People who doubt the historicity of Jesus Christ?

Do you doubt world history in general which discusses the human past? The past that cannot be changed but is fixed and permanent in human culture and effect and influence?

All an unbeliever is saying is that they do not believe history books.

So I read these endless questions about whether Jesus ever lived I wonder how much of your world history do you doubt with other recorded human events?

Why do you spend so much of your time doubting the actual existence of Jesus Christ as historical truth and fact while accepting all other events as true?

Only in recent times have prominent displays for sceptics been promoted to try and influence a present generation of children that what is taught in history books is not true. I'm talking about history books that were written some 50 or sixty years ago and not this rewritten history that is politically or spiritually correct.

Update:

Thanks to all who answered.

Thanks for words of faith by Metal4God, Scotsgirl60,grandmother63,servant, and Maryalice, and Paul C.

Hisbycus I suppose this explains how the exacting records of the Romans led to Christianity becoming their official religion for Rome hundreds of years later.

Samsupplier of Ketamine (what is ketamine?) The Jewish scribes in ancient days recorded their scriptures called the torah which is what the old testament is in the bible. That is history. The link below is Israel's ministry of foreign affairs that has in their time line bible days in the old testament. It is the link below. You see with the Jews religion and history go hand in hand. This is true for Christians as well and yes we do see the new testament as history too.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/Histo...

Update 2:

Thanks to all who answered.

Thanks for words of faith by Metal4God, Scotsgirl60,grandmother63,servant, and Maryalice, and Paul C.

Hisbycus I suppose this explains how the exacting records of the Romans led to Christianity becoming their official religion for Rome hundreds of years later.

Samsupplier of Ketamine (what is ketamine?) The Jewish scribes in ancient days recorded their scriptures called the torah which is what the old testament is in the bible. That is history. The link below is Israel's ministry of foreign affairs that has in their time line bible days in the old testament. It is the link below. You see with the Jews religion and history go hand in hand. This is true for Christians as well and yes we do see the new testament as history too.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/Histo...

20 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    In spite of the claims to the contrary, it simply doesn't matter that the writings about Jesus came a bit after his life (starting at about 20 years after), because in Jesus' day, almost NOTHING was written down about anyone in "real time." Ancient people did not have the value or even the availability of materials to record everything and everyone in real time.

    The Roman record doesn't contain information about lots of people who existed,even important ones, so saying there is no Roman record of Jesus is a moot point. Romans did not keep records of all the people they executed, they did not keep records of all the political uprisings, they didn't even keep a record of the destruction of Pompeii, one of the empire's most wealthy cities, they didn't keep a record of all their esteemed senators, the vestal virgins, the people who were licensed to have stalls in the forum, all the philosophers, the court musicians, etc. The "Roman record" is an utterly failed argument. There is even scant written evidence for Herod and some of the Roman emperors, for that matter.

    It is a FACT there IS more written about Jesus than of almost any other person of antiquity. There are thousands of pages or fragments of original or copies of early manuscripts. To discount it or ignore the massive amount of manuscript evidence of his existence, simply because it later was compiled and called "The Bible," is just plain ignorance.

    ____________________

    @Hybiscus: No, the Romans did NOT keep very detailed tax (or any other) records. If they did, then where ARE the records, anyway?

    _____________________

    @Trawler: By your logic, the fact that there are Christian churches all over the place must prove Jesus existed. The WRITTEN evidence for Alexander was not written until about 400 years after his death. By contrast, the written evidence for Jesus dates starting from only 20 years after HIS death.

    See how that works?

    _______________

    Enigma: Rome kept SOME good records, but did not record all things about all important people, even appointed officials, even some of their emperors. Again, where are all these amazing Roman records that they allegedly kept?

    _________________

    THumbs down don't really bother me. But I notice none of you thumbs-downers actually present ANY evidence at all of these Roman records you cite.

    Your arguments lack any merit at all.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    Yes I doubt world history in general and never accept it until I have don research on it to determine if it is true or not. Through the years history is and has been written by the winners or the powerful. All things that some uninformed persons accept as true are not fixed and permanent in human culture. Perhaps fixed in the minds of the weaker minds but not those who want to know the truth.

    I consider myself to be very informed about history and I know that the NT story is fictional and Jesus is nothing more than a composite character played by a royal Roman.

    I used to doubt Jesus but now I am sure that he was never real, and to claim actual existence of Jesus is an oxymoron and he is not historical. If he was there would be mentions of him in many written works, and in exactness not as perhaps what Jesus meant as stated in the bible. There is nothing on earth that can prove Jesus actually lived. I also have stated that I do not trust history until I have done the research. Perhaps you believe that George Washington admitted to cutting down a cherry tree because he could not tell a lie. Such nonsense I do not believe.

    What history are you referring to when you say was written 50 or 60 years ago? If you want the truth you have to do the research, and the bible is not truth and that is all that you have for proof of Jesus other than some so-called church fathers' most of who were writers of the NT. They had ulterior motives to try to promote Jesus as real.

    Alexander the Great is known in history and much is mentioned about him, we know his father whereas Jesus' father is a myth and so is Jesus. You can ell all that you want, there is nothing to prove Jesus was real, nothing.

    Source(s): Pio Christ the book, Caesar's Messiah, Josephus
    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    Good points. I agree.

    The Bible itself is the principal evidence that Jesus Christ is a historical person. The record in the Gospels is not a vague narrative of events at some unspecified time and in an unnamed location. It clearly states time and place in great detail. For an example, see Luke 3:1, 2, 21-23.

    The first-century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX, sec. 200) A direct and very favorable reference to Jesus, found in Book XVIII, sections 63, 64, has been challenged by some who claim that it must have been either added later or embellished by Christians; but it is acknowledged that the vocabulary and the style are basically those of Josephus, and the passage is found in all available manuscripts.

    Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived during the latter part of the first century C.E., wrote: “Christus [Latin for “Christ”], from whom the name [Christian] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”—The Complete Works of Tacitus (New York, 1942), “The Annals,” Book 15, par. 44.

    With reference to early non-Christian historical references to Jesus, 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.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    jesus did exist , i remember when he visited my ancient family. he was a genteel man, with a nappy black afro. he wore a robe with a rope belt, (pants had not been invented). He was olive skinned, A high yellow. he was very educated, in truth and reality, and had a clear mind for politics. So, what does history have to do with believing this?

    I can write history books. I can literally write "the history of tommorrow". All it requires is a streaming consciousness, writing non stop, until the thought comes to an end. proof read for spelling, cut into paragrephs, come back, and cut into chapters, then add a title,, about the author, a freface, a prologue, an epilogue, a glossary of terms, and a topic index. ship to book Binders, and be on the shelf inside a month.

    If i ever write this book, it will be named (THE HISTORY OF TOMORROW)! cOME TO THINK OF IT, I THINK I WILL WRITE IT! My site will be named, http://the-history-of-tomorrow.webs.com

    Source(s): Life experience.
    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    I don't doubt that Jesus lived, not for a minute. I"ve believed in him since I was 3. We used to sing, "Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world. Red, and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight. Jesus loves the little children of the world." This song also helped me to get interest in missionary activities, and now I'm getting tons of newsletters from missionaries, like Jewish Voice, MAF (Missionary Aviation Fellowship), CfaN, and many others. Never doubted Jesus lived, just felt left out a lot and wondered if he noticed me, but later found him, and I know the Bible is inspired.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • someg
    Lv 6
    9 years ago

    It is ok to question any version of history. The issue as to the historicity Jesus Christ is that some people claim it as undisputed truth, for reasons of faith. People without that particular faith feel free to question it. Thus, there is a conflict, not only of historical issues, but faith. Similar figures in legends such as Gilgamesh, Noah, Hector, Romulus and Remus and others are not subject to such contention, because they are not central to people's faith.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Enigma
    Lv 6
    9 years ago

    Historical facts could be ascertained from various methods/sources to test the reliability.

    For example, how do we know that Julius Ceasar existed? There are coins (excavated) bearing his head; the Julian calendar was invented by him (and named after him); documents written about him by his contemporaries (by both his friends and enemies); he fitted into the line of Roman emperors before and after him (and Romans kept a very good detailed record of their emperors and early history).

    Similarly, for any other historical figures, there are ample proofs, from documents to excavated artifacts to substantiate those claims. Otherwise, every civilization could make up their own historical figures of gods/emperors/other great figures to lay claim to everything just to glorify their own past. Self-written book (religious or by certain groups of people, country, race) cannot be taken as evidence without other mutually supporting evidence to support it.

    However, for the "Jesus" person, there is absolutely no evidence to support his existence. If there are concrete evidence, all Christians will be flaunting them to atheists.

    Contrary to popular belief, the gospels were not written by the disciples or followers of Jesus, but were written pseudeponymously (meaning writers of unknown origins), and those gospels were first referred to by Iraeneus towards the late 2nd century [meaning that scholars know that somehow, the gospels could not exist much earlier than that]. This could point that "events" were written based on some fictitious/mythical figure of more than a century back - and this made it much easier to lay the foundation for a "cult figure" of some distant past.

    EDIT: Again, for Christians, there are willfull effort to deceive by using half-truths. Tacitus' word christus had been confirmed, using modern technology, to be altered from the original word "chrestus" meaning the good - it did not mean christ. No Christian, whenever they try to use this as proof, would want to highlight this fact.

    Another fact is that Josephus' golden paragraph referring to Jesus had been confirmed to be a forgery (forged during the 4th century AD). Christians with integrity, knowing this fact, would not bring this up as "evidence for Jesus", too.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    For most other figures there is documentation other than the rantings of their cult members. We are talking about a figure that supposedly existed during recorded history within a very well documented empire yet was not seen as significant enough to rate ONE contemporary mention. i would doubt MLK, Ghandi and George Washington if they were somehow not mentioned until long after their death.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    "There§s so little evidence for Alxander Great yet everyone believes he existed"

    yeah.. scarce evidence, such as more than ten alexandrias across the Asia minor, Egypt and stretching eastwards to India.

    if ONE single unverified source were to prove person's existence, i'm fine with the Alexander Great movie. And, Harry Potter, obviously.

    scotgirl> Alexander reportedly PERSONALLY founded those towns. unlike Jesus and churches. btw, how about all those silver pieces with alexander's head?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AlexanderCoin.jp...

    http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander/alexander_z1...

    there might have been one or more jewish troublemakers fuzed into one JC. now, if the single "contemporary" source claims all those magick... considering the other stuff from that work... Harry Potter.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Jeebus Crust is the Crust of Crustianity and the reason we celebrate Crustmas. He is the son of Gosh and part of the Holy 3-Some (or Ménage à Trois). Jeebus was born to Bloody Mary, a virgin, by a miracle of the Spirit of Truthiness. The Holy Babble gives an account of an angel visiting Bloody Mary to tell her that she was chosen to bare the Son of Gosh. Jeebus is known as the first Ninja. He is also the first to demonstrate the Ninja stealth ability of turning into a bunny, by a miracle of the Spirit of Truthiness. The Holy Babble gives an account of an angel visiting Bloody Mary to tell her that she was chosen to bare the Son of Gosh. He was also the first known zombie.

    Source(s): I am the reincarnation of Jeebus
    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.