Jesus' Historicity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a number of non-religious documents that confirm Jesus existed in addition to his followers writings. It is unlikely they colluded to create a fictional character.

They document the stories about him and/or his followers, but aren’t written by contemporaries with first-hand knowledge.

+1. Well written.

There is zero surviving non-biblical contemporary evidence for a historical Jesus.

Overwhelming Consensus (≈95–99% of relevant experts)


Virtually all professional historians, biblical scholars, and classicists who specialize in the relevant period (whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or otherwise) accept that a historical Jesus existed, was born around 4–6 BCE, was baptized by John the Baptist, gathered followers, taught in Galilee, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 CE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Say what you want, but does anyone really think that through centuries, billions of people have followed a total myth?

Yes it is called indoctrination.

Look at the US Piggy is unfit and a criminal yet one third of the population thinks he's god.

the Bible and jesus are made up stories for god's sake the bible was rewritten in what 1947.....and in ..... and in ....

Every historian and scholar in the Western world, even atheist and agnostic historians and scholars, were indoctrinated?

And they are all stupid?

Wow. So the real experts are here, posting anonymous online?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With his alleged birthday coming up, let's discuss the person that is being celebrated. Present your information and argument for Jesus, fact or fiction.

Jesus was made up -- not of whole cloth, because a messiah was predicted. But those were the olden days, before modern science and running water and a bunch of stuff that we now take for granted.

Kids can't imagine life without the internet. Neither can I! Remember those old movies where people would wait impatiently for the mailman to come?

Your information/evidence for denying the historicity of Jesus is that when he lived, people didn’t have running water and modern science?

And then you add in something about the internet being embedded in our society, and watching old movies that had a mailman character in the movie.

Fascinating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With his alleged birthday coming up, let's discuss the person that is being celebrated. Present your information and argument for Jesus, fact or fiction.

Jesus was made up -- not of whole cloth, because a messiah was predicted. But those were the olden days, before modern science and running water and a bunch of stuff that we now take for granted.

Kids can't imagine life without the internet. Neither can I! Remember those old movies where people would wait impatiently for the mailman to come?

Your information/evidence for denying the historicity of Jesus is that when he lived, people didn’t have running water and modern science?

And then you add in something about the internet being embedded in our society, and watching old movies that had a mailman character in the movie.

Fascinating.

Yeah, I me think about the rich details of the lives of other Romans we have. We know tions of detail about the lives of Julius Caesar and Cicero and then lived decades earlier. We have texts of laws they wrote and speeches they gave. We actually know quite a bit about the life of Herod from the Bible from Roman sources (which is why the Massacre of the Innocents in the book of Matthew is disputed, we have TONS of records of things he did and that has no historical support).

I tend to agree there was some kind of historical basis. Messianic movements were pretty common at the time. That doesn't mean I agree there's historical evidence for the divinity of Jesus. Those are entirely separate concepts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With his alleged birthday coming up, let's discuss the person that is being celebrated. Present your information and argument for Jesus, fact or fiction.

Jesus was made up -- not of whole cloth, because a messiah was predicted. But those were the olden days, before modern science and running water and a bunch of stuff that we now take for granted.

Kids can't imagine life without the internet. Neither can I! Remember those old movies where people would wait impatiently for the mailman to come?

No he was not made up. His existence and the words he spoke have been proven. What is likely made up is that he was the son of God. Probably not. Then again, how did such an extraordinary person come to have such extraordinary advice on how to be a good person?

In any event he was an amazing man and if we all followed his teachings the world would be a better place.

Link?

Don't hold your breath waiting.

The guy who has spent his entire life studying the Bible thinks it’s true?

Shocker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a number of non-religious documents that confirm Jesus existed in addition to his followers writings. It is unlikely they colluded to create a fictional character.

They document the stories about him and/or his followers, but aren’t written by contemporaries with first-hand knowledge.

+1. Well written.

There is zero surviving non-biblical contemporary evidence for a historical Jesus.

Overwhelming Consensus (≈95–99% of relevant experts)


Virtually all professional historians, biblical scholars, and classicists who specialize in the relevant period (whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or otherwise) accept that a historical Jesus existed, was born around 4–6 BCE, was baptized by John the Baptist, gathered followers, taught in Galilee, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 CE.

They think he most likely existed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With his alleged birthday coming up, let's discuss the person that is being celebrated. Present your information and argument for Jesus, fact or fiction.

Jesus was made up -- not of whole cloth, because a messiah was predicted. But those were the olden days, before modern science and running water and a bunch of stuff that we now take for granted.

Kids can't imagine life without the internet. Neither can I! Remember those old movies where people would wait impatiently for the mailman to come?

No he was not made up. His existence and the words he spoke have been proven. What is likely made up is that he was the son of God. Probably not. Then again, how did such an extraordinary person come to have such extraordinary advice on how to be a good person?

In any event he was an amazing man and if we all followed his teachings the world would be a better place.

Link?

Don't hold your breath waiting.

And Ehrman undermines his own argument by stating something as true, when it is not in fact true. Not every scholar believes in a historical Jesus, and there are plenty of scholars now that have made well-reasoned arguments to the contrary. Ehrman also acknowledges there is not evidence, and then he makes his own specious speculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So who denies his existence?

This is called mythicism, and it is held by:
• Richard Carrier (PhD, controversial figure, strongly criticized)
• Robert Price (former Baptist minister, fringe scholar)
• A few online writers with no academic credentials

Even many atheist scholars strongly reject mythicism.
Bart Ehrman famously said mythicists:

“represent a small but vociferous group who are almost entirely untrained in historical method.”

Mythicism is considered by mainstream academics to be similar to:
• Shakespeare-wasn’t-real theories
• Ancient aliens explanations
• Flat-earth–type fringe arguments (not identical, but similar in methodology)

Why do virtually no historians deny Jesus existed?

Because from a purely historical standpoint:
• Paul’s letters, written within ~20 years of Jesus’ death, reference meeting Jesus’s brother James.
→ This is extremely difficult to explain if Jesus didn’t exist.
• Early Christian, Jewish, and Roman sources treat Jesus as a real executed man.
• The movement behaves like one that began around a charismatic teacher, not a fictional literary creation.

Historians will debate what Jesus said, who he claimed to be, and how stories about him developed—but not whether he lived.

Has anyone here denied that he lived?

Saying that we don’t have evidence isn’t saying he didn’t exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Paul is writing 20 years after Jesus’s death — extremely early by ancient-history standards.

Paul says explicitly that he:
• Met James, the brother of the Lord
• Met Peter
• Joined the movement that already existed shortly after the crucifixion

Historians ask:

How is there a movement centered around a non-existent person within a single generation, led by his “brother”?

Mythicists try to argue that “brother” meant “spiritual brother,” but this collapses because:
• Paul uses the term differently elsewhere
• It appears specifically in a context of identifying a biological family connection

This alone is one of mythicism’s biggest fatal blows.

Historians look for multiple independent attestations — stories that come from different lines of tradition.

For Jesus we have:
• Paul (independent of the Gospels)
• Mark (earliest Gospel)
• Q-like material (sayings source used by Matthew/Luke)
• M material and L material (unique to Matthew and Luke)
• Josephus
• Tacitus
• Early rabbinic traditions

These sources disagree on plenty — which proves they didn’t all copy each other.
But they agree that:
• Jesus was a real Jewish preacher
• He had followers
• He was executed by Roman authority

When multiple hostile or indifferent sources confirm a person existed, historians treat it as strong evidence.

Ancient writers rarely invent things that weaken their own case.

For Jesus:
• Being executed as a criminal is not something early Christians would invent.
• His family not fully believing in him early on.
• His baptism by John (implies inferiority).

These are embarrassing, meaning historically likely.

A mythic figure normally has:
• Glorious birth narrative
• Death in battle
• Triumph

Jesus has:
• Obscure origins
• A humiliating execution

That’s the opposite of typical myth creation.

If Jesus never existed, why did a Jewish sect form instantly around the belief that he was the Messiah?

Mythic heroes usually develop over centuries (e.g., Hercules, Romulus).
But Jesus’s movement exploded:
• In Jerusalem, where he supposedly lived
• Within a few years of his death

Movements based on nonexistent people don’t spring up immediately among people who supposedly knew them.

Here’s the harsh academic truth:
Mythicism fails the basic rules of ancient historical method.

Historians ask:
• What is the simplest explanation that fits the evidence?
• Does this explanation require extra assumptions?

Mythicism requires:
• Reinterpreting Paul unusually
• Dismissing all embarrassing material
• Suggesting coordinated literary invention without motive
• Ignoring how Jewish messianic movements actually worked

It becomes more complicated than simply accepting that a preacher lived and was executed.

When Carrier and Price present mythicist arguments, historians from:
• Princeton
• Yale
• Harvard
• Brown
• Cambridge
• Oxford

…all say the same thing:

“This isn’t how ancient history works.”

Mythicism relies on special pleading, hyper-skepticism, and reading texts against normal linguistic/historical usage.

That’s why scholars in the field consider it fringe.

Tacitus (Roman historian) writes about:
• “Christus” who was “executed under Pontius Pilate”
• The origin of the movement in Judea

Tacitus hated Christians.
He had no reason to repeat Christian myths — he got his information from Roman archives or non-Christian sources.

Josephus (Jewish historian) also mentions Jesus twice.
Even removing Christian edits, the core reference remains widely accepted.

Hostile witnesses rarely treat fictional characters as real recent people.

Bart Ehrman (agnostic/atheist):

“There is no serious historian who doubts Jesus existed.”

Paula Fredriksen (Jewish, non-Christian):

“I don’t know any full professor of ancient history who doubts his existence.”

Maurice Casey (agnostic):

“Mythicism is an embarrassment to real scholarship.”

Michael Grant (secular classical historian):

“The denial of Jesus’s existence is not tenable.”

When even scholars opposed to Christian theology uphold his existence, that’s telling.

Modern mythicism arose from:
• 19th-century anti-Christian activism
• Non-scholarly writers
• People pushing sociopolitical agendas

It didn’t come out of universities or trained historians.

That origin matters.

Why Scholars Reject Mythicism

Because it requires ignoring:
• Early eyewitness-proximate sources
• Embarrassing historical details
• Hostile sources referencing Jesus
• Historical method
• How ancient movements form

…and instead replacing them with a complex conspiracy-like theory without evidence.

The simplest, strongest-supported conclusion is:
A Jewish preacher named Jesus lived and was executed.

Everything else Christians claim is a separate debate — miracles, theology, divinity — but the man himself?
For historians, that part is not controversial.

We have stories about him and/or his followers, but none are written by non-religious contemporaries with first-hand knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a number of non-religious documents that confirm Jesus existed in addition to his followers writings. It is unlikely they colluded to create a fictional character.

They document the stories about him and/or his followers, but aren’t written by contemporaries with first-hand knowledge.

+1. Well written.

There is zero surviving non-biblical contemporary evidence for a historical Jesus.

Overwhelming Consensus (≈95–99% of relevant experts)


Virtually all professional historians, biblical scholars, and classicists who specialize in the relevant period (whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or otherwise) accept that a historical Jesus existed, was born around 4–6 BCE, was baptized by John the Baptist, gathered followers, taught in Galilee, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 CE.

They think he most likely existed.

Virtually all professional historians, biblical scholars, and classicists who specialize in the relevant period (whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or otherwise) accept that a historical Jesus existed, was born around 4–6 BCE, was baptized by John the Baptist, gathered followers, taught in Galilee, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 CE.

Are you a professional historian, biblical scholar, or classicist who specializes in the relevant period?

If not, why are you speaking for them?

Among tenured or professionally employed professors of biblical studies, classics, or ancient history at major universities, the number who openly support mythicism is effectively zero. Even strong critics of traditional Christianity (e.g., Bart Ehrman, Hector Avalos [deceased], Zeba Crook) consider mythicism historically untenable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With his alleged birthday coming up, let's discuss the person that is being celebrated. Present your information and argument for Jesus, fact or fiction.

Jesus would be disgusted by MAGA

Jesus was a socialist

The Gospels were written long after Jesus's death and are unreliable, contradictory, and heavily influenced by theological agendas rather than historical accuracy

Some theories suggest that the Jesus story was created by combining elements from various pre-Christian pagan mystery cults, such as Mithras and Osiris

Add in the well known story about the fabled founder of Rome, Romulus (especially in a Roman controlled province). Both the narratives of Jesus and Romulus feature a hero of divine parentage (Mars/God the Father), whose infancy is imperiled by a jealous ruler (Amulius/Herod) but who is saved and raised in humble circumstances. Both feature tales of prophesied death as part of a divine plan, after death their bodies disappear, and they are then seen after death. They both ascend to heaven.

There are at least fourteen independent sources for the historicity of Jesus from multiple authors within a century of the crucifixion of Jesus[21] such as the letters of Paul (contemporary of Jesus who personally knew eyewitnesses since the mid 30s AD),[note 5][note 6][22] the gospels (as biographies on historical people similar Xenophon’s Memoirs of Socrates),[23] and non-Christian sources such as Josephus (Jewish historian and commander in Galilee)[24] and Tacitus (Roman historian and Senator).[25][26] Multiple independent sources affirm that Jesus actually had family.[22][27]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Tacitus is hearsay and is not evidence for a historical Jesus. Josephus = one is an interpolation (not evidence for a historical Jesus) and the other is an outright forgery added by later Christians.

Paul speaks of a cosmic Jesus, not a historical one. It's also telling that none of the information from the community he is responding to has survived the later orthodox Christian scrubbing they did of any information that they considered heretical.

The gospels are not eyewitness accounts, nor are they based on any oral history.

There goes all your contemporary sources.

Add in that Philo is completely silent on Jesus (or Christianity altogether = a small sect that had no relevance).

Next?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With his alleged birthday coming up, let's discuss the person that is being celebrated. Present your information and argument for Jesus, fact or fiction.

Jesus was made up -- not of whole cloth, because a messiah was predicted. But those were the olden days, before modern science and running water and a bunch of stuff that we now take for granted.

Kids can't imagine life without the internet. Neither can I! Remember those old movies where people would wait impatiently for the mailman to come?

No he was not made up. His existence and the words he spoke have been proven. What is likely made up is that he was the son of God. Probably not. Then again, how did such an extraordinary person come to have such extraordinary advice on how to be a good person?

In any event he was an amazing man and if we all followed his teachings the world would be a better place.

Link?

Don't hold your breath waiting.

And Ehrman undermines his own argument by stating something as true, when it is not in fact true. Not every scholar believes in a historical Jesus, and there are plenty of scholars now that have made well-reasoned arguments to the contrary. Ehrman also acknowledges there is not evidence, and then he makes his own specious speculation.

Exactly. No evidence. Just stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who denies his existence?

This is called mythicism, and it is held by:
• Richard Carrier (PhD, controversial figure, strongly criticized)
• Robert Price (former Baptist minister, fringe scholar)
• A few online writers with no academic credentials

Even many atheist scholars strongly reject mythicism.
Bart Ehrman famously said mythicists:

“represent a small but vociferous group who are almost entirely untrained in historical method.”

Mythicism is considered by mainstream academics to be similar to:
• Shakespeare-wasn’t-real theories
• Ancient aliens explanations
• Flat-earth–type fringe arguments (not identical, but similar in methodology)

Why do virtually no historians deny Jesus existed?

Because from a purely historical standpoint:
• Paul’s letters, written within ~20 years of Jesus’ death, reference meeting Jesus’s brother James.
→ This is extremely difficult to explain if Jesus didn’t exist.
• Early Christian, Jewish, and Roman sources treat Jesus as a real executed man.
• The movement behaves like one that began around a charismatic teacher, not a fictional literary creation.

Historians will debate what Jesus said, who he claimed to be, and how stories about him developed—but not whether he lived.

Has anyone here denied that he lived?

Saying that we don’t have evidence isn’t saying he didn’t exist.

What information we do have points primarily to he didn't exist. It's all myth. A tall tale that was fabricated.

[Anonymous]

Do your own homework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a number of non-religious documents that confirm Jesus existed in addition to his followers writings. It is unlikely they colluded to create a fictional character.

They document the stories about him and/or his followers, but aren’t written by contemporaries with first-hand knowledge.

+1. Well written.

There is zero surviving non-biblical contemporary evidence for a historical Jesus.

Overwhelming Consensus (≈95–99% of relevant experts)


Virtually all professional historians, biblical scholars, and classicists who specialize in the relevant period (whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or otherwise) accept that a historical Jesus existed, was born around 4–6 BCE, was baptized by John the Baptist, gathered followers, taught in Galilee, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 CE.

They think he most likely existed.

Virtually all professional historians, biblical scholars, and classicists who specialize in the relevant period (whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or otherwise) accept that a historical Jesus existed, was born around 4–6 BCE, was baptized by John the Baptist, gathered followers, taught in Galilee, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 CE.

Are you a professional historian, biblical scholar, or classicist who specializes in the relevant period?

If not, why are you speaking for them?

Among tenured or professionally employed professors of biblical studies, classics, or ancient history at major universities, the number who openly support mythicism is effectively zero. Even strong critics of traditional Christianity (e.g., Bart Ehrman, Hector Avalos [deceased], Zeba Crook) consider mythicism historically untenable.

Obviously all of the Bible “scholars” believe he existed.