What historical documentation is there for Jesus Christ?

Question

Other than the bible?

People like Lee Strobel and Kent Hovind claim there is documentation for the existence of Jesus however I can't find what this documentation is.

What is this supposed documentation? And I don't mean stuff written after his death, I mean stuff written while he was still alive.

Please, no Josephus or Tacitus. Those were after JC's death.

Answer 1

I've also seen the documentaries some answers are talking about, it doesn't even give a definite conclusion. There is no solid evidence for the existence of Jesus, or "Yeshua ben Joseph" as I heard he would have been called.



I did read, however, that "many historians and scholars' believe Jesus existed as a Palestinian in 1st cent. BC" but can't find references to these scholars or to the works that shaped that decision. There are no images, hieroglyphics, written works or documentation of such a large figure head besides the Bible, even though many have existed for other famous figures.



So, question is, why is there no solid proof? Perhaps the government wanted to abolish Jesus' works. Maybe he was never alive. Fact is we probably won't know for certain, at least in this time frame, because there were many other people named Jesus (or Yeshua), none of which seemed too important in any records.

Answer 2

I watched an episode on Nat Geo a few months ago called the search for the Historical Jesus. The fact is, Jesus was actually a common name during that time. However, there have been writings found written by some of the leaders of the time (king's, government officials, etc...) That describe a man by the name of Jesus, who had followers, but strange ideas. To the government, he was seen more as a political activist, not a religious figure. He stirred things up...he was considered by some to be a rebel. There is debate as to whether or not these descriptions are the Jesus we know, or someone else. But it is the best and only evidence we have....which is to say not much.

Answer 3

Why would anyone have written about Jesus while He was alive, and who would have written about Him?



Galilee was the backwoods of the Roman Empire. No one cared what went on there.



And you do realize, don't you, that the only crucified person who is recorded by name in any Roman record is Jesus, right?



Also, people didn't write about things while they were happening, usually. For example, the formation of Rome wasn't recorded until hundreds of years after the fact.



Consider the times.



Besides, we don't even have all 1st century documents. Most have been lost.



And by the way, the Bible is not one book, but a collection of books, and all 27 books of the NT were not part of the Bible officially until the end of the 4th century, so they can be submitted as evidence.



Most historians believe Jesus existed. It's only a small fringe (of about a dozen "scholars") who hypothesize that Jesus is a myth.



Edit: As for the person who said that "everything" I wrote is "factually wrong", please demonstrate exactly how. Crucified people aren't mentioned by name in any Roman record (the only crucified person mentioned by name in any document is the Greek, Artacytus, in the 5th century B.C.), hardly any original documents from the 1st century have survived, and the NT really wasn't officially part of the Bible until the late 4th century. These are all historical facts.



Also, anyone who insists that writings from after Jesus' crucifixion are inadmissible as evidence is tantamount to insisting "photographs, or it didn't happen." Very little was recorded while it was happening, and then only if it held significance for many people or for the emperor.



What significance did Jesus have for the Roman Empire while He was alive? None whatsoever. There were other "rabble-rousers", and they were utterly insignificant. They were nothing, and that's what Jesus would have been considered, whether His miracles are a myth or not.

Answer 4

Jesus probably did exist, but renowned theologian Albert Schweitzer concluded that we will never know the Jesus of history. The Gospel writers were not writing history, they were writing theology. The Gospel of Mark was written by someone who wasn't there with Jesus and copied Peter. Matthew was not written by Matthew because he copies Mark (Matthew was a disciple and so was with Jesus, so then why would he copy from someone who had never been with Jesus?). Luke twists thing into his own perspective. He claims Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple, but he was writing after the temple fell, so he could easily he made that up. John was writing to try to spread christianity, so it makes sense he would make Jesus seem very impressive. So, the Gospels can not be viewed as historical documents.

Answer 5

Well, the Bible is the Word of God and if you don't want to believe what He says, you will die in your sins never knowing if you could have taken that one step forward... Jesus said " I AM, the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father, but by Me"

As for written evidence check out the two scrolls which contain the complete record of Isaiah, all 66 chapters. These were discovered in 1947 in the desert at Qumran, The book of Isaiah is the scroll that Jesus read at the synagogue, detailed in the Gospel of St Luke, which was written nearly 4,ooo years before the birth of Christ and gives prophecies which were to be fulfilled by the coming of Christ.

Answer 6

So what Historical documentations are there for Alexander the Great whose introduction to History was first revealed over 400 years after his death?

There is more historical accounts of Jesus than very many historical figures of his time. In fact, if Christianity had not survived, we would have never known about Pilate.

Answer 7

Clement (30-100 A.D.) wrote to the Corinthian Church and reminded them to heed the epistle of Paul



Ignatius and Polycarp have writings that cite verses from every New Testament book except for 2 & 3 John.



Matthew, Luke, John and Paul all wrote of Jesus. Just because people included these writings as part of our bible, does not take away from the fact that these men witnessed the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. They endured beatings, imprisonment and death for Jesus.

Answer 8

The fact tht the Torah Koran and Holy Bible acknowledged that he existed and performed miracles eventhough all 3 religion are against each other should Be enough historical proof. They don't agree on much but this is one of the things all 3 agree on.

Answer 9

Try taking a trip to Israel. Ask any Jew if Jesus lived. In our world, historical figures are seldom recognized by their living authors, governing officials, etc. There are historical things that happened such as the order for the killing of all male Hebrew children in Bethlehem by King Herod. The real issue that you are dealing with is faith.

Answer 10

Is there documentation for everyone who lived 2,000 years ago?? What type of documentation are you looking for? He became much more famous after his death and by the time the writings were finished about Jesus it was after he died. They don't have birth certificate records back that far.

Answer 11

There exists nowhere on Earth any document written during Jesus' supposed lifetime.



There exists not a single eyewitness account.



Kent Hovind et al are ignorant and dishonest.



For the record, everything Cricket has written is factually wrong.

Answer 12

To be honest, im not sure. But even if you saw the article and knew it was real. would that still make you disbelieve?



Why do people ask for something from believers, when we believe from the Bible, THEN say not to use the Bible as an example. Thats like asking scientists to give a scientific answer WITHOUT using scientific methods.

Answer 13

Mc Atheist: BC does indeed stand for "Before Christ" (among many other things). I looked it up at dictionary.com. "Before Christ" was the only time-related definition.

.

Answer 14

We have tons of science books that date prehistoric time on Earth as BC or Before Christ. Why would our ancient scientists do this if Jesus was a fictional character?

Answer 15

Have you read Lee Strobel's book "The case for Christ"? I'm pretty sure he talks about the evidence

Answer 16

written documentation is written documentation whether it came before or after his death.



your trying to exclude some of it shows your dishonesty and are not really looking for any.



the proof if there.

Answer 17

Where is your proof that Christ is not real?



David

Answer 18

You mean that wasn't forged and added into other people's writings sometimes centuries after their deaths?



None, actually. He's a pretty good mythological figure as far as his general message goes though. Too bad so many of his followers don't follow the message. They'd win more people over if they did.

Answer 19

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, etc. They are all historical documents.

Answer 20

Mythology has no historical documentations sense they are made up.



EDIT for matthew: He said other then the bible and sense when are people historical documents?

Answer 21

He's a fictional character, possibly based on a real person, if he ever existed he's exaggerated a lot.

Answer 22

NONE WHATSOEVER OUTSIDE OF THE BIBLE!!!

Answer 23

Quaran.