rabzy: Because you can't find secular historians talking about Jesus is no prove that he does not exist. Jesus lived in a tiny areA of a largely insignficant part of the roman empire.

The jews had no reason to publicise him, they hated him and if he did not exist, the jews would have been the first to raise the alarm when they were trying to cruSh early xtianity.

Pilate was a roman official, the whole record about him is less than that for JeSus. You can hardly find anything about him. In fact for many yrs xtics said he never existed because the only record of Him was in the Bible until they saw a tiny mention of him elsewhere

Can you back this up? Pilate was a roman governor so of course they had to be something about..

mkmyers45: Can you provide proof? Where is the without the bible proof?

Quran

Saint paris:
Quran

Sharrap there

forget your X and Y and believe that the greatest man called yeshua in hebrew existed and he was speaking harmaique his mother language

forget your X and Y the greatest man called jeshua in hebrew existed and he was speaking harmaique his mother language

mkmyers45: Can you back this up? Pilate was a roman governor so of course they had to be something about..

As I said the province of Judea was not a very important outpost, it was for second-rate Roman officials, there were better, more populous and commercial nerve centres where important diplomats are posted to.

The Evidence of Pilate's existence at least by those who were alive during his time where by the four gospel writers, Josephus and Philo who are jews, and lastly Tacitus. Tacitus was the only Roman during his time who recorded something about Pilate and even he got the official title wrong.

One of the physical evidence of Pilate's existence is the discovery of a stone which mentioned his name and gave him his proper title.

Even the only Roman Mention of Pilate i.e the one by Tacitus also mentioned Jesus Christ, the Historian said Jesus was put to death by one of their officials Pilate. So if this statement is discarded as fraud by those who don't believe in Jesus as a real person, then that automatically destroys the existence of Pilate by any offical/roman records.

So where are all the thousands of reports pilates sent to rome, the edict of his appointments, the official tax records, all the building projects and activities he engaged in as recorded by Josephus and Philo. Where are the governmental records, probably going into thousands. They are all Gone, Lost to antiquity, the only physical evidence of him is that Stone.

So those who wants official records of a vilified and hated prophet, from an unknown or unimportant area of the Roman empire and written by a roman court official or Historian knows little about ancient records, they still have a lot of digging to do.

All we know about Socrates are from what his discples such as plato and xenophone wrote, aristotle is not a direct disciple and only mentions him in passing frequently, now if you read the accounts of the three of them, you would wonder if they were talking of the same person but Socrates Lives.
All we know about Jesus were numerous accounts by several of his disciples and family members and also a lot of followers who some few years after Jesus Died where ready to die for him and the Roman records showed that many were killed because they would rather die than disobey their master but despite all this Jesus Did not Live.

That is some crazy and unfounded bias.

What historical evidence do we have that Sango, Oranmiyan, Bashorun Gaa, Soun, Nri etc. Most of the histories of African Personalities, our kings and warriors were not recorded anywhere, they were oral traditions passed down through the centuries by families trained to master such histories and pass them down....so while we might not believe all we hear they did, but it is only a troublemaker that start saying all these people did not exist.

But if you want evidence beyond any doubt or reasonable doubt then hardly would you find it in many ancient records, what records do we have of most people's forefathers.

When Africans were taken to the US and Co as slaves, there were many records taken, merchant records of sales and ownerships, most have been lost and that was just about 400 years ago and at a time when writing was no longer for a select elite.

rabzy:

As I said the province of Judea was not a very important outpost, it was for second-rate Roman officials, there were better, more populous and commercial nerve centres where important diplomats are posted to.

The Evidence of Pilate's existence at least by those who were alive during his time where by the four gospel writers, Josephus and Philo who are jews, and lastly Tacitus. Tacitus was the only Roman during his time who recorded something about Pilate and even he got the official title wrong.

One of the physical evidence of Pilate's existence is the discovery of a stone which mentioned his name and gave him his proper title.

Even the only Roman Mention of Pilate i.e the one by Tacitus also mentioned Jesus Christ, the Historian said Jesus was put to death by one of their officials Pilate. So if this statement is discarded as fraud by those who don't believe in Jesus as a real person, then that automatically destroys the existence of Pilate by any offical/roman records.

So where are all the thousands of reports pilates sent to rome, the edict of his appointments, the official tax records, all the building projects and activities he engaged in as recorded by Josephus and Philo. Where are the governmental records, probably going into thousands. They are all Gone, Lost to antiquity, the only physical evidence of him is that Stone.

So those who wants official records of a vilified and hated prophet, from an unknown or unimportant area of the Roman empire and written by a roman court official or Historian knows little about ancient records, they still have a lot of digging to do.

my friend,this is one of the falsest(forgive my blunder of grammar) statements i have ever read.first it is a big error to assume syria was an insignificant outpost.if it was that insignificant,why would caligula be enraged at their refusal to put his statue in the temple as a god?why would augustus specifically send quirinius to conduct a census after deposing archelaus?
josephus flavius was definitely not alive during pilate's lifetime.he was captured by the romans in the revolt of 66AD and didnt write testimonium flavonium till around 93AD.tacitus also was not alive during the lifetime of pilate.he was born around 52-53AD and didnt mention pilate till around 112AD.the pilate stone is an evidence that pilate existed but history has long mentioned his name in relation to events.there is an account that he was removed as governor in judea for the treatment he meted to some jews.he was regarded as a brutal being.
as for jesus,no single historian mentioned him during his supposed lifetime.philo of alexandria lived from 20BC to about 50AD,a period which spans the entire lifetime of the bible jesus.but he didnt mention a single word about jesus.take into account that philo was very religious and is recorded to have visited capernaum frequently which is close to nazareth and is the city where jesus supposedly changed water to wine

Hello

Delafruita:
my friend,this is one of the falsest(forgive my blunder of grammar) statements i have ever read.first it is a big error to assume syria was an insignificant outpost.if it was that insignificant,why would caligula be enraged at their refusal to put his statue in the temple as a god?why would augustus specifically send quirinius to conduct a census after deposing archelaus?
josephus flavius was definitely not alive during pilate's lifetime.he was captured by the romans in the revolt of 66AD and didnt write testimonium flavonium till around 93AD.tacitus also was not alive during the lifetime of pilate.he was born around 52-53AD and didnt mention pilate till around 112AD.the pilate stone is an evidence that pilate existed but history has long mentioned his name in relation to events.there is an account that he was removed as governor in judea for the treatment he meted to some jews.he was regarded as a brutal being.
as for jesus,no single historian mentioned him during his supposed lifetime.philo of alexandria lived from 20BC to about 50AD,a period which spans the entire lifetime of the bible jesus.but he didnt mention a single word about jesus.take into account that philo was very religious and is recorded to have visited capernaum frequently which is close to nazareth and is the city where jesus supposedly changed water to wine

I never said Syria was an unimportant province, syria was a very important province but Judea was not. It was the different factions of Jewish religious hotbeds who were bent on killing themselves that led to rome's intervention in Judea. One of these factions asked for rome's help in quelling other opposers and also in revolting against the seleucid rulers. Rome was very interested in getting the syrian seleucid dynasty and any revolt against them was welcome. That was what brought rome into Judea and they annexed it to the roman province of syria. Due to its unimportance it was allowed to have its own Kings and ruled directly by Natives unlike other important provinces.
Eventually due to the ineptitude of these kings and the constant religious bickering an revolt in Judea, it was made into a province of its own but because of its unimportance it was not ruled by former senators by by a prefect/proconsul who are of a lower rank than the senatorial legates. Iudaea was not a Senatorial province, nor exactly an Imperial province, but instead was a "satellite of Syria" governed by a prefect who was a knight of the equestrian order (as was Roman Egypt), not a former consul or praetor of senatorial rank. Pontius Pilate was one of these prefects, from 26 to 36 CE

The provinces ruled by the senators were the most important, the less important ones were ruled by prefects/procurators of the equestrian order and they rule with the help of local client kings who know the custom of the people and then maintain peace and order for the sake of collecting taxes for the emperor.

The Roman emperor is always worshipped as a divinity and any people who refuses to acknowledge this is seen to be rebellious, that was one of the reasons why the christians were persecuted all over rome, their refusal to worship the emperor and make offerings to him led to their wholesale slaughtering. So Caligula would have done it to any people who refuse. It was tantamount to open rebellion. Then Judah has been known as a place of rebellion, strife, bickering and guerilla warfare so though it was adding next to zero to the imperial purse but its religious issues and refusal to accept any foreigner as king were always a front burner. It also controlled the land and sea route to the food basket of the roman empire i.e egypt, so any problem along the route would hurt the empire badly. From 70 CE until 135 CE Iudaea's rebelliousness required a governing Roman legate capable of commanding legions.

Remember that even the capital of the province of Judea was not even in Jerusalem it was located in caesarea. Census taking was something common in the Roman empire, it was required for taxation purposes, in any country or state if a census is to be taken, even the most insignificant town is also counted.

Pilate ruled Judea between 26 ce to 37 ce. Josephus was born 37 CE, so his lifetime definitely overlapped that of Pilate. Pilate was deposed in 36/37 ce he did not die that year. We don't know when he died. So Josephus was alive when pilate was alive. The same might apply to tacitus too.

Most records of ancient people were not written by people who were alive when they lived, so this does not prove anything. The history you mentioned about pilate being cruel was made by Philo who was a jew in alexandria, he was not a roman official. Where are the contemporary roman historians of pilate who wrote about him, and how much did they write about him. Philo was a jew in faraway egypt writing about the plight of Jews in his Homeland, why should he concern himself about a another Jew who claims to be the messiah, there has been several people who have claimed to be messiahs in Judea, in fact it was the surest way to garner followers. so why would philo hundreds of miles away write about a professed messiah whose 'stardom' lasted just 3 and half years.

If he arrives in capernaum months after the event and he heard and refuses to believe or just would not write about it, does that mean Jesus never existed. Did he write about all the crazy religious zealots that judea was never short of, Jesus was an intinerant preacher, who the lowly people of Judea follows, why should an important personnel like Philo concern himself about him. The fact of Jesus was made profound by the way his teachings blossomed after he died, the fact that his followers were ready to die for his ideals.

Josephus lived at a time when people who saw Jesus, who knew Jesus were still alive,so it was easy to either verify whether he was fictitious or not. Just a few years after his death, whole families were ready to die for him, you think any fictitious character could pull that off. If the myth of Jesus was created by his apostles, what do they stand to gain, when they have so much to lose and which they lost including their lives.

The followers of Jesus were ostracized and persecuted by both Jews and Romans, you think any lie would withstand such scrutiny and persecution. The early believers saw Jesus and most others knew those who personally knew Jesus, they saw the lives apostles lived and it was not a life based on lies, it was a life that was put to the ultimate test and it survived, not by one person but by hundreds of people who were ready to lay down their lives for it.

It is as crazy as saying Mohammed never lived, his history was written mostly by his followers, but the passion, fire and zeal it created cannot be created by a lie.

you recall that the jews were the first converts of christianity and it was a major cause of trouble to the Jewish leaders, the Sanhedrin, if Jesus was not real, the myth would have been destroyed by the Jews themselves who were voracious writers, they would have written volumes to dissuade the masses from following his disciples.

Josephus made mention of the fact that after the roman armies withdrew from Jerusalem, the christians fled the city into the mountains as instructed by their lord christ. This instruction was given by Jesus to his followers and they heeded it and saved themselves.
Also after Herod Antipas suffered a resounding military defeat, the Jewish historian Josephus, writing in 93 C.E., said: “To some of the Jews the destruction of Herod’s army seemed to be divine vengeance, and certainly a just vengeance, for his treatment of John, surnamed the Baptist. For Herod had put him to death, though he was a good man and had exhorted the Jews to lead righteous lives, to practise justice towards their fellows and piety towards God.”10 Thus Josephus confirms the Bible account that John the Baptizer was a righteous man who preached repentance and who was executed by Herod. Should this also be discounted because he wrote it some 50 years after the death of John but he was writing to an audience who could still check the facts.

A historian writes history and reputable historians heck what they write. The consensus among modern day historians was that Josephus was a reputable historian, he had some facts wrong (it was not a jet age, where everything is easily checkable and there are proper storage of documents and files)

The New Encyclopædia Britannica states: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.”—(1976), Macropædia, Vol. 10, p. 145.


Justin Martyr, writing in the middle of the second century wrote in reference to the death of Jesus: “That these things did happen, you can ascertain from the Acts of Pontius Pilate.”14 In addition, according to Justin Martyr, these same records mentioned Jesus’ miracles, regarding which he says: “That He did those things, you can learn from the Acts of Pontius Pilate.”15 True, these “Acts,” or official records, no longer exist. But they evidently did exist in the second century, and Justin Martyr confidently challenged his readers to check them to verify the truth of what he said. Take note that justin Martyr was writing to the emperor and he could not have been spewing forth lies and referring to none existent documents.
He was eventually beheaded for causing subversion and that is how we get the word for martyr till date.

one simple question,why is that all those who studied the testimonium flavanium never quoted the paragraph about jesus till eusebius "miraculously" discovered it in the 4th century?

If the records of the acts of pilate, if all his tax returns, his edicts, the letters he wrote to his superiors then those saying the lack of secular written evidence of Jesus shows he does not exist are the very very biased.

We need to ask what percentage of ancient records are available to us today. There are many books, novels that were written just a hundred years or so ago and all we have are just few copies which are now collectors items. If those books were all lost, does it prove that those books were never written.

you have not answered my question.before eusebius,various scholars had studied the antiquities and never mentioned the testimonium flavanium.manuscripts before eusebius didnt contain the testimonium flavanium.for example,No form of the Testimonium Flavianum is cited in the extant works of Justin Martyr, Theophilus Antiochenus, Melito of Sardis, Minucius Felix, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Pseudo-Justin, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Methodius, or Lactantius. According to Michael Hardwick in Josephus as an Historical Source in Patristic Literature through Eusebius , each of these authors shows familiarity with the works of Josephus.it is widely believed that the testimonium flavanium was inserted by eusebius into the antiquities of josephus to give credibility to jesus

Delafruita:
very ridiculous.muslims use the hijrah calendar and that doesnt make you believe in mohammad's migration from makkah to abyssinia or its significance

Calendar existed before emergence of Islam. Islam itself never denied Jesus. The simplest proof of Jesus existence is calendar. Every dating sets around him. BC or AD.

Joagbaje:

Calendar existed before emergence of Islam. Islam itself never denied Jesus. The simplest proof of Jesus existence is calendar. Every dating sets around him. BC or AD.

pastor joe,calendar existed before the creation of the jesus myth

Its quite funny to know that all the people in the link that mentioned him never met him physically but are just putting down what they heard decades and centuries after his death.

I personnally believe he existed, but thats all.
He was a normal man with a human father who was inspired by the many revolutionarists before him but took a very different and quite intelligent approach(non violence, gentleness and tolerance).
Obviously that approach has paid off.

But if u study the new test, u'll notice alot of inconguencies or rather differences in the synoptic gospels of matt, mark, luke and john.
It only goes to tell u that there is no such holy spirit guiding them in their writing. They are only humans most probably exaggerating the works of their master to make it seem more appealing.

Please accept the truth.
It might hurt but its for the good and progress of the world.

inurmind: Its quite funny to know that all the people in the link that mentioned him never met him physically but are just putting down what they heard decades and centuries after his death.

I personnally believe he existed, but thats all.
He was a normal man with a human father who was inspired by the many revolutionarists before him but took a very different and quite intelligent approach(non violence, gentleness and tolerance).
Obviously that approach has paid off.

But if u study the new test, u'll notice alot of inconguencies or rather differences in the synoptic gospels of matt, mark, luke and john.
It only goes to tell u that there is no such holy spirit guiding them in their writing. They are only humans most probably exaggerating the works of their master to make it seem more appealing.

Please accept the truth.
It might hurt but its for the good and progress of the world.

How sure are you that it's not your prejudiced mental disposition that makes it seem less appealing to you.

What can you say about writers who wrote about Jesus hundreds of years prior to his birth, were they not inspired?

But your father and you exist. That is a proof right there.

vb0mb: Did my great-great-great grand father exist? I dont know because there is no written record about him.
@op, hw ar u sure u are existing?

Delafruita: you have not answered my question.before eusebius,various scholars had studied the antiquities and never mentioned the testimonium flavanium.manuscripts before eusebius didnt contain the testimonium flavanium.for example,No form of the Testimonium Flavianum is cited in the extant works of Justin Martyr, Theophilus Antiochenus, Melito of Sardis, Minucius Felix, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Pseudo-Justin, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Methodius, or Lactantius. According to Michael Hardwick in Josephus as an Historical Source in Patristic Literature through Eusebius , each of these authors shows familiarity with the works of Josephus.it is widely believed that the testimonium flavanium was inserted by eusebius into the antiquities of josephus to give credibility to jesus

It is not widely believed that the testimonium flavanium was inserted by eusebius into the antiquities of Josephus, what is widely believed or accepted is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to interpolation.

There are other passages in Josephus apart from the testimonium flavanum which mentions Jesus, while there have been arguments also against their authenticity, these passages are even more widely accepted (than the testimonium) by scholars that these references were actually made by Josephus.

Even the Josephus that we have assumed to be historical, if not for christian scholars he would have been lost to anitiquity, Josephus was a Jew who led part of the Jewish army, and he was also worked for the Romans as an interpreter and was a close friend and confidant of three roman emperors, he was even given state pensions by these emperors, what secular Roman writing or even Jewish writing of antiquity do we have to show his existence....i believe none except his own works which survived through copies made by Christians.

The fact is that most historical persons even the very popular ones can not be proven to have existed if subjected to the same scrutiny as done to the historicity of Jesus.

rabzy:

It is not widely believed that the testimonium flavanium was inserted by eusebius into the antiquities of Josephus, what is widely believed or accepted is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to interpolation.

There are other passages in Josephus apart from the testimonium flavanum which mentions Jesus, while there have been arguments also against their authenticity, these passages are even more widely accepted (than the testimonium) by scholars that these references were actually made by Josephus.

Even the Josephus that we have assumed to be historical, if not for christian scholars he would have been lost to anitiquity, Josephus was a Jew who led part of the Jewish army, and he was also worked for the Romans as an interpreter and was a close friend and confidant of three roman emperors, he was even given state pensions by these emperors, what secular Roman writing or even Jewish writing of antiquity do we have to show his existence....i believe none except his own works which survived through copies made by Christians.

The fact is that most historical persons even the very popular ones can not be proven to have existed if subjected to the same scrutiny as done to the historicity of Jesus.

Are you sure about that abi na different one be that?

proof that edisson existed without using science. LMAO