Did Jesus really exist?

Oh, I think he probably did exist... I mean, Christianity must have started somewhere!

As for why the Romans had no record of him: well, they crucified literally thousands of Jews in those few decades... many of whom must have been called 'Jesus', for the same reason why, if you shoot a couple of thousand Americans, there must be a couple of Johns among them... did they keep records on all of them?

No, I think he simply was not that important to the Romans - and that the miracles that made him seem so important in retrospect were made up by the gospel writers.

I think he was merely a misunderstood idealist... and perhaps a minor insurrectionist.

Judea in Roman times was a hot bed for fanatical religious activity. Rather like now, its funny how some things never change.There where hundreds of different religious sects vying for control over a religiously devout population, while the Romans tried to keep the peace as best they could. Jesus would have been one of many religious leaders to have been causing trouble, so no one really cared to record his actions but his followers some 60 years after his death.

Never the less the Romans were anal on recording yes. I imagine they must have kept tabs on these various religious leaders who could be causing rebellion. Whatever they recorded of Jesus must not have been seen as significant by the Romans, and so any primary source accounts of Jesus have been been lost to history.

There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record - that is right - not one!!! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are well recorded!!

He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record?

Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!!

At best he was an amalgam of those others!!

But what about Pilot - recorded as a somewhat lackluster person but no mention of Jesus, a trial or crucifixion. Surely with such a humdrum man if there was any truth at all to the claims about Jesus it should have been recorded in Pilots history!!!

It is not surprising that the Romans don't have much written down about an itinerant Jewish Rabbi who had a 3 year ministry in Palestine. But they do have a lot written down about how His ministry took off after His death (and resurrection) including stories about how His followers would suffer horrible deaths and torture rather than denounce their faith.

Many of these people claimed to have either seen Jesus when He was alive like Peter and Paul or they knew people who had been with Jesus. A Muslim might give up his life because he believed that doing so would ensure him an entrance into Heaven but he wouldn't do it for something that he knew was a lie. The Muslim faith is based upon something that was written in the 6th century AD. The Christians who died in the first century AD in Rome had faith based upon eyewitness accounts or personal experience.

First of all, your argument is from a "lack of evidence". Just because we don't find anything written about Him from Roman sources is not evidence that they did not write about Him. They may have and it simply was lost. As for anything substantial, remember that as a wandering prophet in some obscure little country, He wasn't that important to Romans. So why would they write anything substantial? Why would you expect them to?

That being said, you're wrong anyway. He was written about.

• Tacitus (AD 55-120), a renowned historical of ancient Rome, wrote in the latter half of the first century that ‘Christus ... 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 originated, but through the city of Rome also.’ (Annals 15: 44).

• Suetonius writing around AD 120 tells of disturbances of the Jews at the ‘instigation of Chrestus’, during the time of the emperor Claudius. This could refer to Jesus, and appears to relate to the events of Acts 18:2, which took place in AD 49.

• Thallus, a secular historian writing perhaps around AD 52 refers to the death of Jesus in a discussion of the darkness over the land after his death. The original is lost, but Thallus’ arguments — explaining what happened as a solar eclipse — are referred to by Julius Africanus in the early 3rd century.

• Mara Bar-Serapion, a Syrian writing after the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, mentions the earlier execution of Jesus, whom he calls a ‘King’.

• The Babylonian Talmud refers to the crucifixion (calling it a hanging) of Jesus the Nazarene on the eve of the Passover. In the Talmud Jesus is also called the illegitimate son of Mary.

• The Jewish historian Josephus describes Jesus’ crucifixion under Pilate in his Antiquities, written about AD 93/94. Josephus also refers to James the brother of Jesus and his execution during the time of Ananus (or Annas) the high priest.

From a secular historical standpoint, probably... but not with absolute certainty, and probably not as described by early Christians.

The Roman argument in your OP isn't terribly convincing--Jesus was allegedly a peasant Jew, executed in an outlying territory for sedition. In other words, at the time of his death, he was a dime-a-dozen common foreign rabble-rouser from the perspective of his executioners. There's no reason to suppose he'd be any better documented than the average local criminal executed for a routine offense.

Even from a secular standpoint, though, the gospels--though not an unbiased, uncorrupted source by any means--are as good a ancient biography as any other about a first-century Hebrew peasant. They may not (depending on your faith, or lack thereof) be a to-the-letter example of biographical journalism, but they're reasonable evidence that the man existed in the given timeframe, had followers, preached and was executed for sedition.

Suppose...just for a click or two...that Jesus really existed, and really did what the Bible claims He did.

Now, put yourself in Pilate's place, or the place of the soldiers.

Pilate was already in trouble with Rome...

He crucifes a Man, against his own better jugment...to placate the Jewish Sanhedrin, basically because, with his already precarious situation, he didn't want another riot on his hands...

And then, the Guy has the unmitigated audacity to get up out of His tomb, and walk around town with His followers...

What are the chances he'd want to report this episode to Rome?

I don't know about you, but in Pilate's shoes, I'd probably keep my mouth shut.

And, you know the soldiers were keeping their mouths shut, Whatever really had happened, they knew it was going to be blamed on them...and the penalty for it would be their death.

Now, you can believe whatever you want to believe about Jesus, and about His death and resurrection.

But whatever you believe, it is pretty evident that His life and death changed the history of the world, and still has a pretty solid impact on world events to this day.

We even date our calendar from His advent.

Oh, yeah...I know...we've changed the designations from "B.C." or Before Christ to "B.C.E." or Before the Common Era...and, "A.D." or Anno Domine, meaning "Year of our Lord" is not "C.E." or "Common Era".

You'd be amazed at the vast numbers of people who honestly believe that BCE stands for "Before the Christian Era" and CE stands for "Christian Era". Strange coincidence, "common" and "Christian" both begin with the letter "C"...

Yep...

Passing strange...

To be honest I'm gonna have to look into that.

However, one question does come to mind...

Greece and Rome were the next places to recieved the christian faith why do you think that would be?

It seems that Josephus, in the book Jewish Antiquities" wrote:

"At that time lived Jesus, a wise man, if he may be called a man; for he performed many wonderful works. He was a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. . . .And when Pilate, at the instigation of the chief men among us, had condemned him to the cross, they who before had conceived an affection for him did not cease to adhere to him. For on the third day he appeared to them alive again, the divine prophets having foretold these and many other wonderful things concerning him. And the sect of the Christians, so called from him, subsists at this time" (Antiquities, Book 18, Chapter 3, Section 1).

and Tacitus,

in writing about accusations that Nero burned the city of Rome and blamed it on Christians, said the following:

". . .Nero procured others to be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishment upon those people, who were in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the name of Christians. They had their denomination from Christus (Christ, dm.), who in the reign of Tibertius was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate. . . .At first they were only apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast multitude discovered by them, all of which were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. . . ." (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44).

actually, Jesus was historically recorded. look at Tacticus' writings. Besides, to them Jesus was just another criminal. Most of our knowledge of Jesus comes form "Oral Tradition", which is by people who actually saw the Guy, and usually never changes over time because it is, as they say, a tradition.

there are very few scholars that believe Jesus never existed. St. Peter is proven to exist (hell, he writes a bunch of letters in the Bible), and he claimed to know Jesus personally. St. Paul knew St. Peter, so on and so on. the Catholic Church has recordings (writings) of talking to people who actually spoke to Jesus. (this of course was 2000 years ago, not people from today. hahaha)

people only started questioning whether the Man existed not too long ago, like the 1850's.

The Romans were not anal about recording everything, especially something as insignificant as Jesus was at the time. He was put on the cross along side common thieves. There was no record of everyone who was put to death, just the significant ones.

The Roman's were encouraged by the Jewish nobles to kill Jesus, because he was attempted to reform their ways. All historians agree that some man caused a ruckus amoung the Jewish nobles, and was put to death by the Romans.

His divinity is arguable, his historical existance, is not.