CreateDebate


Debate Info

23
38
There is no evidence of Jesus This is evidence of Jesus
Debate Score:61
Arguments:57
Total Votes:63
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 There is no evidence of Jesus (19)
 
 This is evidence of Jesus (37)

Debate Creator

smilinbobs(434) pic



There is no Evidence of a Historical "Jesus Christ"

After years of study looking for any historical evidence to support the Jesus story I find that the "Gospels" are not reliably historical with many contradictions. There was nothing written of the events portrayed in the Bible until 70 years past the time the events portrayed were suppose to have occurred. There is no archaeological evidence to support the Jesus story. Does anyone have any strong evidence?

There is no evidence of Jesus

Side Score: 23
VS.

This is evidence of Jesus

Side Score: 38
2 points
Side: There is no evidence of Jesus
Side: This is evidence of Jesus

There was nothing written of the events portrayed in the Bible until 70 years past the time the events portrayed were suppose to have occurred.

Just for clarification, the apostles and Jesus were about 33ish (33 AD) when the events happened. The gospels are claimed to have started being written in 68 AD, in theory. The letters from Paul began in 57 AD. If it had been 70 years after the fact, the apostles would have been 103 years old. The mistake is that AD means "after death", but it doesn't mean "after death". It means "Anno Domini", which starts in year one of Jesus life.

There is no archaeological evidence to support the Jesus story.

If you think about the premise of this statement, what exactly would the "archaeological evidence" be? Without video and newspaper clippings, etc I can't "archaeologically" prove that the mass exodus happend from Hurricane Katrina, and that was just a few years back. The apostles had no cameras or mass media at their disposal.

What we do know is the people, such as Pilate and Herrod did exist. Jerusalem did and does exist. Damascus, Bethlehem, Nazareth all did and do exist. We know the Romans controlled Israel. The point? Much of the ongoing events and people mentioned that weren't Jesus or the apostles are 100% verifiable without the Bible.

Supporting Evidence: Anno Domini (en.m.wikipedia.org)
Side: This is evidence of Jesus
smilinbobs(434) Disputed
1 point

The years that you are referring to are the earliest possible dates contrived by the religious right in order to put the authors in a time frame to claim there was a chance they knew members of the stories. Yet there is no mention of these works or events until the 2nd century. The earliest piece of physical evidence of the Gospels is 3rd century. The authors were unaware of many 1st century customs, events and geography. Most non-religious Biblical Scholars date Mark around 100 AD

When I mention archaeological evidence I am referring to physical items related to the stories such as a self written manuscripts from Jesus or his disciples. The boat Jesus stepped out of to walk on water. the withered fig tree. The tomb where Jesus was resurrected, ect. These for the believers should have been priceless treasures which were protected through the generations. Note: on all maps of 1st and 2nd century Judea there is no Nazareth. It is not mentioned in any literature outside of the Gospels until the 3rd century.

Many allegorical fictional stories of the time included places and people who had fame to the authors. The Gospels are a classic example of Allegorical fiction of that period. Much is written from the mindset of the actors by authors who write in 3rd person. Much was written by historians and scribes of the time about people like Herrod or Pilate their deeds and misdeeds yet there is no mention of the events written in the gospels. No mention of the character "Jesus Christ"

Side: There is no evidence of Jesus
1 point

The boat Jesus stepped out of to walk on water. the withered fig tree. The tomb where Jesus was resurrected, ect. These for the believers should have been priceless treasures which were protected through the generations

I'd find it hard to believe there would be physical evidence of the first two (a boat and a small dead tree) after 2,000 years, plus the Romans tried to wipe out Christianity. It would have been unreasonable to think Roman and Jewish territory, hostile to Christianity, would easily preserve Christian relics. Nevertheless, they think the tomb exists and they give tours to the alleged tomb. Obviously unverifiable but technically could be authentic in theory.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

such as a self written manuscripts from Jesus or his disciples

The Apostle Paul wrote actual letters to the Corinthians, Phillipians, etc. The actual name of the book of Corinthians is "the letter from Paul to the Corinthians".

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

No mention of the character "Jesus Christ"

But there is evidence that the Romans were killing Christians in the Roman Colliseum at this time period, meaning these early Christians believed Jesus was real enough to die for.

Jesus is also mentioned by Josephus, not a Christian, and in his writing he claims to know people who knew Jesus who claimed to be the Christ. (Antiquity of the Jews)

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

Josephus verifies John the Baptist and the Apostle Paul (Saul) as historical Jewish figures.

-The girl who danced before Herod and requested John the Baptist’s head was named Salome (Antiquities 18.5.4).

-Herod sent John the Baptist to prison in Macherus, on the east side of the Dead Sea (Antiquities 18.5.2).

-Felix, the Roman governor who met Paul in prison and trembled at his words, had begged his Jewish wife, Drusilla, to divorce her husband so they could marry (Antiquities 20.7.2).

-Cornelius Tacitus (A.D. 55-120) was considered the greatest historian of ancient Rome. He wrote of Nero who "punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus [Christ], 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 originiated, but through the city of Rome also."

-And from the Jewish Talmud, "we learn that Jesus was conceived out of wedlock, gathered disciples, made blasphemous claims about himself, and worked miracles, but these miracles are attributed to sorcery and not to God."

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

The authors were unaware of many 1st century customs, events and geography. Most non-religious Biblical Scholars date Mark around 100 AD

I'm unaware of many current American customs, and there's no way to prove someone 2,000 years ago was unaware of anything.

There is no real way to verify for sure when they were written. It could have been the year it happened in 33 AD. People are pretty much guessing from both sides. No one knows. It's all rather meaningless.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

Note: on all maps of 1st and 2nd century Judea there is no Nazareth. It is not mentioned in any literature outside of the Gospels until the 3rd century

To claim that Nazareth definately existed in the 3rd century doesn't really do much for your argument. If it existed then, it probably existed prior.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

Much was written by historians and scribes of the time about people like Herrod or Pilate their deeds and misdeeds yet there is no mention of the events written in the gospels. No mention of the character "Jesus Christ"

If you are writing about Herrod, to randomly throw in a rebel's name, would be ignorant and sloppy.

Many early historians mention Jesus. Did they know him? No. Do they know of him? Yes. Historians of today never actually met Abraham Lincoln, but they know of him and talk about him in their writings, and it's reliable.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

The Gospels are a classic example of Allegorical fiction of that period

And letters from Paul are provably not.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

The earliest piece of physical evidence of the Gospels is 3rd century.

The gospels aren't the only parts of the New Testament, and the other parts back up the gospel story. They are dated earlier.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

The earliest piece of physical evidence of the Gospels is 3rd century

Josephus mentions Jesus. He isn't Christian, and he's first century. He was born in the 30's AD.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

The fact that you are talking about Jesus at all is proof that we are talking about a historical figure.

Clearly a mark has been made on history.

Besides that, you don't even know Jesus. If you knew Jesus, you'd realize that we are talking about The Word of God, and there is not a thing that was created that was created apart from The Word of God.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
smilinbobs(434) Disputed
4 points

So since every year millions of people talk about Santa Clause, The Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, ect. that makes them historical figures equal to Jesus, Right?

Side: There is no evidence of Jesus
TzarPepe(797) Disputed
1 point

Jesus is defined in scripture as being The Word of God made flesh dwelling among us. The scriptures say that "not a thing that was created was created apart from The Word(of God)".

The point is, Jesus Christ is God, and all history is the result of Jesus.

The reason why the historicity of Jesus is in question at all has more to do with the fact that those debating it don't realize the identity of Jesus. They aren't looking at the same Jesus.

The idea that history is knowledge at all is very naive to begin with. There is nothing about history that is solid science. If this is what you put your faith in, you aren't putting your faith in anything you really know.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus
1 point

@smilinbobs

No one claims the Easter Bunny etc are historical figures or even real, nor are their "followers", if any, mentioned throughout 2,000 years of history.

Side: This is evidence of Jesus