Question:
Do some atheists really maintain that Jesus never existed?
ImagoDei
2009-06-14 03:36:29 UTC
It's one thing not to believe in Jesus, meaning you reject his theology and claims to divinity...

...but how can people believe that Jesus never EXISTED?

Or are they just mixing up their words?
28 answers:
2009-06-14 04:04:14 UTC
Jesus Christ

It is significant that Christ is not only spoken of in the Bible, but also in historical sources outside the Bible.

Cornelius Tacitus (born about 52 A.D.) was a Roman historian, who was also a Governor of Asia in 112 A.D. He mentioned Christ at least three times, --in fact, while writing about the reign of Nero, Tacitus mentions the death of Christ ("Christus") as well as the presence of Christians in Rome:

"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence, to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also (Annals, XV. 44).



(ref: The Best of Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, by Josh McDowell,

Here's Life Publ., San Bernardino, CA, 1990, p.198)



Flavius Josephus (born in 37 A.D.) was a Jewish Historian, who became a Pharisee when he was 19, was the commander of Jewish forces in Galilee in 66 A.D. When Roman forces captured Josephus, he was conscripted to the Roman headquarters. In about the year 105 A.D., Josephus writes:

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call Him a man, for He was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to Him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those that loved Him at the first did not forsake Him; for He appeared to them alive again in the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning Him. And the tribe of Christians so named from Him are not extinct at this day (Antiquities, xviii. 33).



(ref: The Best of Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, by Josh McDowell,

Here's Life Publ., San Bernardino, CA, 1990, p.199)



A good number of ancient and secular sources refer to Jesus. There are allusions to Christ in the writings of such ancient authors as:

Philo of Alexandria (20 BC - 50 AD)

Galen of Pergamum (ca 130-201 AD)

Celsus (True Discourse, c.170)

Mara Bar Serapion (pre-200?)

Lucian (mid-2nd century)

Even the Jewish Talmud and Midrash mention Jesus

Other ancient historians who mention Christ in their writings are:

Thallus, a Samaritan (wrote about in about 52 A.D.)

Seutonius, who was on the staff of Emperor Hadrian, wrote about Jesus in about 120 A.D. ("Lives of the Caesars," c. 125).

"Plinius the Younger," a Governor of Bithynia in Asia-Minor in about 112 A.D., who wrote the following about the Christians:

"They affirmed, however, that the whole of their guilt, or their error, was that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verse a hymn to Christ as to a god (Epistles, X. 96).



(ref: The Best of Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, by Josh McDowell,

Here's Life Publ., San Bernardino, CA, 1990, p.200)







At Caesarea: Center Line is "[Po]ntivs Pilatvs"

...or, Pontius Pilatus.

Pontius Pilate

It is quite interesting that various authorities and "experts" maintained for a number of years that Pontius Pilate was not substantiated as an actual historical figure, and was therefore most probably a fictional embelishment added to the story about Jesus.

However, this present author has personally seen a slab of stone (about 15 inches by 30 inches, picture at left) unearthed by archaeologists in Caesarea by the Sea, Israel, which includes the name of "Pontius Pilate" ("Pontivs Pilatvs," with the letter "u" shaped like a "v") in the inscription on it. This find substantiates the historical reality of one of the central figures in the gospel accounts of the trial of Jesus.



New Testament

With regard to the New Testament, archaeological support is excellent, as F.F. Bruce remarks, "Where Luke has been suspected of inaccuracy, and accuracy has been vindicated by some inscriptional evidence, it may be legitimate to say that archaeology has confirmed the New Testament record."



("Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament", Revelation and the Bible, R.F. Bruce, Grand Rapids, 1969, p.331)

.

Widespread Agreement

Few archaeologists and scholars doubt that the people mentioned in at least the latter part of the Old Testament (such as Nebuchadnezzar, David and Jeremiah), as well as through most of the New (Jesus, Peter and Paul), were people who really existed.

William R. Albright, professor of Semitics at Johns Hopkins University, became one of the most prominent and respected archaeologists of modern times, and after working at many sites in and around Israel, he states: "Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition of the value of the Bible as a source of history."



(Randall Price, The Stones Cry Out (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1997), p.10.)

Yale archaeologist Millar Burrows maintains, "On the whole, however, archaeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the scriptural record. More than one archaeologist has found his respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine."



(What Mean These Stones?, Burrows, New York, 1965, p.1).



Concerning the text of the Bible itself, Burrows says, "Such evidence as archaeology has afforded thus far, especially by providing additional and older manuscripts of the books of the Bible, strengthens our confidence in the accuracy with which the text has been transmitted through the centuries."



(same as last citation, p.42)

Because of abundant historical facticity of the Biblical accounts, the field of Biblical archaeology is so big that there are whole journals and university departments dedicated to its study in various places around the world.

The archaeological confirmation of the historicity of much of what the Bible records is very extensive and solid, and grows constantly.



It is significant that Christ is not only spoken of in the Bible, but also in historical sources outside the Bible.

Cornelius Tacitus (born about 52 A.D.) was a Roman historian, who was also a Governor of Asia in 112 A.D. He mentioned Christ at least three times, --in fact, while writing about the reign of Nero, TacituTacitus mentions the death of Christ ("Christus") as well as the presence of Christians in Rome:

"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence, to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also (Annals, XV. 44).



(ref: The Best of Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, by Josh McDowell,

Here's Life Publ., San Bernardino, CA, 1990, p.198)



Flavius Josephus (born in 37 A.D.) was a Jewish Historian, who became a Pharisee when he was 19, was the commander of Jewish forces in Galilee in 66 A.D. When Roman forces captured Josephus, he was conscripted to the Roman headquarters. In about the year 105 A.D., Josephus writes:

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call Him a man, for He was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to Him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those that loved Him at the first did not forsake Him; for He appeared to them alive again in the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning Him. And the tribe of Christians so named from Him are not extinct at this day (Antiquities, xviii. 33).



(ref: The Best of Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, by Josh McDowell,

Here's Life Publ., San Bernardino, CA, 1990, p.199)



A good number of ancient and secular sources refer to Jesus. There are allusions to Christ in the writings of such ancient authors as:

Philo of Alexandria (20 BC - 50 AD)

Galen of Pergamum (ca 130-201 AD)

Celsus (True Discourse, c.170)

Mara Bar Serapion (pre-200?)

Lucian (mid-2nd century)

Even the Jewish Talmud and Midrash mention Jesus

Other ancient historians who mention Christ in their writings are:

Thallus, a Samaritan (wrote about in about 52 A.D.)

Seutonius, who was on the staff of Emperor Hadrian, wrote about Jesus in about 120 A.D. ("Lives of the Caesars," c. 125).

"Plinius the Younger," a Governor of Bithynia in Asia-Minor in about 112 A.D., who wrote the following about the Christians:

"They affirmed, however, that the whole of their guilt, or their error, was that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixe
TriCyclic
2009-06-14 03:52:15 UTC
There have been a number of books that portray Jesus as a myth, and some good ones that tear those books into tiny pieces. The best on the myth side is Earl Doherty. The best refuter of such is RT France with The Evidence for Jesus but this book is not available in the US, only in the UK, so the American atheists still argue that Jesus is a myth because they do not know it was refuted. The Jesus Myth by GA Wells had some followers but they seem unaware the author changed his mind and admitted he was wrong.



It is fairly easy to produce a scenario where we can deny the historicity of a major public figure. There are some good spoofs on denying Hannibal exists.
?
2016-10-31 01:19:54 UTC
I show you how to already know that attraction to authority and quote mining are logical fallacies! you do not have a speck of info that Jesus replaced right into a real guy. i can locate scholars who disagree with those you have chose to cite. there is not any point out of Jesus in any substances interior the time the Bible says he replaced into meant to stay. If he replaced into so noteworthy, why did not anybody in any respect point out him until eventually many years after he died? The Bible has super contradictions approximately him, and it exhibits plenty replaced into extra to the memories approximately him as time glided with the help of. i've got in no way heard of the adult adult males you quote. it rather is probable because of the fact purely believers study such biased morons' rubbish. This decision of nonsense does not practice Jesus existed. It only confirms my opinion that he in no way lived. a million. Mark A. Powell is crammed with crap. greater suitable scholars than him say Jesus in no way existed. 2. Larry Hurtado does not understand his butt from a hollow interior the floor. 3. Richard Burridge and Graham Gould at the instant are not extraordinarily much as good as Michael Martin as scholars. 4. Who the heck is Bruce? he's ineffective incorrect! 5. Jesus existence is ineffective between purpose scholars, so Robt. van Voorst is crammed with it. 6. Craig Evans does not understand plenty approximately history and historians. 7. No sane man or woman thinks Jesus replaced right into a real guy. Rudolph Buttman is biased. 8. purely biased morons say Jesus replaced into real, so G. Bornkamm is inferior intellectually. 9. Albert Schweitzer stated the alternative of what W. Marxsen says. 10. Michael grant is acquainted with not something approximately "first rank scholars". that is biased crap. 11. Geza Vermes is senseless in his rant.
?
2014-11-19 07:15:01 UTC
There is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.

http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

Suggested Reading

The Case for the Real Jesus By: Lee Strobel

http://www.christianbook.com/the-case-for-the-real-jesus/lee-strobel/9780310292012/pd/292012?product_redirect=1&Ntt=292012&item_code=&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP



Non Biblical evidence as proof for Jesus Christ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrRQqYGf4O0



'Did Jesus Exist?' A Historian Makes His Case

http://www.npr.org/2012/04/01/149462376/did-jesus-exist-a-historian-makes-his-case

Refuting the myth that Jesus never existed

http://bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

Did Jesus Really Exist?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/philosophicalfragments/2012/08/29/did-jesus-really-exist/

What do we know about Jesus - from non-biblical sources?

http://www.provethebible.net/T2-Divin/D-0201.htm



Did Jesus Christ Really Exist? Proving Jesus Without the Bible

http://beginningandend.com/jesus-exist-historical-evidence-jesus-christ/



Is There Any Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible?

http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/pg79644





Is There Any Proof of Jesus Other Than the Bible? (1of2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HknelAk8_S8&feature=related
2009-06-14 04:07:41 UTC
People who consider it likely that Jesus never existed as an historical figure have at least one of two problems:



They seem to reject critical thinking and the scientific method, and/or

They have never studied early Christianity.



Early Christianity existed. It started somewhere and was started by someone or by a group of people. The earliest evidence we have for Christianity ascribes its origin to Jesus, *but* the figure of Jesus presented in some of these earliest descriptions of him is often very much at odds with the beliefs of the religion, even at that time. How does one explain this? If you were to create a fictional founder of your religion, wouldn't you create him to reflect your religious beliefs and practices? Why would you create a figure some of whose deeds and actions were so contrary to your religion as to be embarrassing and require censure?



Actually, there are no gospels (as far as we know) that are "eyewitness testimonies". Of course, we don't know who or what group compiled Q - but since we don't know that, we cannot assume that it was produced by anyone who knew Jesus.



There is, however, Josephus. It is *absolutely astonishing* how many people here uncritically claim that the two passages in his "Jewish Antiquities" in which Jesus is mentioned are *entirely* Christian interpolations. I doubt they've looked at these passages; I doubt they're familiar with the secondary literature in which historians discuss these passages; and (most importantly) I doubt they have looked at the ancient evidence that would help us determine which bits of these two passages are interpolated and which (if any) are genuine. When one does this, the interpolations can be pretty easily shown for what they are and, when removed from the text, reveal that Josephus did refer to Jesus, but only as the "so-called Christ" or "so-called Messiah". If they had actually studied history, they would recognize that this non-interpolated text of Josephus, in which Jesus was known, but not regarded as "the Son of God", is clearly known to the third-century writer Origen.



These people are simply being lazy, not thinking for themselves, and feel threatened by the existence of a founder of a religion of which they're not an adherent.
efqy
2009-06-14 04:01:56 UTC
I don't know of any that say for certain that there was no historical jesus, but if there was, there is an astonishing lack of evidence for someone who had the life that's described in the bible.



None of the gospels are eyewitness testimonies, as even the most basic biblical research will show you.



In the *earliest* christian writings, Jesus is not referred to as an actual living human being at all.
?
2009-06-14 03:59:54 UTC
Just a couple of points -



One, while its true that the authors of the gospels likely never met Jesus they were writing within about 40 years of his death so they might have known someone who knows him. I realise that sounds tenuous but its a hell of alot better than most things we've got from that kind of period.



The Jewish historian Josephus, writing in about 93, mentions Jesus twice. One of them is shady and probably inserted later by Christians but one of them were Jesus gets a passing mention seems authentic.



Tacitus in 116 mentions Jesus as Christus.



Obviously none of them are an argument stopper but I personally (non-christian) believe Jesus existed, for whatever that is worth.
MyNonBelief
2009-06-14 08:03:34 UTC
we have the pyramids which reference many mnay gods...does the fact that tehre are references to these gods make these gods real...or does it jsut confirm that people beleived in these gods nad made temples etc to them.



Jesus never did/may never have said anything that is attributed to him.

How different is it for Jesus to have actually walked on water, or for someone to say that Jesus walked on water. Since we have no way to confirm nor refute what Jesus said, we have no way to confirm nor refute that someone SAID the Jesus walked on water. It all goes down to when somoene tells you something, do you beleive nad wait to be refuted...or do you remain skeptical and wait for more/better evidence to confirm or back it up?



We beleive that Paul Revere warne the british are coming the british are coming. Was that not Israel Bissel? (Check out assume the position with robert wuhl on HBO). When the legend becomes fact, print the legend. What is and what is beleived to be can tend to merge and the actual truth is unable to be distinguished.

Is the sky blue....or is the gky believed to be blue?

The sky is not blue...the nitrogen in the air makes it appear to be blue. The sky is not blue...it appears to be blue. What something is and what something appears to be are 2 completely separate things. Jsut cuz it is beleived to be x, does not make it x.

People believed that their 1million dollars was worth 2 million dollars...adn they have bank statements from Bernie Madoff to back it up and prove it. But then later on they foudn out they had 0 dollars. So the fact that they beleived they had 2million dollars did not change the fact that they really had 0 dollars. But they believed they had 2 million at one point and acted accordingly...and now they beleive they have 0 dollars and act accordingly.



I dont believe that the god you speak of exists in the context you talk about...therefore I dont beleive the man who says/is "accused of saying" he was the son of that god which I dont beleive exists.

I have no reason to, and it does not matter to me, whether or not a man named Jesus that all this history is accounted to lived or did not live.

And honestly, that really is irrelevant at this point in time. First, no one can prove or disprove it, and probably never will be able to. Jesus existing, and people beleiveing jesus existed are 2 different things...and they will act accordingly.

I dont believe in God/jesus...but I defitniely beleive in the belief of god...I beleive that beleif in them inspire people to do good things, bad things, nothing, something, etc. Whether or not they are reall is irrelevant at this point.



I say it all the time, and I will say it now. Is love real...fear, happiness, hate, sadness, anger, etc etc etc. Has anyone ever seen any of those? Are the feelings they "inspire" real? Yes. But do any of those things actually exist as far as having an aim...a goal...a desire...a set of rules to follow? No. Love inspires movies, songs, poems, actions, books...but is there a love being somewhere making all that so? No. Is there a god somewhere making all that is attributed to him happen? No.
Dean M
2009-06-14 03:47:19 UTC
How long ago were these "testimonials" written? Have you ever played pass it on down the line, and like 6 people later, you get a completely different story, well, this bible of yours are basically the events of such a game, passed on through a couple of thousand years, written in languages no longer spoken, of course it is bs and complete fiction.



Im sure a man named jesus lived, but definitely not a divine creature.
2009-06-14 03:48:23 UTC
the new testament was written between 65 and 120 years AD. those two gospels are not going to sway an atheist.



despite mounting scientific evidence evangelical christians refuse to believe that the earth is more than 6000 years old. no matter what evidence exists, people will still find a reason not to believe something



i am jewish. i was born catholic and rejected my church at age 16
2017-03-19 20:03:54 UTC
Yet ne'er with wits profane to range, be complacence extended

An atheist laugh's a poor exchange, for deity offended
?
2017-03-18 23:34:55 UTC
The fact is, ALL religion was based from Egyptian sun god worship. Its been that way way since the sun first rose in the sky. They're all pagan symbols of the zodiac. Stories were told, changed and copied. The buble itself is the 8th version of the same story retold.
2009-06-14 03:45:56 UTC
Yes, there are some atheists who seriously doubt whether Jesus actually lived. They suggest he was merely a fictional figurehead, a legend (like Paul Bunyon, perhaps), to lead a cause.



But despite that, whether there was an historical Jesus or not, it remains that much of the information contained in the New Testament about him is legendary in character and cannot be validated by other sources or any other means. His stories are no different than the myriad other stories of heroes and miracle workers from the ancient world.
☯paradox☯
2009-06-14 04:06:55 UTC
The books in the bible are not eyewitness accounts, they were written well after Jesus apparently lived.
2009-06-14 03:56:38 UTC
The bible is not evidence for anything.



You see preachers talking about how science is wrong, because the "evidence" in the bible shows....



That's the big mistake. The bible cannot be used for evidence. It's like using Harry Potter for evidence. Maybe in a thousand years people will think Harry Potter was real and worship him.
Freethinking Liberal
2009-06-14 04:07:02 UTC
Writing from the church do not count as evidence. What would count is, and in any learned document, would be corroboration from an imparcual source. I understand there is such a document. However no were does it say he was a god
Brown
2009-06-14 04:06:58 UTC
It is still a topic of debate among eminent scholars till date about Jesus' existence. Does it not make you wonder that no contemporary writer wrote anything about Jesus. His existence is confirmed by no other source except the bible. That is very suspect except one decides to throw rationality to the wind.
2009-06-14 03:41:40 UTC
I'm not an atheist, I'm more agnostic.



But I don't doubt he existed, there's quite a few sources to back up his existence and it's fairly widely believed he existed.



But just as a man, in those days there were many "prophets"

I heard somewhere that monty pythons the life of brian was more accurate than the bible in terms of all the prophets walking around those days.
TAI <3
2009-06-14 03:41:35 UTC
Well there are some Christians who believe in the story of creation but there's no evidence to support it but tons to support the the big bag theory.

So it's the same for the atheists really.
ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT••
2009-06-14 03:40:04 UTC
I'm not sure that he did or didn't. There may have been a man going by "Jesus" that fancied himself as a messiah and got a lot of people to believe in his scam, but I don't know of any reliable evidence which would point to this being the case.
2009-06-14 03:39:52 UTC
I don't really care if he existed or not. What difference does that make?



Some guy named Jesus might or might not have existed a long time ago....Wow. Ok.Yoshua was a common name back then.



Still no proof for god or the devil or the miracles or talking snakes or the world flood or crucifixion/resurrection etc.
?
2009-06-14 05:05:55 UTC
because there is no actual evidence to support that that specific jesus existed
2009-06-14 03:44:18 UTC
History shows that Jesus probably never existed, the myth was created from several other deities. If he ever existed he was only mortal.
Madara
2009-06-14 03:54:21 UTC
For me jesus never existed but if he did... well I think he's the greatest con man ever lived.
2009-06-14 03:46:36 UTC
"Do some atheists really maintain that Jesus never existed?"

I am sure there were blokes named Jeez cruising around the Middle East pretending they were god ... it still happens now, dontcha know?



Ma-a-a-ate, Paul was looking for a name to hang his scam from - Jeez name came out teh hat first.

Voila !

~
2009-06-14 03:39:53 UTC
there is still no credible evidence to support that jesus really existed. unless you can cite sources that say otherwise.



instead giving a thumbs down, why not just post a link that proves jesus existed.

thanks.
2009-06-14 03:40:01 UTC
I'll believe it if you can prove it. Can you? No. Then stop rambling.
2009-06-14 03:42:57 UTC
Or maybe Jesus was the monkey we're all descended from. Atheists are f*cked in the head, that's all.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...