Did Jesus exist?

Why weren't the orginal writing of the gospels preserved? If they were translated, then the translator must have had access to them (otherwise he would have nothing to translate). So why would the translator throw out the originals? Or do they still exist.

If they do exist, where are they?
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
The earliest copies are fragments, then whole books (book of Luke), the evidence indicating they were written between 50 and 80 A.D.
Click to expand...

IceAge, any chance you could let me know where I can research this evidence? I'm not being sarcastic either, I really want to know. Thanks.
 
"Historically, Pontius Pilate's title was thought to have been procurator. Tacitus speaks of him as such. However, an inscription on a limestone block — apparently a dedication to Tiberius Caesar Augustus — that was discovered in 1961 in the ruins of an amphitheater called Caesarea Palaestina refers to Pilate as "prefect of Judeaea". Archaeologists believe it to be genuine and settles the argument about the historicity of Pontius Pilate. (See Pilate Stone)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate

I found the above interesting. Apparantly, there is proof to the existence of Pontius Pilate.

To me, this is fairly signifigant.
 
"There is so much evidence that the Gospels were written in the Second Century that it’s hard to believe that the vast majority of scholars still stick stubbornly to the belief that they are a First Century production. The earliest known Christian writings are the letters of the Apostle Paul, dated sometime between 48 and 58 A.D.; but there are no copies of these original documents [1], and there are many questions about their authenticity [2]. Some people believe that the earliest versions of the four Gospels were written between 60 A.D. (Mark) and 100 A.D. (John), but there is no proof of these early dates, and some scholars believe that all the Gospels were written after 100 A.D. (e.g., Acharya, 1999; Ellegard, 1999; Keeler, 1965; Koester, 1980; Wheless, 1990). Here is some evidence to support this theory:



* The first epistle of Clement of Rome (c 64-96 A.D.), which is reasonably dated to 95 A.D., makes no mention of any of the Gospels although it does mention the epistles of Paul. This is a strange omission had the Gospels been circulating at that time.
* The Gospel of Luke borrows heavily from material in Josephus’ (37–100 A.D.) later works [3], especially Life and Against Apion, implying that the Gospel of Luke was not composed (much less published) until after 100 A.D., since Josephus’ later works weren’t published before 95 A.D.
* None of the Gospels are mentioned in the letters of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, which can be dated from 110 A.D.
* Archeologically, the earliest dated portion of any gospel is a tiny fragment consisting of a few words from what could be the Gospel of John, and this dates to 125 AD (Funk & Hoover, 1993, p. 9).
 
nds1 said:
1) Did Jesus exist in the physical sense.
Click to expand...
Probably. Or, at least someone with a similar name. Since "Jesus" is just a bad translation of "Yeshoua", or "Joshua", it may have been a fairly common name.

2) Did Jesus exist as the Son of God, implying supernatural law-defying abilities.
Click to expand...
No. Since there is all likeliness no god(s), said person cannot be the son of a nonexistent being.
Jesus was just a man, a simple man of modest means; a philosopher of sorts, who was apparently quite a charismatic leader. He was handed into the authorities' hands by his closest friends when he did not go far enough with his revolutionary rhetoric. They needed a revolutionary, not a philosopher; a Lenin, not a Marx.
What's more, his death was well-deserved. He betrayed not only his people, but even worse, he betrayed Rome, and he betrayed Caesar Tiberius. He let his charisma go to his head, and in so doing, he declared himself the son of a god, something that not only was heresy to his native Judaism, but also was in breach of Roman Law.
 
There is one thing that can't be denied: Jesus had an enormous effect on the people around him. The Christian following became so great that Constantine actually legalized Christianity, himself being a pagan. The Christian following must have been huge then, and probably was growing.

To me, one way to get a huge following is to perform miracles. It seems like the only way a man could create a new religion is by performing miracles and verifying his word and teachings. If Jesus didn't perform miracles, then the following would probably have died down, and went away eventually.

It's true that no historians or people who were around during Jesus' time wrote about Jesus or his miracles. But why would they? They would be burned at the stake or tortured by the Romans some other way. If I were a famous historian from that era, and had a priviledged life, why would I risk losing all that in even mentioning Jesus and being executed?
 
nds1 said:
There is one thing that can't be denied: Jesus had an enormous effect on the people around him. The Christian following became so great that Constantine actually legalized Christianity, himself being a pagan. The Christian following must have been huge then, and probably was growing.

To me, one way to get a huge following is to perform miracles. It seems like the only way a man could create a new religion is by performing miracles and verifying his word and teachings. If Jesus didn't perform miracles, then the following would probably have died down, and went away eventually.

It's true that no historians or people who were around during Jesus' time wrote about Jesus or his miracles. But why would they? They would be burned at the stake or tortured by the Romans some other way. If I were a famous historian from that era, and had a priviledged life, why would I risk losing all that in even mentioning Jesus and being executed?
Click to expand...

I think this is a pretty weak argument. As far as I know the Romans allowed the Jewish People to practise their own religions. That not one eyewitness account exists of Jesus Christ is astonishing.

I think Constantine was on his way to fight a battle one day. He saw something in the shape of a Cross in the sky, most likely a Meteor.

When he was victorious in the Battle, he turned the Roman Empire to Christianity, pretty much whether his people wanted to turn to it or not.
They werent given a choice in the matter.
If it wasnt for this event Christanity could possibly have been a cult religion today practised by a very small minority. Most of the Western World today probably wouldent even have heard of Jesus Christ.

Thousands of years later the people of the newly discovered America's were given the same ultimatum. Convert or Die. Christanity was never spread anywhere through Preaching, only by the Sword.
 
Last edited:
TheVisitor said:
If you actually saw a flying teapot....
If it was real and you were the only one that saw it....that particular time.....

Would your lack of proving it, not having any evidence to provide to the "skeptics, like say a photo, or witness, or some tangible remains make the fact the teapot did fly.......in any way whatsoever, any less real?
Click to expand...

It would be an Extraordinary Claim that a Teapot Flew. You'd have to have to have some Extraordinary Evidence to back it up.
 
Monsta said:
I think this is a pretty weak argument. As far as I know the Romans allowed the Jewish People to practise their own religions. That not one eyewitness account exists of Jesus Christ is astonishing.

I think Constantine was on his way to fight a battle one day. He saw something in the shape of a Cross in the sky, most likely a Meteor.

When he was victorious in the Battle, he turned the Roman Empire to Christianity, pretty much whether his people wanted to turn to it or not.
They werent given a choice in the matter.
If it wasnt for this event Christanity could possibly have been a cult religion today practised by a very small majority. Most of the Western World today probably wouldent even have heard of Jesus Christ.

Thousands of years later the people of the newly discovered America's were given the same ultimatum. Convert or Die. Christanity was never spread anywhere through Preaching, only by the Sword.
Click to expand...

I see what your saying.
 
nds1: There is one thing that can't be denied: Jesus had an enormous effect on the people around him.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: I disagree. None of his peers ever wrote about him. As the story goes, he didn't even have that much influence on his family. But, then again, this is based on the assumption that he existed. He is characterized as the underdog but then rises to fame and glory as a sacrificial lamb for the world. Kinda like the story of Rocky Balboa.

Later generations exalted Jesus more than his own generation. And why is that? Because he wasn't a real person but a character in a story book. People wrote about him, then the story became popular and widespread. Still no Jesus. Still no salvation. Still no god.
 
Monsta: It would be an Extraordinary Claim that a Teapot Flew. You'd have to have to have some Extraordinary Evidence to back it up.[/QUOTE]

*************
M*W: Well, I have seen a teapot fly with my own eyes, and I'm not kidding. The evidence for it was the gash in my ex-husband's forehead when I threw it at him. It was truly airborne at the time and was no supernatural phenomenon.
 
The word "Elohim" in the Hebrew, means "the self-existence," all by Himself.
Nothing existed before Him.
He was all the existence there ever was, the self-existent One: "El, Elah, Elohim," means the "all-sufficient, all-powerful, Almighty, self-existent One."
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. Guess Hebrew aint your thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top