0
Mankind, who does not wish to have 'someone' as a moral authority over him, has always been hostile to any mention of those who profess there is. Considering Jesus preached in a relatively obscure corner of the Roman Empire and it is the history of the Romans that we in the Western world primarily study, it doesn't surprise me if there is so-called scarce documentation on his life. Also, consider that the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed along with many eye-witnesses to Jesus' life events in 70 AD, is it any wonder of this scarcity? However, there is enough and the reader needs to Google with an open mind and see pro & con for this question. Here are a few historian mentions of Jesus/Christ/Christian:
The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious "Christians" (from Christus, which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (Annals 15.44).
Flavius Josephus is the most famous Jewish historian. In his Antiquities he refers to James, "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ." There is a controversial verse (18:3) that says, "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats....He was [the] Christ...he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him." And there are many more in this work.
Pliny the Younger, in Letters 10:96, recorded early Christian worship practices including the fact that Christians worshiped Jesus as God and were very ethical, and he includes a reference to the love feast and Lord's Supper.
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago
Wiki User
∙ 8y agoHistorians usually accept that a person mentioned in ancient texts really did exist, unless there is good reason to believe otherwise. Jesus is mentioned in the gospels, so historians have accepted by default that he existed, although there is no actual proof of his existence. From a different perspective, some biblical scholars and an increasing number of historians have raised doubts about his existence, even as a simple, wandering preacher.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What is the information that historians use to show that something is TRUE?
A variety of sources referring to the same event. If the source is antipathetic to the subject, that is a good indicator of its truth. For example, Josephus is not impressed by Jesus, which is an indication that the historical Jesus existed.
What is the name of the place historians believe Columbus reached first-?
Historians believe that Columbus reached the Bahamas first.
What did historians think of hatshepsut?
A lot of historians believe that she was the stepmother of the biblical Moses.
Why historians are not sure if xia dynasty existed?
Historians know about the Xia dynasty because of stories. Archaeologists have not yet found evidence of this dynasty, so many believe that it never existed. Chinese people honor these stories, though.
When do many historians believe the Hittite civilization reached its peak?
Many historians believe that the Hittites were the first civilization to develop the use of the Israelite monarchy reached its peak with the reign.
What can you do for evidence that jesus existed?
Read the Bible and believe it.
Why do historians doubt Jesus' existence?
Historians usually accept that a person mentioned in ancient texts really did exist, unless there is good reason to believe otherwise. Jesus is mentioned in the gospels, so most historians accept by default that he existed, although there is no actual proof of his existence. Nevertheless, a growing minority of historians are beginning to question the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth.
Why do you personally believe that Jesus is truly the Son of God?
the bible has been researched and jesus existed, we believe our history books which we were not here to verify so why would you not believe a book (the bible).
What do Hindus believe about jesus?
Some Hindus believe he didn't exist. Some Hindus believed he existed but wasn't divine. Some Hindus believe that he existed and was divine. It all depends on the Hindu that is asked.
How do scientists believe the Badlands have change in climate and appearance since Tyrannosaurus rex roamed the Earth?
Jesus existed, therefore dinosaurs didn't. The badlands never existed, because dinosaurs never existed, because Jesus exists.
Was Jesus ever here?
A:Probably. Historians take the position that if a famous person was attested in ancient times, he probably did live, unless there are good reasons to believe otherwise. So, although Abraham is attested in the Bible, there are sufficiently good reasons to believe that he never really existed, whereas this is not the case with Jesus. This of course does not mean that historians accept that Jesus performed miracles. Against this is that Paul, in his epistles, seems not to have realised that Jesus was a man who had lived in Palestine in the recent past. For him, Jesus often seems either to have been someone who must have lived at some time in the distant past or to have been purely spiritual.
Do Illuminatis believe that Jesus is God in the flesh?
No. The Illuminati don't particularly believe in anything since they have not existed since 1785.
If you believe there is a god how does a person find his way to him?
Jesus existed as a person. But believing he had superpowers, etc is ludicrous.
Who made zero?
The number zero has always existed. Most historians believe that zero was first described by Indian mathematicians around 600 bce
What is the difference between believing in and believing that?
For Christianity, believing in means that you believe Jesus existed. Believing that means you believe Jesus died to save us from our sins. I'm not 100% sure, but that's what I think.
What is the information that historians use to show that something is TRUE?
A variety of sources referring to the same event. If the source is antipathetic to the subject, that is a good indicator of its truth. For example, Josephus is not impressed by Jesus, which is an indication that the historical Jesus existed.
What does it mean if I believe there was a Jesus but that he was not the son of God?
This is actually what Jews and Muslims believe. It is also what Hindus and atheists believe. If you believe that Jesus existed but that he was not the son of God, this does not, by itself, make you a Jew, Muslim, Hindu or atheist, but it does arguably make you a realist. It remains for you to decide which God or gods you believe in, if any.
