Did Jesus Exist?

There is almost no verifiable evidence that Jesus existed outside the record in the Bible and extrabiblical scripture. Personally, I believe Jesus existed, but even if he is only a fictional character, the message is still a valid one.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The message is to love others as you love yourself. If everyone just trys to do what's right, treats others the way they would like to be treated, then this world will be a better place.It really is as simple as that.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The Suetonius reference IIRC was from his Life of Nero, and it is certainly vauge and could be misconstrued. In it it mentions that the Jews were costantly causing problems at the urging and instigation of Chrestus.Logically, that shows us a couple things.First, the people involved were considered Jews. That's not unreasonable as it's very likley that at that time, any followers of Christ would still be considered, and consider themselves, as Jews, not a separate religion.But the rest of the quotation seems to imply a particular individual as opposed to a sect. It seems to say that there was some living individual who was the leader or instigator of the Jewish disturbances, and not some separate Jewish sect.Granted, it could have any number of interpretations. It could be a misspelling. It could refer to a specific individual. It might refer to a subset of the Jews in the area. But at best it is inconclusive evidence.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yup, we know. That's what folk have been trying to point out to you.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

There are several issues involved here regarding the issue of whether or not Jesus actually existed, and also trying to determine what exactly was Jesus' message. In this regard, Christianity is very different from most of the other world religions.One problem is that if Jesus did exist, he died young, and almost immediately after beginning his ministry. In addition, we have very little material that is actually even attributed to Jesus. To see this, look at what is called a "Red Letter Bible". In those, the words that are attributed directly to Jesus are printed in red to let them stand out from all the rest. It is amazing how little of the New Testament is actually attributed directly to Jesus.Compare this to the active missions of some other religious leaders, Confucius, Mencius or The Buddha as examples. Their active missions went on for many decades, and there was a large body of accolytes who's sole task was recording the words of the Master.There is far more documentation of both the existence and mission of those others.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, Paul was definitely a spin master and played fast and free with the details to sell the product. One good example is his use of the "Unnamed God" to promote his agenda. You can also see it in his selectivity on which of the OT laws to ignore and which to retain. There's also little doubt that the authors of the Gospels copied from earlier works, and that would have included the OT as fertile ground as well.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It's not Christians that worry about questions such as this. Most of us realize that Jesus is a belief. We believe Jesus existed. That's all. It's covered in the creeds. They all state, I believe.If folk wish to study the actual existence of Jesus, great. Support them. Help them. Welcome their input. Rejoice in their questions.There IS No Attack, except in the minds of some.And, as I said, early in this thread, even if it turns out that all of the Bible is no more than tales told about the campfire, the message is still valid.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

There is absolutely no problem here related to beliefs. For example, I believe that Jesus was real and did in fact live.But that has nothing to do with the thread.What we are discussing here is any potential evidence for a historical Jesus.The Bible is evidence. But it's also only one piece. What would be needed to move Jesus from belief to fact would be some other evidence, particularly something that could be independantly confirmed.But even if it were possible to established Jesus as fact, it would have no meaning in relation to Jesus, in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.Even if Jesus could be positively proven to exist as a real, historical character, it would have no effect on Christianity. That would still depend on Belief, just as it does now.The search for a historic Jesus is great. It may just actually find evidence that he did exist. It's impossible to prove that he did not exist. And regardless, it has no bearing on the theology of Christianity, so why not welcome the search?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't see how finding out that there really was a person named Jesus who lived at the time, even if you found records of someone named Jesus who lived at the time and was crucified, would add much if any credibility to Christianity. By your reasoning Buddhism is more credible than Christianity because we can document when the Buddha lived. But I can see where it might bolster the faith of some people.As for the other possibility, it's impossible to prove that Jesus did not live. There is absolutely no threat from the search for a historical Jesus, and possibly even an upside for some people.So why not embrace the effort and celebrate the results?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sure. His family was actually quite prominent, a small regional nobility family. His ministry lasted several orders of magnitude longer than that of Jesus. The documentation and evidences for the Buddha are far greater than for Jesus. And it's all Off Topic.But that's not the point.This thread is not about the Buddha, even though it is a religion I believe every Christian should study and embrace, but about a historic Jesus. It's about the search for a historic Jesus.First, it is impossible to prove that he never existed. Even if we found every census for every middle-eastern city and found not one Jesus mentioned, it would not prove he did not exist. All that would show is that he was not listed. Those who wished could continue their beliefs just as they do today.However, it is possible that some evidence might be found that shows a person named Jesus did live at the time, and in the area, and was crucified and who's body disappeared. For many that might appear to be confirmation of the story, and to some extent it would. It still says nothing about the divinity of Jesus or that he actually was resurected.The issue of finding a historic Jesus is one that seems to offer no problems to Christianity. The worst case scenario would be that nothing is found which leaves us exactly where we are today.There is the possiblity of actually finding some records of such an individual, but no matter how complete, they can never prove divinity. That will, and must, forever remain in the realm of Faith & Belief.So what is the problem?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion