A growing number of scholars are openly questioning or actively arguing against Jesus’ historicity

Religion is one of the most enduringly powerful forces on earth. Two of the most influential, both today and in the past, Christianity and Islam, believe that Jesus Christ played a pivotal role in both faiths.

Christians believe that Jesus was the son of God, born of a virgin birth, was crucified and resurrected for the remission of sins. Muslims believe that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth brought forth by the command of Allah and became one of his most important (and subsequently revered) prophets. Muslims do not believe that Jesus was crucified but that another man died in his place.

Whether or not we believe in the existence and life of Christ as a matter of faith most people are prepared to accept that Jesus was a real and verifiable historical figure; that he was born, lived and died in Judea between around 4BC and 33AD. This has been repeated so many times that most people do not ever think to challenge it but should they? Did a man called Jesus, son of Mary (and adoptive son of Joseph) walk the paths of Judea or was he merely a figment of imagination? A group of stories and myths pulled together by a range of cynical individuals for a particular purpose?

If you are a Christian, of course, the existence of Christ is a matter of faith but should non-Christians believe in Jesus so readily? Here are my top 9 reasons to claim that Jesus never existed.

There is no contemporaneous account of the life


Not only is nothing in the bible capable of being directly linked to the time in which Jesus was reputed to be alive (see below) but there are absolutely no contemporaneous accounts that speak of Jesus. As far as the historical record is concerned he just did not exist. The Gospels claim that Jesus’ ministry was famous across the region and well known to people such as Herod and Pontius Pilate. In the later part of his ministry it is claimed that he was followed by great multitudes of people and, of course, in one instance that he fed 5,000.

There is not a single mention in him in military records or dispatches back to Rome (surely anyone who could command huge gatherings of people in a potentially disruptive province should be of interest). He is not mentioned in the records of Herod’s court nor is he mentioned in the records of the Temple or by any Priests. Surely if he was believed by some to be a prophet and others to be a false prophet some mention of the ructions he was causing in Judean civic and religious society should have been recorded. Some people like to point to the supposed letters of Pontius Pilate as evidence of Jesus’ life but these were a work of fiction.

Of course it is possible (although unlikely, the Roman Empire was very efficient) that contemporaneous accounts existed but disappeared.


In the words of Bart Ehrman: “What sorts of things do pagan authors from the time of Jesus have to say about him? Nothing. As odd as it may seem, there is no mention of Jesus at all by any of his pagan contemporaries. There are no birth records, no trial transcripts, no death certificates; there are no expressions of interest, no heated slanders, no passing references – nothing. In fact, if we broaden our field of concern to the years after his death – even if we include the entire first century of the Common Era – there is not so much as a solitary reference to Jesus in any non-Christian, non-Jewish source of any kind. I should stress that we do have a large number of documents from the time – the writings of poets, philosophers, historians, scientists, and government officials, for example, not to mention the large collection of surviving inscriptions on stone and private letters and legal documents on papyrus. In none of this vast array of surviving writings is Jesus’ name ever so much as mentioned.”

we are waiting.... cause I can't see one of those ur reasons,not to talk of ten.

All Later Accounts Of The Life Of Jesus Are Pure Hearsay

Even though there are no contemporaneous lifetime reports of the existence of Jesus there are references to him in Christian writing (see below) and non-Christian texts in the decades after his alleged death.

Not a single one of these accounts is a credible account of his life. None of them reference any earlier texts and are therefore nothing more than hearsay and, as such unreliable. If we condemn hearsay evidence as unreliable in our court systems why should it be sufficient to establish the existence of an important historical figure?

The evidence that is usually cited in support for the existence of Jesus comes from the writings of Josephus Flavius who was born in 37AD (some years after the crucifixion) and wrote about the life of Jesus in 93AD, after the Gospels were written. He cited no sources for his materials. Similarly Pliny the Younger (born around 62BC, Tacitus (64AD) and Suetonius (69AD) all wrote about Jesus but without any reference to contemporaneous sources. It is likely they got their information from believers but without sources the passages do nothing more than document a social phenomenon.

In the previous point we mentioned that it is possible that contemporaneous sources existed but have since been destroyed or disappeared. If they did exist it is likely that these three respected historians (Tacitus in particular was known for the high quality of his research and referencing) would have referred to it directly rather than have relied on hearsay.

The Gospels Were Written As Christian Propaganda

To Christians everywhere the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the authoritative sources of the happenings of the life of Christ as written by his disciples, those who knew him best and observed his ministry.

Originally there were many more Gospels. When the final four were settled on as the orthodox account in the second century the other gospels were denounced as heretical. Copies of these ‘spare’ gospels were found in the Dead Sea, and at Nag Hammadi during the previous century but there is no evidence of who wrote them and none appear to be copies of a contemporaneous source. One of these documents, however, the Gospel of Thomas, does appear to predate the Gospel of Mark. It does not contain any reference to Jesus as a historical figure, as the messiah or any reference to the resurrection. It is, instead, a collection of ‘sayings’. It was denounced as heresy.

The fact that the leaders of the early church denounced this original Gospel in favor of four mostly narrative pieces of writing, shows that they were selecting works for the purpose of creating an evidentiary trail for the existence of Jesus.

The earliest New Testament writers seem ignorant of the details of Jesus’ life, which become more crystalized in later texts


Paul seems unaware of any virgin birth, for example. No wise men, no star in the east, no miracles. Historians have long puzzled over the “Silence of Paul” on the most basic biographical facts and teachings of Jesus. Paul fails to cite Jesus’ authority precisely when it would make his case. What’s more, he never calls the twelve apostles Jesus’ disciples; in fact, he never says Jesus HAD disciples –or a ministry, or did miracles, or gave teachings. He virtually refuses to disclose any other biographical detail, and the few cryptic hints he offers aren’t just vague, but contradict the gospels. The leaders of the early Christian movement in Jerusalem like Peter and James are supposedly Jesus’ own followers and family; but Paul dismisses them as nobodies and repeatedly opposes them for not being true Christians!

Liberal theologian Marcus Borg suggests that people read the books of the New Testament in chronological order to see how early Christianity unfolded. “Placing the Gospels after Paul makes it clear that as written documents they are not the source of early Christianity but its product. The Gospel — the good news — of and about Jesus existed before the Gospels. They are the products of early Christian communities several decades after Jesus’ historical life and tell us how those communities saw his significance in their historical context.”

The gospels, our only accounts of a historical Jesus, contradict each other

other.If you think you know the Jesus story pretty well, I suggest that you pause at this point to test yourself with the 20 question quiz at

http://exchristian.net/3/test_quiz.php


The gospel of Mark is thought to be the earliest existing “life of Jesus,” and linguistic analysis suggests that Luke and Matthew both simply reworked Mark and added their own corrections and new material. But they contradict each other and, to an even greater degree contradict the much later gospel of John, because they were written with different objectives for different audiences. The incompatible Easter stories offer one example of how much the stories disagree.

If you still think they don't disagree on easter

Kindly answer these quiz

1. Who first came to the tomb on Sunday morning?
a. one woman (John 20:1)
b. two women (Matt. 28:1)
c. three women (Mark 16:1)
d. more than three women (Luke 23:55-56; 24:1,10)

2. She (they) came
a. while it was still dark (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1)
b. after the sun had risen (Mark 16:2)

3. The woman (women) came to the tomb
a. to anoint the body of Jesus with spices (Mark 16:1-2; Luke 24:1)
b. just to look at it (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1)

4. The women had obtained the spices
a. on Friday before sunset (Luke 23:54-56; 24:1)
a. after sunset on Saturday (Mark 16:1)

5. The first visitor(s) was/were greeted by
a. an angel (Matt. 28:2-5)
b. a young man (Mark 16:5)
c. two men (Luke 24:4)
d. no one (John 20:1-2)

6. The greeter(s)
a. was sitting on the stone outside the tomb (Matt 28:2)
b. was sitting inside the tomb (Mark 16:5)
c. were standing inside the tomb (Luke 24:3-4)

7. After finding the tomb empty, the woman/women
a. ran to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:7-8; Mark 16:10; Luke 24:9; John 20:2)
b. ran away and said nothing to anyone (Mark 16:

8. The risen Jesus first appeared to
a. Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:14; Mark 16:9)
b. Cleopas and another disciple (Luke 24:13,15,18)
c. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1,9)
d. Cephas (Peter) alone (1 Cor. 15:4-5; Luke 24:34)

9. Jesus first appeared
a. somewhere between the tomb and Jerusalem (Matt. 28:8-9)
b. Just outside the tomb (John 20:11-14)
c. in Galilee - some 80 miles (130 Km) north of Jerusalem (Mark 16:6-7)
d. on the road to Emmaus - Miles (11 Km) west of Jerusalem (Luke 24:13-15)
e. we are not told where (Mark 16:9; 1 Cor. 15:4-5)

10. The disciples were to see Jesus first
a. in Galilee (Mark 16:7; Matt. 28:7,10,16)
b. in Jerusalem (Mark 16:14; Luke 24:33,36; John 20:19; Acts 1:4)

11. the disciples were told that they would meet the risen Jesus in Galilee
a. by the women, who had been told by an angel of the Lord, then by Jesus himself after the resurrection (Matt. 28:7-10; Mark 16:7)
b. by Jesus himself, before the crucifiction (Mark 26:32)

12. The risen Jesus
a. wanted to be touched (John 20:27)
b. did not want to be touched (John 20:17)
c. did not mind being touched (Matt. 28:9-10)

13. Jesus ascended to Heaven
a. the same day that he was resurrected (Mark 16:9,19; Luke 24:13,28-36,50-51)
b. forty days after the resurrection (Acts 1:3,9)
c. we are not told that he ascended to Heaven at all (Matt. 28:10, 16-20; John 21:25; the original Gospel of Mark ends at 16:

14. The disciples received the Holy Spirit
a. 50 days after the resurrection (Acts 1:3,9)
b. in the evening of the same day as the resurrection (John 20:19-22)

15. The risen Jesus
a. was recognized by those who saw him (Matt. 28:9; Mark 16:9-10)
b. was not always recognizable (Mark 16:12; Luke 24:15-16,31,36-37; John 20:14-15)

16. The risen Jesus
a. was physical (Matt. 28:9; Luke 24:41-43; John 20:27)
b. was not physical (Mark 16:9,12,14; Luke 24:15-16,31,36-37; John 20:19,26; 1 Cor. 15:5-

17. The risen Jesus was seen by the disciples
a. presumably only once (Matt. 28:16-17)
b. first by two of them, later by all eleven (Mark 16:12-14; Luke 24:13-15,33,36-51)
c. three times (John 20:19,26; 21:1,14)
d. many times (Acts 1:3)

18. When Jesus appeared to the disciples
a. there were eleven of them (Matt. 28:16-17; Luke 24:33,36)
b. twelve of them (1 Cor. 15:5)


Hey, when has religion ever let facts or figures get in the way of a good quote. If this quiz has in any way shaken your faith, simply open the Bible and pull out sentences at random that make you feel good or (completely out of context) reaffirm any belief you want to hold.

Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the real historical Jesus depict wildly different persons.

They include a cynic philosopher, charismatic Hasid, liberal Pharisee, conservative rabbi, Zealot revolutionary, nonviolent pacifist to borrow from a much longer listassembled by Price. In his words (pp. 15-16), “The historical Jesus (if there was one) might well have been a messianic king, or a progressive Pharisee, or a Galilean shaman, or a magus, or a Hellenistic sage. But he cannot very well have been all of them at the same time.” John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar grumbles that “the stunning diversity is an academic embarrassment.”

For David Fitzgerald, these issues and more lead to a conclusion that he finds inescapable:

Jesus appears to be an effect, not a cause, of Christianity. Paul and the rest of the first generation of Christians searched the Septuagint translation of Hebrew scriptures to create a Mystery Faith for the Jews, complete with pagan rituals like a Lord’s Supper, Gnostic terms in his letters, and a personal savior god to rival those in their neighbors’ longstanding Egyptian, Persian, Hellenistic and Roman traditions.

In a soon-to-be-released follow up to Nailed, entitled Jesus: Mything in Action, Fitzgeraldargues that the many competing versions proposed by secular scholars are just as problematic as any “Jesus of Faith:” Even if one accepts that there was a real Jesus of Nazareth, the question has little practical meaning: Regardless of whether or not a first century rabbi called Yeshua ben Yosef lived, the “historical Jesus” figures so patiently excavated and re-assembled by secular scholars are themselves fictions.

The New Testament Was Designed To Promote Christianity Not Document Historical Fact.

In the early years of Christianity there were a number of different and competing interpretations. We have already mentioned the wealth of different books and gospels that were discovered at the Dead Sea and Nag Hammadi. Many of these writings followed a gnostic tradition that was at odds with what became the orthodox interpretation of Christianity.

In the second century Irenaeus of Lyon started to codify the New Testament and identified the four Gospels which we use today as part of the Canon, rejecting all other interpretations. He wrote eloquently and vehemently in his book Against Heresies to establish exactly what should be included and excluded in the definition of Christianity. Our modern day New Testament is, therefore, very much one man’s vision and interpretation of what Christianity should be. Irenaeus was not interested in documenting the facts, he was interested in setting out his beliefs and ensuring that others followed him.

This tradition has been well entrenched in the Church over the succeeding centuries with any sects deemed as heretical being put down violently or even eliminated altogether (eg the Cathars). Writing towards the end of the 4th Century St Jerome said ‘assurance often explains that of which it knows nothing; and when it has convinced others imposes on itself.’. The thoroughly unpleasant Ignatius Loyola famously said that he was willing to believe that white is black if required to by the church.

Why should the early Christian zealots have been any different? They were not, their behavior set the tone for the rest of the church through history and for that reason we should be extremely skeptical of the New Testament and any claims it makes about the life of Jesus. It is nothing more than a propaganda treatise.

. There Is No Historical Evidence Of An Eclipse, Earthquake Or Rending Of The Veil In The Temple Supposed To Have Happened At The Moment Of Jesus’ Death.

The Gospel of Matthew (Chapter 27) and the Gospel of Luke (Chapter 23) give an in-depth account of the events of the crucifixion. Both agree that there was a sudden darkness (possibly an eclipse or a dust cloud from a volcano) that fell on the land between the 6th and 9th hours of the day. They also explain that at the moment of Jesus’ death ‘the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent’. The earthquake is said to have been so severe that the graves of the dead burst open which must have been an extremely traumatic event, particularly when combined with an eclipse.

Except it did not happen! Key events such as earthquakes and eclipses would have been recorded in detail by contemporary historians and an earthquake severe enough to burst graves would have been recorded both by the Jewish court and by the Roman administrators. There are no secular records at all of any relief efforts being sent to Jerusalem or of any rebuilding works. Finally the veil in the temple was extremely precious and any damage to it would have been recorded.

The only explanation for this lack of reporting is that the earthquake and eclipse simply did not occur, at least not in that time and place. There were contemporary earthquakes elsewhere in the Empire (to which aid was sent) and we know that earthquakes happened in Jerusalem over that period but nothing in the geologic record can pin one exactly to the alleged date and time of the crucifixion. Indeed the only sources to link an eclipse (or volcanic debris) are Christian, clearly trying to establish a link between the supposed death of Jesus and the divine.


For more on that http://blog.bibleplaces.com/2012/05/evidence-for-april-3-33-ce-crucifixion.html?m=1

Are you done?
I'll tell you what, when you die you gonna know the truth. But then it will be too late.

wellmax:
Are you done?
I'll tell you what, when you die you gonna know the truth. But then it will be too late.

And you know this? How? Because the same book being picked apart here says so?

. There Are No Tangible Historical Artifacts Linked To Jesus.

Anyone who has lived, even a simple carpenter, will leave possessions after their death. The Gospels claim that the soldiers on duty at the crucifixion cast lots to share out Jesus’ clothing amongst them. Had he really had many devoted disciples (who would have been disgusted at their failure to protect him in the Garden) they or his grieving family would surely have tried to purchase or barter back the clothing. Such items would have been invaluable in the formation of the new church.

Nevertheless, nothing, absolutely nothing from Jesus’ life remained, even shortly after his demise. In the 12th Century people started to mention that they owned the shroud in which Jesus had been wrapped and, years later it surfaced in Turin. It was accepted as a genuine artifact for many years but carbon dating in the 20th Century showed it to be a 12th Century forgery. An ossuary claiming to hold the bones of James, brother of Jesus was also found to be a forgery. There is not one single, verifiable, tangible object in existence today or known to have existed at any time in the past 2,000 years that belonged to Jesus.

. The City Of Nazareth Did Not Exist During The Time Jesus Is Reputed To Have Been Alive.

Jesus was known as the Nazarene, possibly because he is reputed to have been from Nazareth. For many people there is no reason to doubt this claim. Nazareth exists today, an old town with a long history (and one very famous son) but while Nazareth is old, it is not as old as Jesus or even Christianity.

The historian Josephus lists all the cities in Galilee from around that time and Nazareth is not on the list. Nazareth is not mentioned in the Epistles, the first books of the New Testament to be written (see above), indeed there is no reference to the name until the Gospels. Excavations of the current day Nazareth and the surrounding area have led to mixed results. Evidence of human activity has been found from around the time when Jesus was alleged to have lived there but this activity was in the form of a necropolis for the dead and not a village in its own right.

An alternative translation of the word Nazarene is ‘truth’ and was a name given to a gnostic sect of Christians. It is possible that when the traditions split and the gnostic heritage was excised from Christianity the phrase was reimagined to state that Jesus was from Nazareth which, of course, was by then in existence.

*singing* Darling Jesus, Darling Jesus,
Oh my darling Jesus,
you are a wonderful God.
I love you so much darling Jesus.
Oh my darling Jesus,
you are a wonderful God!

modelmike7:
*singing* Darling Jesus,
Darling Jesus,

Oh my darling Jesus,

you are a wonderful God.

I love you so much darling Jesus.

Oh my darling Jesus,

you are a wonderful God!

*singing* Darling Deadpool, Darling Deadpool,
Oh my darling Deadpool,
you are a wonderful Hero.
I love you so much darling Deadpool.
Oh my darling Deadpool,
you are a wonderful Hero!

What scholars? There's no "growing" number of scholars, 99.9 % believe he existed. The only ones who believe he didn't is Robert Price nd carrier, both not taken serious in academia.

This thread should be " Reasons why two scholars believe Jesus didn't exist".

Also here's Bart Ehrman opinion on this matter :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4q3WlM9rCI

Did Jesus Really Exist?
HE WAS neither rich nor powerful. He did not even have a home that he could call his own. Yet his teachings have influenced millions. Did Jesus Christ really exist? What do both modern and ancient authorities say?
Michael Grant, a historian and an expert on ancient classical civilization, noted: “If we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus’ existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.”
Rudolf Bultmann, a professor of New Testament studies, stated: “The doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the oldest Palestinian community [of Christians].”
Will Durant, a historian, writer, and philosopher, wrote: “That a few simple men [the Gospel writers] should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so lofty an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospels.”
Albert Einstein, a German-born Jewish physicist, asserted: “I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.” When asked if he viewed Jesus as a historical person, he responded: “Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”
“No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus.”—Albert Einstein
WHAT DOES HISTORY REVEAL?
The most detailed record of Jesus’ life and ministry is recorded in the Bible accounts known as the Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—named after the men who wrote them. In addition, a number of early non-Christian sources name him.
TACITUS
(c. 56-120 C.E., or Common Era) Tacitus is considered to be one of the greatest of the ancient Roman historians. His Annals deal with the Roman Empire from 14 C.E. to 68 C.E. (Jesus died in 33 C.E.) Tacitus wrote that when a great fire devastated Rome in 64 C.E., Emperor Nero was considered responsible. But Tacitus wrote that Nero accused the Christians in order to “scotch the rumour.” Then Tacitus said: “Christus, the founder of the name [Christian], had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus.”—Annals, XV, 44.
SUETONIUS
(c. 69–a. 122 C.E.) In his Lives of the Caesars, this Roman historian recorded events during the reigns of the first 11 Roman emperors. The section on Claudius refers to turmoil among the Jews in Rome that was likely caused by disputes over Jesus. ( Acts 18:2 ) Suetonius wrote: “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Christus], he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.” ( The Deified Claudius, XXV, 4) Although wrongly accusing Jesus of creating disturbances, Suetonius did not doubt his existence.
PLINY THE YOUNGER
(c. 61-113 C.E.) This Roman author and administrator in Bithynia (modern Turkey) wrote to Roman Emperor Trajan about how to deal with the Christians in that province. Pliny said that he tried to force Christians to recant, executing any who refused to do so. He explained: “Those who . . . repeated after me an invocation to the [pagan] Gods, and offered adoration, with wine and frankincense, to your image . . . and who finally cursed Christ . . . , I thought it proper to discharge.”— Pliny—Letters, Book X, XCVI.
FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS
(c. 37-100 C.E.) This Jewish priest and historian states that Annas, a Jewish high priest who continued to wield political influence, “convened the judges of the Sanhedrin [the Jewish high court] and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.”— Jewish Antiquities, XX, 200.
THE TALMUD
This collection of Jewish rabbinic writings, dating from the third to the sixth centuries C.E., shows that even Jesus’ enemies affirmed his existence. One passage says that on “the Passover Yeshu [Jesus] the Nazarean was hanged,” which is historically correct. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a, Munich Codex; see John 19:14-16 .) Another states: “May we produce no son or pupil who disgraces himself in public like the Nazarene”—a title often applied to Jesus.—Babylonian Talmud, Berakoth 17b,

[s]

joyandfaith:
Did Jesus Really Exist?
HE WAS neither rich nor powerful. He did not even have a home that he could call his own. Yet his teachings have influenced millions. Did Jesus Christ really exist? What do both modern and ancient authorities say?
Michael Grant, a historian and an expert on ancient classical civilization, noted: “If we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus’ existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.”
Rudolf Bultmann, a professor of New Testament studies, stated: “The doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the oldest Palestinian community [of Christians].”
Will Durant, a historian, writer, and philosopher, wrote: “That a few simple men [the Gospel writers] should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so lofty an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospels.”
Albert Einstein, a German-born Jewish physicist, asserted: “I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.” When asked if he viewed Jesus as a historical person, he responded: “Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”
“No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus.”—Albert Einstein
WHAT DOES HISTORY REVEAL?
The most detailed record of Jesus’ life and ministry is recorded in the Bible accounts known as the Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—named after the men who wrote them. In addition, a number of early non-Christian sources name him.
TACITUS
(c. 56-120 C.E., or Common Era) Tacitus is considered to be one of the greatest of the ancient Roman historians. His Annals deal with the Roman Empire from 14 C.E. to 68 C.E. (Jesus died in 33 C.E.) Tacitus wrote that when a great fire devastated Rome in 64 C.E., Emperor Nero was considered responsible. But Tacitus wrote that Nero accused the Christians in order to “scotch the rumour.” Then Tacitus said: “Christus, the founder of the name [Christian], had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus.”—Annals, XV, 44.
SUETONIUS
(c. 69–a. 122 C.E.) In his Lives of the Caesars, this Roman historian recorded events during the reigns of the first 11 Roman emperors. The section on Claudius refers to turmoil among the Jews in Rome that was likely caused by disputes over Jesus. ( Acts 18:2 ) Suetonius wrote: “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Christus], he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.” ( The Deified Claudius, XXV, 4) Although wrongly accusing Jesus of creating disturbances, Suetonius did not doubt his existence.
PLINY THE YOUNGER
(c. 61-113 C.E.) This Roman author and administrator in Bithynia (modern Turkey) wrote to Roman Emperor Trajan about how to deal with the Christians in that province. Pliny said that he tried to force Christians to recant, executing any who refused to do so. He explained: “Those who . . . repeated after me an invocation to the [pagan] Gods, and offered adoration, with wine and frankincense, to your image . . . and who finally cursed Christ . . . , I thought it proper to discharge.”— Pliny—Letters, Book X, XCVI.
FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS
(c. 37-100 C.E.) This Jewish priest and historian states that Annas, a Jewish high priest who continued to wield political influence, “convened the judges of the Sanhedrin [the Jewish high court] and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.”— Jewish Antiquities, XX, 200.
THE TALMUD
This collection of Jewish rabbinic writings, dating from the third to the sixth centuries C.E., shows that even Jesus’ enemies affirmed his existence. One passage says that on “the Passover Yeshu [Jesus] the Nazarean was hanged,” which is historically correct. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a, Munich Codex; see John 19:14-16 .) Another states: “May we produce no son or pupil who disgraces himself in public like the Nazarene”—a title often applied to Jesus.—Babylonian Talmud, Berakoth 17b,

[/s]


Check point number 2

hopefulLandlord:

Oga mi you no dey reply mail?

wellmax:
Are you done?
I'll tell you what, when you die you gonna know the truth. But then it will be too late.

If you are a Christian, you are going to the Muslim hell

If you are a Muslim, you are going to the Christian hell

See you in hell

hopefulLandlord:

wey them

01Mysticdon:

Oga mi you no dey reply mail?

Sorry bro, I didn't receive any mail, kindly send it to you got it already, right?

Mysticdon, I've replied your mail

The jewish religion or judaism started taking shape after their return from exile in babylon. prior to that time, they worshiped so many Gods and Goddess..it was after they left babylon that Ezra was commanded to write the law..He got his informations from babylon on the God of Cyrus(Marduk), Issaih was also at that time trying to make them understand that Marduk was the creater of all and it is God above all other( Issaih 45)..the jew did not believe him..the jews believe there was many Gods and Goddesses..and these have their cult groups..one of such cult was that of Inana and his belivered Dimuzi. she is also Aphrodite in the greeks religion and venus in the roman. one..she is the goddess of love and beauty..it is this cult that metamophosed to christainity where Inana was given the name of Mary..she is also Lucifer and the LovePeddler of babylon in Issaih 47 and the book of revelation..it has always been about her..there was no Jesus in the equation...that was an after thought..it was about the light within..it was much later the catholic church decided to make it a story about a man at the council of Florence in the 6Th century..the story is not a jewish one cos the messiah the jews are waiting for is a mortal man not a demi god....

hopefulLandlord:


Sorry bro, I didn't receive any mail, kindly send it to you got it already, right?

no, let me resend it

Interesting read but I think he as a person existed because you cannot tell me that a fictional person made all this cult like following till this day. most archaeological excavations has showed that Nazareth was a settlement during his life on earth. As for his God like status, I honestly think it was exaggerated. one thing me and you would agree on is that he must have been an exceptional person for him to have this level of followers till now.

01Mysticdon:

no, let me resend it

You can send mails to lukamodric4555@gmail.com

hopefulLandlord:


You can send mails to lukamodric4555@gmail.com

okay sir, thanks

Scholars are Theorists. They make the World go round but never really change anything.