Is there evidence, besides the Bible, proving that Christ existed?

This is a topic of much debate among many religionists and archaeologists. However, the account of Christ’s life, as found in the Bible—which is inspired revelation from God—serves as proof enough of His existence! However, there are other sources that contribute to the proof of His life and death.

A second-century theologian, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, 35 stadia from Jerusalem, in which Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registries of the taxing under Cyrenius your first procurator in Judea” (First Apology, chapter 34).

Martyr was referring to the records of Jesus’ birth in Judea that were still in existence in his day. But, since he was a theologian who would naturally support accounts of Christ’s existence, his account may seem invalid to the doubter.

What about historians against Christianity? What did their writings say?

One of such anti-Christian mentality was Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman historian, senator, consul and governor of the province of Asia. Concerning Jesus and His followers, Tacitus wrote, “Nero…punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. But in spite of this temporary setback, the deadly superstition had broken out afresh, not only in Judea (where this mischief had started) but even in Rome” (The Annals of Imperial Rome, XV, 44).

Julian the Apostate (called such because he rejected Christianity after being raised in it), a fourth-century emperor, wrote, “Jesus, whom you celebrate, was one of Caesar’s subjects. If you dispute it, I will prove it by and by; but it may be as well done now. For yourselves allow, that he was enrolled with his father and mother in Cyrenius…But Jesus having persuaded a few among you, and those the worst of men, has now been celebrated about 300 years; having done nothing worthy of remembrance; unless anyone thinks it is a mighty matter to heal lame and blind people, and exorcise demoniacs in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany” (Cyril Contra Julian, VI, 191, 213).

These are just two quotes from pagan Roman scholars who loathed Christianity. Since these men had access to government records, and hated what Christians believed and stood for, they could have easily “disproved” and discredited the existence of Christ if they so wished. But, because they could not do such a thing, their writings only add to the monumental proof of the life of Christ.

What about the Jewish people? If Christ did not exist, how then could the Jews reject Him?

In his book Antiquities of the Jews, Jewish historian Flavius Josephus writes about Jesus, His disciples and John the Baptist. He referred to John as “the good man” (XVIII, 5, 2). Modern-day scholars recognize Josephus’ account of the death of James, “the brother of Jesus who was called Christ” (XX, 9, 1), as genuine.

The Jewish Encyclopedia (1907 edition) explains that Jesus is also mentioned in the Talmud, the Jewish tradition consisting of the Mishnah and the Gemara. These references to Christ are found in the sections Shabbath 104b and 116b; Sanhedrin 43a, 67a and 107b; and Sotah 47a. You may want to read an article entitled “Jesus of Nazareth,” from The Jewish Encyclopedia (1907), the articles “Jesus Christ” and “Talmud and Midrash” from The New Encyclopedia Britannica (1981), or the article “Jesus” in the Encyclopedia Judaica for more background concerning this subject.

These sources offer valuable information regarding the many proofs of the life of Christ. They point to the immutable facts that He: was born of a virgin, was of Jewish nationality, preached the gospel, healed the sick and diseased, and was betrayed and brutally slaughtered.

The gospels are enough proof for anyone with a sincere mind.

Ranchhoddas:
The gospels are enough proof for anyone with a sincere mind.

Yeah bro. But sometimes, I think some people too sincerely don't believe in Bible proves because to them, they ain't even Christians to start with. Hence, the need to provide other external documents aside the Bible for their perusal.

Thanks all the same, you have a rock solid point.

What is Christ? What is Gospel?

Christ means light,truth etc and the Gospel is the teaching of a particular knowledge.

If Christ is the truth about humans being a.k.a Gods,the Gospel of Christ then means the knowledge or teaching of Godliness of Man.

But what is the Truth? It simply is that Man has a Mind that never dies and if activated to its full potential,Man will become God(unlimited)

What is God(the state where man conquers the illusion of the material world)

The human mind is the only evidence of the truth/christ/light......not the book/bible

Very few reputable historical biblical scholars will stake their reputations on the Non-Existence of Jesus, the general consensus is that a first century Jewish Teacher/Rabbi of that name lived…..and was put to death for what was considered seditious teachings at the time. In my view if there are any questions to be asked it can only be with respect to the accuracy of the teachings and actions supposedly ascribed to Jesus.
Historical consensus agrees that the Gospels are wildly fictitious, and not just the miracle claims in them, although it is fair to state that universal truths are held in them.

Upon close scrutiny the Gospel of Mark which is the first Gospel shows blatant signs of literary fiction. The unknown author uses ancient Greek techniques of story telling, which really is the opposite of recording history. Effectively Mark is one giant parable within parables conveying theology. The later Gospel authors placed their own perspective on Mark. Matthew for instance corrects geographical, and Jewish theological mistakes that Mark makes. The Gospel of John diverges wildly from the other Gospels, but it's popularity at the time ensured that it was included in the canon.

The letters of Paul when placed under scrutiny reveals that he had no knowledge of an Earthly Jesus. His Jesus is derived by selected verses (taken out of context) in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT), and hallucinations. I would point out that although Paul states he met the brother of Jesus named James, we know that Paul calls everyone baptized in Jesus a fictive kin in a spiritual family (he makes no biological distinction with James). Therefore When apologists point at certain wordings by Paul for an Earthly Jesus they overlook Paul's use of allegory, and the literal Greek translation.

If one takes an honest look at the historical evidence for Jesus then by necessity one would have to be Agnostic on his historicity. Paul does not know about Mary, Joseph, the virgin birth, or anything Earthly about Jesus. Paul is clearly talking about a celestial being. The Gospels use a historic background, but contains evident trademarks of myth making.

Sarassin:

Very few reputable historical biblical scholars will stake their reputations on the Non-Existence of Jesus, the general consensus is that a first century Jewish Teacher/Rabbi of that name lived…..and was put to death for what was considered seditious teachings at the time. In my view if there are any questions to be asked it can only be with respect to the accuracy of the teachings and actions supposedly ascribed to Jesus.
Historical consensus agrees that the Gospels are wildly fictitious, and not just the miracle claims in them, although it is fair to state that universal truths are held in them.

Upon close scrutiny the Gospel of Mark which is the first Gospel shows blatant signs of literary fiction. The unknown author uses ancient Greek techniques of story telling, which really is the opposite of recording history. Effectively Mark is one giant parable within parables conveying theology. The later Gospel authors placed their own perspective on Mark. Matthew for instance corrects geographical, and Jewish theological mistakes that Mark makes. The Gospel of John diverges wildly from the other Gospels, but it's popularity at the time ensured that it was included in the canon.

The letters of Paul when placed under scrutiny reveals that he had no knowledge of an Earthly Jesus. His Jesus is derived by selected verses (taken out of context) in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT), and hallucinations. I would point out that although Paul states he met the brother of Jesus named James, we know that Paul calls everyone baptized in Jesus a fictive kin in a spiritual family (he makes no biological distinction with James). Therefore When apologists point at certain wordings by Paul for an Earthly Jesus they overlook Paul's use of allegory, and the literal Greek translation.

If one takes an honest look at the historical evidence for Jesus then by necessity one would have to be Agnostic on his historicity. Paul does not know about Mary, Joseph, the virgin birth, or anything Earthly about Jesus. Paul is clearly talking about a celestial being. The Gospels use a historic background, but contains evident trademarks of myth making.

Thank you very much my brother. I know quite well that you're speaking from the other side of the divide and wasn't expecting one from your background to disagree less, hence, I can as well bear with you.

Yes, it is true that I have lots of objection to raise, for example, tagging the bolden above as a "general consensus" (obviously believed by few people of like-minds), amounts to Fallacy of Hasty Generalization. This is because what you called a "general consensus" can be conveniently rebuffed by superior arguments supported by countless number of people of all classes.

Of course, raising this and other objections can only lead us to circle of endless arguments which is unprofitable to you and I. For which reason I'd say again, thank you very much for your contribution. Cheers!

There is evidence Jesus Christhe existed and was crucified. What there is no proof of is resurrection or the claim that he is the son of God.

Sarassin:

If one takes an honest look at the historical evidence for Jesus then by necessity one would have to be Agnostic on his historicity. Paul does not know about Mary, Joseph, the virgin birth, or anything Earthly about Jesus

thank you Good sir!
This is the truth.

Splinz:

Thank you very much my brother. I know quite well that you're speaking from the other side of the divide and wasn't expecting one from your background to disagree less, hence, I can as well bear with you.

Yes, it is true that I have lots of objection to raise, for example, tagging the bolden above as a "general consensus" (obviously believed by few people of like-minds), amounts to Fallacy of Hasty Generalization. This is because what you called a "general consensus" can be conveniently rebuffed by superior arguments supported by countless number of people of all classes.

Of course, raising this and other objections can only lead us to circle of endless arguments which is unprofitable to you and I. For which reason I'd say again, thank you very much for your contribution. Cheers!

Thank you sir for your kind words, naturally I am aware that asserting a "general consensus" claim is subject to scrutiny, the bar is a lot lower in this case, but as you point out there is no profit in engaging in a cycle of endless arguments, thank you for receiving my submission, very classy.

raphieMontella:

thank you Good sir!
This is the truth.

It ceases to be the truth when you factor in the supernatural...with a pinch of honesty that is.

Ranchhoddas:
It ceases to be the truth when you factor in the supernatural...with a pinch of honesty that is.

if you factor out ''paul'' and some other stuffs...your assertion can be ''possible''..
Like The cult of john frum...did john frum exist?
We cant be fully aware...

raphieMontella:

if you factor out ''paul'' and some other stuffs...your assertion can be ''possible''..
Like The cult of john frum...did john frum exist?
We cant be fully aware...

Speak for yourself bro. It's more than an assertion. People who have experienced it can be and are 'fully aware'.

Ranchhoddas:
Speak for yourself bro. It's more than an assertion. People who have experienced it can be and are 'fully aware'.

people experience the hindu feelings associated with their religion...
Have you seen the pictures which depict bramha?
Anyone can experience anything bruh...
An anexoric girl will feel guilty after eating a sandwich..but it doesnt make what she die bad/immoral..

raphieMontella:

people experience the hindu feelings associated with their religion...
Have you seen the pictures which depict bramha?
Anyone can experience anything bruh...
An anexoric girl will feel guilty after eating a sandwich..but it doesnt make what she die bad/immoral..

I knew this was going to be the next reply. Other experiences do not negate this one, do they?

Ranchhoddas:
I knew this was going to be the next reply. Other experiences do not negate this one, do they?

i do not understand..pls elaborate

raphieMontella:

i do not understand..pls elaborate

raphieMontella:

people experience the hindu feelings associated with their religion...
Have you seen the pictures which depict bramha?
Anyone can experience anything bruh..
An anexoric girl will feel guilty after eating a sandwich..but it doesnt make what she die bad/immoral..

raphieMontella:

i do not understand..pls elaborate

That people have feelings associated with their religions does not make the feeling associated with following Jesus any less real or untrue.

Ranchhoddas:
That people have feelings associated with their religions does not make the feeling associated with following Jesus any less real or untrue.

so in essense they are all true?

Splinz:
Is there evidence, besides the Bible, proving that Christ existed?

This is a topic of much debate among many religionists and archaeologists. However, the account of Christ’s life, as found in the Bible—which is inspired revelation from God—serves as proof enough of His existence! However, there are other sources that contribute to the proof of His life and death.

A second-century theologian, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, 35 stadia from Jerusalem, in which Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registries of the taxing under Cyrenius your first procurator in Judea” (First Apology, chapter 34).

Martyr was referring to the records of Jesus’ birth in Judea that were still in existence in his day. But, since he was a theologian who would naturally support accounts of Christ’s existence, his account may seem invalid to the doubter.

What about historians against Christianity? What did their writings say?

One of such anti-Christian mentality was Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman historian, senator, consul and governor of the province of Asia. Concerning Jesus and His followers, Tacitus wrote, “Nero…punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. But in spite of this temporary setback, the deadly superstition had broken out afresh, not only in Judea (where this mischief had started) but even in Rome” (The Annals of Imperial Rome, XV, 44).

Julian the Apostate (called such because he rejected Christianity after being raised in it), a fourth-century emperor, wrote, “Jesus, whom you celebrate, was one of Caesar’s subjects. If you dispute it, I will prove it by and by; but it may be as well done now. For yourselves allow, that he was enrolled with his father and mother in Cyrenius…But Jesus having persuaded a few among you, and those the worst of men, has now been celebrated about 300 years; having done nothing worthy of remembrance; unless anyone thinks it is a mighty matter to heal lame and blind people, and exorcise demoniacs in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany” (Cyril Contra Julian, VI, 191, 213).

These are just two quotes from pagan Roman scholars who loathed Christianity. Since these men had access to government records, and hated what Christians believed and stood for, they could have easily “disproved” and discredited the existence of Christ if they so wished. But, because they could not do such a thing, their writings only add to the monumental proof of the life of Christ.

What about the Jewish people? If Christ did not exist, how then could the Jews reject Him?

In his book Antiquities of the Jews, Jewish historian Flavius Josephus writes about Jesus, His disciples and John the Baptist. He referred to John as “the good man” (XVIII, 5, 2). Modern-day scholars recognize Josephus’ account of the death of James, “the brother of Jesus who was called Christ” (XX, 9, 1), as genuine.

The Jewish Encyclopedia (1907 edition) explains that Jesus is also mentioned in the Talmud, the Jewish tradition consisting of the Mishnah and the Gemara. These references to Christ are found in the sections Shabbath 104b and 116b; Sanhedrin 43a, 67a and 107b; and Sotah 47a. You may want to read an article entitled “Jesus of Nazareth,” from The Jewish Encyclopedia (1907), the articles “Jesus Christ” and “Talmud and Midrash” from The New Encyclopedia Britannica (1981), or the article “Jesus” in the Encyclopedia Judaica for more background concerning this subject.

These sources offer valuable information regarding the many proofs of the life of Christ. They point to the immutable facts that He: was born of a virgin, was of Jewish nationality, preached the gospel, healed the sick and diseased, and was betrayed and brutally slaughtered.

Ranchhoddas:
That people have feelings associated with their religions does not make the feeling associated with following Jesus any less real or untrue.

and come to think of, testimonies are evidences that Jesus is real....

raphieMontella:

so in essense they are all true?

Perhaps. But they vary in substance. One is superior to the rest and there are no points for guessing which one it is.

But why always Jesus....

Oh I love Jesus.

Ranchhoddas:
Perhaps. But they vary in substance. One is superior to the rest and there are no points for guessing which one it is.

no..you just said that personal experience is substantial..
So IOW brahma is very likely to be the author of the universe whatever...
1)You're in a christian locality...so jesus is superior here..not there
is jesus superior in islamic countries?
You need to give credence to your assertions...
2)we both know how christianity spread...
I dont know of a ''hindu holy war''...if you know of one..please share..
3)presently christianity is superior in ''numbers''..it has not always been so..and never will..
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world..so figure..

winner01:
But why always Jesus....

Oh I love Jesus.

Thank you very much brother. I just can't help but agree with that quote up there.

raphieMontella:

no..you just said that personal experience is substantial..
So IOW brahma is very likely to be the author of the universe whatever...
1)You're in a christian locality...so jesus is superior here..not there
is jesus superior in islamic countries?
You need to give credence to your assertions...
2)we both know how christianity spread...
I dont know of a ''hindu holy war''...if you know of one..please share..
3)presently christianity is superior in ''numbers''..it has not always been so..and never will..
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world..so figure..

Was there a christian holy war?
Were people killed because they refused to be christians?
I'm well aware of the attrocities of the catholics, which pales in comparison to that of godless men. But how did christianity spread, please educate me cos how we know christianity spread is illustrated in the picture below. You do realize that christians suffered terror from the claws of the catholics than any other group .


You are not thinking clearly too. How can you say "presently christianity is superior in ''numbers''.. and then go on to say and never will (be so)".
Guy, it is so, and will continue to be. The best you can do is rant on nairaland for the better part of your life or pick up arms like the countless numbers of atheist mass murderers who shared your opinions.

Islam has been the fastest growing religion since the early 90's and it will be the same in the next 90 years, the reason is simple. It is self-destructive.
Why do you even do what you do

raphieMontella:

no..you just said that personal experience is substantial..
So IOW brahma is very likely to be the author of the universe whatever...
1)You're in a christian locality...so jesus is superior here..not there
is jesus superior in islamic countries?
You need to give credence to your assertions...
2)we both know how christianity spread...
I dont know of a ''hindu holy war''...if you know of one..please share..
3)presently christianity is superior in ''numbers''..it has not always been so..and never will..
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world..so figure..

The superiority I mean is the superiority of content and not superiority of numbers. An Iphone is superior to a China phone anywhere in the world regardless the number of people that use China phones in any location.

Successdude:
and come to think of, testimonies are evidences that Jesus is real....

There is a distinction to be made between the historicity of Jesus, which is largely accepted and the myth of Jesus. It is clear that the effects of Christianity is achieved entirely through belief. I often hear Christians say that Christianity itself is evidence that Jesus existed. Belief alone is all that has been required for the spread of belief.

Yet, we are aware that the earliest written evidence of Jesus is provided by Paul's writing in the 50's CE and he writes about a pre-existent being who co-created the Universe. We have no biography of Jesus from Paul but visions, and revelations through select verses from the Old Testament (taking them out of context). So at the very outset we have a mythological Jesus, and Paul even admits his information is from no man.

It is the later Gospels written between the 70's-120's CE that put Jesus on Earth, fully twenty years or more after Paul’s writing and very often the Gospel accounts often conflict with one another(the nativity accounts are a prime example). The actions of the disciples in the Gospel accounts could not have been better scripted if the Gospels were written as a drama. The Book of Acts written as a quasi-historical account is pretty much a disaster, very often in conflict with Paul's own accounts of his movements, belief and action, I need not even mention historical discrepancies contained within the book.

And so it is that, other than the highly debatable passages in Josephus, the Pauline Epistles, and the four canonical Gospels are the only evidence for Jesus in the 1st century, virtually everything else appears anecdotal.

There's no consensus by secular scholars on who Jesus really was. He can be successfully positioned as anything between an itinerant Rabbi to rebel leader. There was a real Jesus but I don’t think he would recognize himself in present day writings.

Ranchhoddas:
The superiority I mean is the superiority of content and not superiority of numbers. An Iphone is superior to a China phone anywhere in the world regardless the number of people that use China phones in any location.

Can u Explain to me How the Personal Experience of Christians is Superior to the One Of The Hindus Experiencing Their goddess Kali? After drinking blood?

EyeHateGod:

Can u Explain to me How the Personal Experience of Christians is Superior to the One Of The Hindus Experiencing Their goddess Kali? After drinking blood?

Proverbs 10:22 The blessings of the Lord maketh rich and addeth no sorrow...

Ranchhoddas:
Proverbs 10:22 The blessings of the Lord maketh rich and addeth no sorrow...

Are u kidding me? is this a joke or what?

raphieMontella:

so in essense they are all true?

Raphael Raphael Raphael. I dont underatand your atheism. Isnt atheism a disbelief in the gods? All gods? But your arguements seem to imply that "If theres a Christian God, then there are other gods too", which we have never for once refute.
You have a scuttle with Yahweh .What really is your problem with Yahweh?

How did he hurt you, pls do tell this animosity is deep.

EyeHateGod:

Are u kidding me? is this a joke or what?

Kidding you for where na? The experiences will stand the test of time. Others won't.

Ranchhoddas:
Kidding you for where na? The experiences will stand the test of time. Others won't.

Which Test of time?

Anas09:

You have a scuttle with Yahweh .What really is your problem with Yahweh?

How did he hurt you, pls do tell this animosity is deep.

I don't know about him o but I'll speak for myself..Eh ehem Because of Yahweh and Jesus U no Wan marry me