Is there any evidence to suggest that Jesus lived?

[Achilles]

This isn't meant to cause a flamewar... see, one of my Professors a couple years ago(who was actually atheist, I believe) said that there is actual evidence documented by the Romans, or perhaps someone else, during Jesus's lifetime that he did in fact exist and was crucified(whether or not he was the actual son of God is another debate, but there was a man 2000 years ago who at least claimed to be).

However, someone else that is debating these topics with me claims that there is not one single shred of evidence to suggest that the man even existed. Who is right? Is it a lot harder to figure out than just that, or are there actual documents supporting the existance of this man?

 

[Darthphere]

I thought there was evidence he existed.

 

[Achilles]

So did I, that's why I'm suddenly confused....

 

[Carter]

Yeah, I think there are a few things
Whether that makes him god or not, I don't know.

 

[CConn]

I've always been told that there is (even told by people with Ph.D.s in history that there is), but I've never heard what the actual evidence is, myself.

 

[NEWcomicbook123]

I've never even heard someone with a Ph.D. even speak.

 

[DBM]

It's pretty well established that someone named Jesus did in fact lead a sect of Jews back in that time period. I can't give you any specific sources off the top of my head, but I studied it when I was in undergrad.

 

[CConn]

I've never even heard someone with a Ph.D. even speak.

Plebeian.

 

[Cho Chang]

This is ridiculous. You atheist hethens come in here spewing your hate against God and expect us good Christians just to roll over and let the world be taken over by your sodomising, spiteful, baby-killing asses. Jesus is coming for you. Remember my name when you're burning in hell for all of eternity.

 

[jaguarr]

This is ridiculous. You atheist hethens come in here spewing your hate against God and expect us good Christians just to roll over and let the world be taken over by your sodomising, spiteful, baby-killing asses. Jesus is coming for you. Remember my name when you're burning in hell for all of eternity.

Looks like someone needs to reread the thread a little more carefully.

jag

 

[Daisy]

I think Cho needs to make better use of the smilie.

 

[Lurk]

I'm hoping it was a joke......

 

[jaguarr]

I'm hoping it was a joke......

I was unsure so I erred on the side of ridicule.

jag

 

[Daisy]

I'm pretty sure it was sarcastic. It's happened before with him (today, in fact).

 

[Cho Chang]

I'm hoping it was a joke......

Hell is no joke my son. There's nothing funny about a red-skinned man with hooves, horns, a pointy tail and a pitchfork. It's no laughing matter.

 

[Lurk]

jeebus christmas he's for real!!


I don't even know where to start.......

 

[jaguarr]

Hell is no joke my son. There's nothing funny about a red-skinned man with hooves, horns, a pointy tail and a pitchfork.

Actually, that sounds hilarious!

jag

 

[Addendum]

Yes, there is

 

[Lurk]

Hitler's a chic?!?!?

 

[Daisy]

Well, this is from Tacitus (Annals 15.44) He's talking about Nero blaming the Christians for the fire in AD 64.

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."

http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.11.xv.html

There's a number of other sources as well, but this is probably the most well-known non-christian source, particularly that near to Christ's time.

 

[Addendum]

Early Christ-followers called themselves 'saints', 'brethren', 'Brothers of the Lord' and their critics used various names: Nazoreans, Ebionites, 'God fearers', atheists. The Jewish association remained strong throughout the first century and when Christian sects got going in Rome in the second century they were identified by their rival leaders – Valentinians, Basilidians, Marcionites, etc.

So little were christ-worshippers known in the Roman world that as late as the 90s Dio Cassio refers to 'atheists' and 'those adopting Jewish manners'. Christians as a distinct group from the Jews appear only late in the 1st century, not long before the Jewish curse on heretics at the council of Jamnia (around 85 AD). The label 'Christian' itself only appears with the 2nd century Acts – with the story that the term 'began in Antioch' (11.26)

 

[PyroProductions]

My stand on the whole thing is, I am an atheist, therefore, I do not believe that Jesus was the Messiah nor a reincarnation of God. I do believe that it is entirely possible that a man named Jesus walked this earth, but not in a spiritual sense. I don't know enough about "evidence" to say whether or not he was the Messiah, especially since I don't believe in higher deities, but I'd say it is entirely possible that the Jesus from the Bible was a real person.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Well...the Bible

 

[XwolverineX]

This isn't meant to cause a flamewar... see, one of my Professors a couple years ago(who was actually atheist, I believe) said that there is actual evidence documented by the Romans, or perhaps someone else, during Jesus's lifetime that he did in fact exist and was crucified(whether or not he was the actual son of God is another debate, but there was a man 2000 years ago who at least claimed to be).

However, someone else that is debating these topics with me claims that there is not one single shred of evidence to suggest that the man even existed. Who is right? Is it a lot harder to figure out than just that, or are there actual documents supporting the existance of this man?

I'M PRETTY SURE ANYONE WHO HAS A TRACE OF LOGIN, KNOWS IT'S ALL A CROCK OF ****.

 

[PyroProductions]

Well...the Bible

But then the question comes up about how you can prove that the Bible is 100% accurate. I may cause a whole diareahha-type mess with this statement, but I find it funny that the Bible Christians refer to is based off the King James version (minus Catholics, of course) who, in a brilliant act, decided what was going to be put in the Bible and what wasn't. So basically all the stuff that made the Bible look bad went out the window. Another funny thing, the dead sea scrolls state that the reason God flooded the earth in Noah's time was because angels were coming down to earth and having raunchy sex with everyone.