pow R. Toc H.]

Does it really matter if there is any proof that Jesus Christ ever existed? Christians dont base any of their beliefs on proof. Why should the proof of the existence of their god be any different?

[Joby]

Josephus mentioned him.

But seriously, don't start this argument. We have enough enemies, and alienating 2 billion christians won't help.

Instead, focus on what Jesus said, and show how hpocriical he right is.

[freakazoid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2006 04:15 pm
I'm still waiting for freakazoid's proof that there is a God.

Though there is a material capacity for Jesus to exist, at least.
You might not want to wait for me, it will take a while. :( The only time I can be on the internet is when I am at mr Grandmothers house, I don't have my own computer. And I am only over here about once or twice a week and I am usually doing my college work, well.. atleast I should be doing it :( . So it will be a while for me to get around to it. But when I do prepaire to have your sock blown off :P .

[LSD]

Is there any Reliable proof that a man called Jesus ever lived ?
ie. any historical documents from the period

No.

This has been discussed before (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51141).

[freakazoid]

LSD - You just wait until I post my awsome post, :P.

[DaRk-OnE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2006 06:30 am

Is there any Reliable proof that a man called Jesus ever lived ?
ie. any historical documents from the period

No.

This has been discussed before (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51141).
Thanks.

[DaRk-OnE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2006 06:40 am
LSD - You just wait until I post my awsome post, :P.
I'm still waiting. :lol:

[freakazoid]

Never fear for freakazoid is here! I now have fianlly gotten around to typing it out. So without furthur adu hear it is in all its awsomeness.

Here we go, this is copied from the Lecture Notes from the New Testament class that I was in. Our teacher was Dr. Beahm. Spring 2006

Pg. 26
RG 190 New Testament
Session 4
Lecture : Non-Christian and Christian Sources

1. Non-Christian Sources on the Life of Christ

A. These sources prove that Jesus was a historical figure who lived in Palestine in the early years of the first century, gathered a group of followers, and was condemned to death by Pontius Pilate.

B. Jewish sources which refer to Jesus

1. Flavius Josephus (37 A.D. to 100 A.D.) Jewish historian

a. Antiquities of the Jews, in approximately 93 A.D. Josephus references Jesus and mentions his trial before Pilate and also his crucifixion. (XVIII.iii.3,)

2.Babylonian Talmud

a. This is a vast collection of Jewish traditions from the 5th century, but it contains material that goes back to the first century.

b. Here there are six references to Jesus. There references make the following statements:

1. Jesus is called Ben Pandera, and said to have been born out of wedlock, his mother having been seduced by a man named Pandera. Scholars think this name is a play on the Greek term “parthenos” which means “virgin.”

2. He is said to have been in Egypt where he learned magic, and that explained how he was able to do many miracles and deceive many people.

3. He is said to have called himself God.

4. He was tried by the Sanhedrin as a deceiver and evil teacher.

5. He is mentioned as having been executed on the eve of Passover, either by crucifixion or being stoned then hanged.

6. He is said to have had five disciples.

c. This gives independent and hostile evidence that Jesus of Nazareth really existed.

C. Secular Sources Which Refer To Jesus

1. Pliny the Younger (62 - 113 A.D.)

a. While governor of Bithynia, a Roman providence in Asia Minor, he consulted with Emperor Trajan concerning his actions with Christians, who had been growing larger in his area.

b. Their growth saw a decline in the sale of sacrificial animals for sacrifices at the pagan temples. This was a serious economic problem.

c. In describing Christians, he notes that they assemble together regularly on a certain day, “to sing responsively a hymn to Christ as if to a God.”

2. Tacitus (55 - 117 A.D.)

a. In his Annals (XV .55, 115 A.D.) he relates how the emperor Nero in 64 A.D. blamed Christians for a fire that destroyed half the city Rome. Nero threw them to the animals in the amphitheater, and impaled them on posts and dipped them in tar and set them on fire to light his race track at night.

b. Tacitus says, “Their name comes from Christus, who in the reign of Tiberius as emperor was condemned to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate. (XV. 44)

3. Seutonius (70 - 160 A.D.)

a. In his history The Lives of the Twelve Caesars (published 120 A.D.), and says that the Emperor Nero “inflicted punishments on the Christians, a sect which professes a new and mischievous superstition.” In another section he mentions that at the time of Claudius that the Jews were kicked out of Rome because of trouble being stirred up by influence of “Chrestus.” The misspelling of the name Christ reveals a lack of interest of the pagan author for this new group.

D. Archeology and Jesus (the following article is by Paul L. Maier, Ph.D., professor of Ancient History at Western Michigan University - Kalamazoo, MI)

Next is the History, Archaeology and Jesus but I might post that later, I have to hand type everything.

[Fawkes]

I do not see the question as being whether he existed or not, I see it rather as whether he should even be remembered and honored for the things he did and praised as a savior, which I of course think he should not be. I suspect that he was very mentally unstable considering the fact that he claimed to be "god".

[freakazoid]

While you might not be questioning whether or not he existed, there are those who have. Here is something that you more than likely didn't know that Jesus had said, Acts 4:32-35


32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 05:20 am
While you might not be questioning whether or not he existed, there are those who have. Here is something that you more than likely didn't know that Jesus had said, Acts 4:32-35
It may well be aq very pretty verse, but it really doesn't answer whether or not Jesus was actually th son of god. Even if the, often dubious, evidence that point to jesus as being a single, historical figure the idea that he is the "son" or even "part" of god is patently ridiculous.

[freakazoid]

It may well be aq very pretty verse, but it really doesn't answer whether or not Jesus was actually th son of god.

That verse was not to prove that he is the son of God but to show how Jesus is one of our comrades.


Even if the, often dubious, evidence that point to jesus as being a single, historical figure the idea that he is the "son" or even "part" of god is patently ridiculous.

If you don't believe in God to begin with then of course you're going to see it as ridiculous. :D

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 08:19 pm

It may well be aq very pretty verse, but it really doesn't answer whether or not Jesus was actually th son of god.

That verse was not to prove that he is the son of God but to show how Jesus is one of our comrades.
"Is"? Even if Jesus were a historical figure he's still dead as a door nail. He also predates the idea of communism, meaning he's not really 'our' comrade anyway.



Even if the, often dubious, evidence that point to jesus as being a single, historical figure the idea that he is the "son" or even "part" of god is patently ridiculous.

If you don't believe in God to begin with then of course you're going to see it as ridiculous. :D Even assuming a god I find it a dubious proposition.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 01:20 am
While you might not be questioning whether or not he existed, there are those who have. Here is something that you more than likely didn't know that Jesus had said, Acts 4:32-35


32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.
I dont see whats so spectacular here. People brought food to apostles that were waiting for a dead guy to come back to life and they shared it amongst themselves?

Do you think this is related to communism? :lol: It sounds very cultish. Maybe it could be some weird stalin/mao sect? :lol:

Sounds a lot like the church throughout history, living off of working people.

So please tell me how this little paragraph directly means that jesus christ would support the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie by the proletariat for a communist society. I really don't see the connection. Thats like saying a capitalist who shared his lunch is now a communist.

[LSD]

A. These sources prove that Jesus was a historical figure who lived in Palestine in the early years of the first century, gathered a group of followers, and was condemned to death by Pontius Pilate.

No, actually they consist entirely of authors who both lived and wrote decades, if not centuries, after the supposed death of "Jesus Christ". Not a single one of them was an actual contemporary of "Jesus", nor can they even site a primary source regarding "Him".

Look, this is just basic historiography; while occasionaly secondary sources alone are used to defend a conjecture, in those cases, overwhelming evidence is needed.

In the case of "Jesus", we barely have any "evidence" at all.

Indeed, other than a few scattered references, all of which refer more to "his" followers" than to "him", his name just doesn't come up. This despite the fact that the first century was a time of great schollarship, especially chronicle-keeping.

There are several accounts of Gallillee and Judae in the supposed "time of Christ" and yet not one of them even so much as mentions a "Jesus" or a "Christ".

So either an historical Jesus was so marginal and unimportant that his myth might as well be fiction; or its fiction. Either way the brilliant, witty, influential, and widely-admired "Jesus" of the Gospels is pure invention.


1. Flavius Josephus (37 A.D. to 100 A.D.) Jewish historian...

probably didn't even write about Jesus at all! Rather the relevant sections were almost certainly later interpolations by Church officials, probably Eusebius.

The "Jesus passages" are entirely out of context, break up the narrative flow, and speak of Jesus in overly reverential terms not appropriate for a non-Christian Jew of the first century.

The passages are out of context, inconsistant with Josephus' person and manner, overtly Christian, never mentioned until the fourth century, and remarkably convienient.

And considering that Eusebius was the first to "discover" them and given his open endorsement of historical interpolation, the legitimacy of Josephus as a source cannot help but be in doubt.

Logically, it doesn't even make sense. Why would Josephus alone record the existance of a man which none of his contemporaries even mentioned. Why would he, as a Jew, praise a man who's followers specifically condemned his faith?

Perhaps even more damningly, why would he proclaim "Jesus" as an answer to prophecy when such a statement is in direct contradiction with non-Christian Judaism. If one considers "Jesus" to be the Messiah, one is by definition a Christian ...and Josephus died a Jew.

No matter which way you look at it, something doesn't make sense!


1. Pliny the Younger (62 - 113 A.D.)...

never mentions a historical Jesus. At all.

He does mention the fact that Christians worship "Christ", but beyond that he has absolutely nothing to say on the subject.


2. Tacitus (55 - 117 A.D.)...

does briefly mention the "Christ" myth (although he calls him "Christus"), but he doesn't elaborate on who or what he was. He also does not provide any new or contemporary information and had a general tendency to speak of mythological figures.

He devotes a significant amount of words, for instance, relaying the "life of Hercules"! :rolleyes:


Seutonius (70 - 160 A.D.)...

talks about a "Chrestus" who "instigates" Jews, but the name was an incredibly common one and since Suetonius doesn't go into any details about who this "Chrestus" was, it's basically an irrelevency.


2.Babylonian Talmud

a. This is a vast collection of Jewish traditions from the 5th century, but it contains material that goes back to the first century.

b. Here there are six references to Jesus.

Well actually ...no.

There are a couple of references to a "Yeshua", none of which bear the slightest resemblence to the "Jesus" of the New Testament, but not a single uncontroversial mention of "Christ".

Besides, the Bablylonian Talmud was compiled in the 5th century, some segments go back as far as the third, but it's by no means a primary source. It's hardly even a secondary one.

By the 5th century, Christian mythology was a part of the culture. It's patently absurd to take anything written in that period as unbiased when it comes to the question of "Jesus".

***

Sorry to bum you out, freaky, but this is all old shit.

Maybe you should have read the thread I linked to (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51141) before repeating the same tired old claims?


That verse was not to prove that he is the son of God but to show how Jesus is one of our comrades.

Even if he had existed (something for which, again, there is absolutely no evidence), "Jesus'" politics speak for themselves:

Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples...why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? ...then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always. - John 12:3

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. - Matthew 22:21

Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. - 1 peter 2:18

"Comrade"? Hardly. :angry:

[The Rover]

Jesus wasn't a real person, just a metaphor somebody created in an attempt to teach a lesson. It didn't matter anyways, because the Church went ahead and fucked it up by including the old testament and the letters, along with deciding to add their own rules and papal infallibility.

[bezdomni]

Jesus didn't exist. For real.

[RebelDog]

Originally posted by DaRk-[email protected] 29, 2006 09:17 pm
Is there any Reliable proof that a man called Jesus ever lived ?
ie. any historical documents from the period.
Have you tried the phone book?

[freakazoid]

As I don't have enough time right now I will only post on one thing.


This didn't jsut happen in one day. Also all of the food was shared to anyone who needed it, kind of like the saying, From each accord to ability to each according to need. Notice how it said [quote]34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 11:54 pm


This didn't jsut happen in one day. Also all of the food was shared to anyone who needed it, kind of like the saying, From each accord to ability to each according to need. Notice how it said
34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.
I noticed what it said. It says this, "brought the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need", however it's not clear to me who "anyone" is. They could be referring to the group of apostles as "anyone."

Regardless, it's pointless to try and make a connection about a mythical figure and the modern communist movement based on a sentence of fiction.

[RedKnight]

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com