Why the stunning lack of accurate, historical evidence for Jesus Christ?

by nicolaou 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  nicolaou

  By no means a new topic for discussion but always worth a fresh airing . . .

  I'd suggest that the 1st century was quite a well documented time. We have lots of historical evidence for important people who actually existed.
  
  People like Julius Caesar for example. We have writings by him, and writings about him written during his lifetime. We have contemporary sculptures and artwork so that we have a pretty good idea of what he looked like, and various other artifacts confirming his life and death.

  We have a known year of birth and a known day of death. In truth, we have quite a complete history of Julius Caesar which surely must give some pause for thought for thinking Christians when they consider that as yet no such evidence or complete historical record is found for Jesus Christ, who is supposed to have lived at a similar time (even a few decades later).

  We don't even know Jesus last name.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  It works out better that way, with all the desire to 'take it all on faith' you know. Vague, incomplete, are the substance of Christianity.

  Of course I will be attacked for saying - must be the demunz driving my negative opinions.

  Jeff
• 

  unshackled

  Because if a man like Jesus ever actually existed he beared little resemblance to the fiction embellished character in the bible.

  Vague, incomplete, are the substance of Christianity.

  Think you could also replace Christianity with the word Faith.
• 

  leavingwt

  Jesus personally speaks (with an audible voice) to some of our members, here.

  This testimony is superior to any historical document -- for them.
• 

  nicolaou

  Jesus personally speaks (with an audible voice) to some of our members, here.

  And they say you can judge a man by the company he keeps . . .
• 

  BluesBrother

  Pardon me for pointing out that we have sculptures and records of Julius Caesar because he was the Emperor of Rome, whereas Jesus was a carpenter killed as a common criminal. Which one do you think would leave more records?

  Information on ordinary people , even say 500 years ago is hard to come by.
• 

  leavingwt

  Jesus was a carpenter killed as a common criminal.

  The dude performed miracles, including raising people from the dead.
• 

  nicolaou

  Hi Blues. Jesus was supposed to be the long awaited MESSIAH! The SON OF GOD no less! Surely this most important of all men would have made a bit more of a dent in the historical records, especially (as leaving intimates) he did such striking things as walk on water and raise the dead!!

  C'mon . . . .
• 

  undercover

  The dude performed miracles, including raising people from the dead.

  Well, duh.... the Roman government squelched all information about the insurrectionist. Couldn't have a martyr to stir the people to revolt ya know... It's like a movie... they removed all traces of his existance from their computer banks. Wiped his social security, his driver's license, his hospital records, school records. The man came to not exist. If it weren't for his faithful apostles who recorded everthing down in code (reference the discrepencies between accounts - it's not like they purposely screwed shit up, c'mon!) nothing of our savior would have been preserved to our day.

  It was a top level conspiracy.

  I mean... if we're gonna fantasize about the whole thing
• 

  snowbird

  It was foretold that He would be lightly esteemed. Isaiah 53.

  Yet, this lowly Person somehow managed to change the course of history - even the calendar.

  Whenever we write a date, we should think of that.

  Syl