Lest I be labeled anti-Islam, I though I'd post some questions and thoughts I have about a historical Jesus (if he existed), based on some reading I've done.

From my understanding, there are no contemporary writings that mention a Jesus figure. One would think that scribes, historians and governing officials in Roman-ruled Jerusalem would have been likely to mentioned him - he caused enough trouble.

The authors of the Gospels are unknown. Of the authors of historical works mentioning Jesus, all were born too late to have actually been eyewitnesses.


So, is there any solid evidence that there even was a Jesus - a letter from his mom, his "step-dad", the bar tab from the Last Supper ?

You know how much money, dunno who, spent here, to study the Sacra Sindone :duh: which is in contrast with Islamic belief, but better than nothing :(

And no matter if the conclusion is that it is mere artistry, some will always believe.


http://www.sindone.org/images/scient/neg.jpg

Ma no, a man who passed through terrible sufferences, is supposed to have been there. Obviously is a matter of faith to believe that man was Jesus, that is your problem: you always want things rational, not always possible.

http://www.sindone.org/en/scient/telo/sin_imma.htm
Waiting for other answers

Me go back investigating on this other pre-islamic thing :rolleyes:

Here's a good impartial summary I found:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html

Some excerpts -

" The purpose of this document is to partially answer the question, "To what extent are the events described in the New Testament corroborated by contemporary non-Christian texts?"

"I argue that the answer to this question is "not much""

"A reader of the ancient texts is struck by how little the literature has to say about events in the New Testament. For example, Herod's infamous murder of the Innocents (in which he ordered the slaughter of hundreds of children), while playing a major role in the New Testament, is not mentioned by any other source, including the various accounts of Herod's reign. "

It discusses the writings of Josephus Flavinus, which mention Jesus but concensus is that Christian writers altered the original (written towards the end of the 1st century, or about 50 years after the events), and other writings from the 2nd century...

as a muslim, I have to beleive that Prophet Jesus peace be upon him exists, coz thats the basic pillers of beleiving,

I dont think we would have christianity as the largest religion in the world if he didnt exist!!

I dont have solid proof, and because I have the Quran which I beleive in I dont need to look for solid proof, to me concentrating on learning how to live as a better muslim is better than going back in history

Originally posted by Arabian Princess

I dont think we would have christianity as the largest religion in the world if he didnt exist!!



Do you have any idea how many children believe in Santa Claus ?

Originally posted by Arabian Princess

I dont have solid proof, and because I have the Quran which I beleive in I dont need to look for solid proof, to me concentrating on learning how to live as a better muslim is better than going back in history

Well, it's all you have as there is no "history" of Jesus to review.

"Take, for example, the works of Philo Judaeus who's birth occurred in 20 B.C.E. and died 50 C.E. He lived as the greatest Jewish-Hellenistic philosopher and historian of the time and lived in the area of Jerusalem during the alleged life of Jesus. He wrote detailed accounts of the Jewish events that occurred in the surrounding area. Yet not once, in all of his volumes of writings, do we read a single account of a Jesus "the Christ." Nor do we find any mention of Jesus in Seneca's (4? B.C.E. - 65 C.E.) writings, nor from the historian Pliny the Elder (23? - 79 C.E.).

If, indeed, such a well known Jesus existed, as the gospels allege, does any reader here think it reasonable that, at the very least, the fame of Jesus would not have reached the ears of one of these men?"


Take a look at this page, I think it is rather interesting -

Did a historical Jesus exist?

by Jim Walker

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

But Babbo Natale is a commercial thing :duh:

Originally posted by amo_l_oman
But Babbo Natale is a commercial thing :duh:

Doesn't matter, the point is that you can get a large number of people believing in things which are simply untrue.

Again and again.



Jinn
Tooth Fairy
Leprechauns
Menehune
Easter Bunny
Werewolves
Chupacabra
Cyclops
Trolls (not internet Trolls - they exist)
Banshee
Centaur
Elves
Golem
Incubus
Mermaids
Satyr ;)
Unicorns

People are superstitious.

Plus 25th of December is not the real one as you surely know.
Ye you right, on the 8th is women's day, waiting for lots of mimosas :color: but i suffer allergy :weep:

Early non Christian sources about Christ

1) Tacitus, Roman Historian:

"'Therefore to dispel rumour, Nero substituted his culprits and treated with the most extreme punishments some people, popularly known as Christians whose disgraceful activities were notorious. The originator of that name Christus had been executed when Tiberias was Emperor by order of the procurator Pontius Pilatus. But the deadly cult, though checked for a time, was now breaking out again not only in Judea, the birth place of this evil, but even throughout Rome where all the nasty and disgusting ideas from all over the world pour in and find a ready following"

2) Josephus, Jewish Historian:

'And there arose about this time a source of new trouble, one Jesus. He was a doerof marvellous deeds. This man was the so-called Christ and when Pilate had condemned him to the Cross, those who had loved him did not cease - for he appeared to them, as they said, on the third day alive again.'


3) Lucian of Samosata, a Satirist:

He referred to Christ as 'the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced a new cult into the world'.

4) Seutonius refers to Christians as being 'given over to a new and mischievous superstition'.

5) Pliny the Younger gives advice to Trajan about killing Christians.

6) Thallus and Phlegon are two first-century historians who debate the cause of the darkness in the middle of the day which occurred at Christ's crucifixion.
This brief excursion into Jewish and Roman history is simply to show that the consensus among non-Christian writers was that Jesus existed, performed miracles, was crucified under Pilate when Tiberius was Emperor, and was believed by his followers to have risen from the dead. If we're wanting more detailed evidence then it is to the Gospels in the New Testament that we must turn.

Early New Testament documents:


1) John Ryland fragment in the John Ryland Library in Manchester which dates from 125 AD

2) Magdalen fragments which date from about 65 - 70 AD and are housed in the Magdalen College Library in Oxford.

3) Complete manuscripts of the New Testament from the first three centuries after Christ including the Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Sinaiticus in the British Library and the Codex Vaticanus in the Vatican Library in Rome.

Documentary perspective:

1) We know of Julius Caesar only from ten documents, the earliest of which is a copy written 1,000 years after his life-time.

2) Apart from the New Testament, the best documented literature in antiquity is Homer's Iliad of which have only 643 copies, the earliest written 500 years after the original.

with thanks

A full critical description of historical documents about Jesus can be read here:Historical Jesus (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm)

Ponzio Pilato could be simple and quick historical proof: the trick is in the presence of both Yeshua and Bar Abba (son of the father in Aramaic):

When Pilato asked: who do you want?
Was he talking really about a choice between two men there (Yeshua and Bar Abba) or just asking if people wanted the crucifixion of the son of the father, which might led to think that only one was there and his name was Bar Abba?

Amo

What are you brewing in your cauldron, if you don´t mind my asking?

Trying to give an answer to pitbull Wandy and that was a theory i watched on a program on raitre last week
Pilato is history isn't it :duh: But related to that period astronomers and geologists said that all conditions presented from bible at that era are not proved, eclips and so on plus there's this thing about Barabba, well you are a linguista you should know more than me.

Even more baffling is the fact that Barabbas was also known as Jesus Barabbas.

So experts said :lost:
Oh, no one of my customers brought me mimosa what a shame, but maybe cuz raining :sad:

Originally posted by Shakoosh Kabir
A full critical description of historical documents about Jesus can be read here:Historical Jesus (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm)


LOL


"The non-Christian sources for the historical truth of the Gospels are both few and polluted by hatred and prejudice"

In other words - not favorable to our [the Catholic Church] position.

How are the Catholic sources on the historical truth of Mormonism, I wonder ?

W

Allow me to be of assistance*:Mormon (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10570c.htm)

* I cannot comment on the orthographical accuracy of the "heavenly messenger".

Mormons
(Also called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.)

This religious body had its origin during the early part of the nineteenth century.

Joseph Smith, the founder and first president of the sect, was the son of a Vermont farmer, and was born in Sharon township, Windsor County, in that state, on 23 December, 1805. In the spring of 1820, while living with his parents at Manchester, Ontario (now Wayne) County, New York, he became deeply concerned upon the subject of his salvation, a condition partly induced by a religious revival which proselytized a few of his relatives to the Presbyterian Faith. Joseph himself was inclined toward Methodism; to satisfy his mind as to which one of the existing sects he should join, he sought Divine guidance, and claimed to have received in answer to prayer a visitation from two glorious beings, who told him not to connect himself to any of these Churches, but to bide the coming of Church of Christ, which was about to be re-established.

According to his own statement, there appeared to him on the night of 21 September, 1823, a heavenly messenger, who gave his name as Moroni, and revealed the existence of an ancient record containing the fullness of the Gospel of Christ as taught by the Saviour after his Resurrection to the Nephites, a branch of the House of Israel which inhabited the American continent ages prior to its discovery by Columbus. Moroni in mortal life had been a Nephite prophet, the son of another prophet named Mormon, who was the compiler of the record buried in a hill situated about two miles from the modern village of Manchester.

Joseph Smith states that he received the record from the angel Moroni in September, 1827. It was, he alleges, engraved upon metallic plates having the appearance of gold and each a little thinner than ordinary tin, the whole forming a book about six inches long, six inches wide, and six inches thick, bound together by rings.


If only he had gone to a cave to reflect !!

So what did Joe Smith do with the record? (sounds more like a stack of DVDs actually....this Moron guy was tech-hip);)

Originally posted by mimosa
So what did Joe Smith do with the record? (sounds more like a stack of DVDs actually....this Moron guy was tech-hip);)

Well he translated them into the Book of Mormon.

Unfortunately, the angel Moroni decided to recover the gold plated original book. :rolleyes:

Too bad. It might have been excellent evidence of authenticity.

Mormons make excellent military troops - they don't drink alcohol or smoke, they are nationalistic, and stress education - especially high tech - so many officers/pilots.

Originally posted by Wanderer
Mormons stress education - especially high tech

D@mn right - they had DVDs in 1827.

Originally posted by Wanderer


Unfortunately, the angel Moroni decided to recover the gold plated original book.

Surely that doesn´t mean what remains is corrupted?