I don't think there is any arugment among scientific minds that Jesus was a real person. The argument lies in if he was who people think he is. Now, I'm not scientifically minded, but even among those who are, I don't think they doubt that he in fact existed. As far as pulling actual facts...what kind of facts are you looking for? DNA? Even if there were DNA samples, what are you going to compare it against? It's hard to show that someone existed 2 thousand years ago without some sort of point of reference.

 

Ok maybe not to the extent of scientific data that you want but if many people SAW him and reported on his existence during that time means he existed. I mean how do we know caesar exists? Or someone else from before, it's because people tell stories about him existing. The real proof you want won't exist because like RB said what are you going to compare what you find with? There's no way of honestly knowing short of having a time machine and go back in time.

 

There's nothing in the On-Topic rules about it having to be a current event.

 

I think he was a storybook hero. The names used were common names and the stories were a way of saying that extraordinary things can happen to even the most common of people regardless of who or what they are.

Scientific proof...nope never seen or heard of it being found. I would think that this is where a persons faith comes into play as opposed to hard evidence...but I have no faith so you are gonna have to prove it to me.


Have you read the GTST post yet? You might want to

 

werd. Besides kids stories, there is no proof. Which is why I don't believe in any of it

 

:doh:

there's tons of evidence that support the existence of jesus. ancient scholars and historians such Josephus (i believe thats his name) who was not affiliated w/ any "christian" church back in the day wrote about the life of christ specifically, not just any of the other dozens/hundreds of jesus's. this is the same historian that we rely on for a lot of ancient roman history. beyond that, old roman official documents record of the consequences of jesus's actions back in the day, whos teachings and actions stirred up lots of unruly crowd activity. not that that was his intention, but the romans had to supress the people who were either rioting against or for jesus

the four gospels w/in the bible are also time tested, not only in authorship but content. the places and events that the different authors record are all real events (the different census, rulers, governors, officials, feasts, etc.). theres a whole slew of background information on that which would take far too long to dive into

all in all, the actual "evidence" that christ existed is out there. all educated historians will admit that disproving his existence is a far tougher challenge than proving his existence

this info is all out there. its just that not many people have the access to dig through manuscript after manuscript to trace back into a time period, culture and society that all of us today are completely unfamiliar w/ (for the most part)


and brar, youre ignorant

 

theres no reason to believe jesus did not exist.

 

historians and scholars may be be evidence, but it is NOT SCIENTIFIC evidence. I need hard proof of something to believe it was real.

 

agreed. but with a subject that old and with so many myths its hard to separate the facts.

 

word of mouth isn't facts h:
just because it is written in a book doesn't make it true either. Do you believe everything on the internet? no, because anyone could have written it. Same thing for books, anyone can write one.