I have a question for those who deny Jesus Christ ever existed?

Every one of those people were important historical figures who had there own writings and things written about them while they were actually alive. Jesus is a mythological character and the earliest writings about him date back to decades after his "life" supposedly ended.

Alexander the Great conquered the known world. He was a ruler. The most important man of his time. Jesus was a poor man who didn't do anything on a grand scale while he was "alive" therefore there is much less known about him. So much less that he may have never existed.

Julius Caesar and Nero were both Roman emporers so their existences are as proven as Alexander's

Aristotle and Plato were also documented while alive. Unlike Jesus

Everyone else you listed...simply laughable. These people existed in the modern era. There are descendants of many of these people alive today who can trace their lineage back to them. George Washington? C'mon? He's the first president of the United States. I can not prove that Jesus never existed but you can not compare him to the other people you named. The son of a carpenter who preached a lot and was later crucified vs The Emporer of Rome...hmmmmm which one was a bigger deal at the time? Which one would have more written about them?

The biggest reason why people doubt that Jesus actually existed was that there were stories about a man born of a virgin and saving the world and being crucified for thousands of years before Jesus supposedly lived.

Nobody says Aristotle, Plato, Julius Caesar, William Shakespeare, Alexander the Great, George Washington, Paul Revere, Thomas Jefferson, King Henry the 8th, Sir Francis Drake, Christopher Columbus, Nero have created the earth. We say they were human being and we read their notes. They say God has created the earth, which is false. They show bible, which is a fiction, from some ancient people's mind.

Oh boy. Really?

Ok - you asked for it.

1) We know Aristotle & Plato existed because we have writings and contemporary accounts etc. Socrates is in doubt, but who cares. No one says we're off to hell for doubting Socrates existence.

2) Julius Caesar - we have letters FROM and TO him, contemporary accounts written by friends an enemies, busts made in his lifetime. Evidence he existed.

3) William Shakespeare. He existed, we have documentary evidence. He has a gravestone, numbskull! Whether or not he actually wrote the plays attributed to him is another matter.

4) Alexander the Great - plenty of archaeological evidence suggesting his existence.

5) George Washington? Are you kidding. His goddamn letters for a start. Portraits? Jeepers, you're scraping the barrel.

6) Paul Revere - contemporary, independent accounts.

7) Er again....letters, diaries, accounts, portraits. Incidentally, we have his DNA.

8) Henry VIII - portraits, letters to and from him, contemporary accounts

9) Sir Francis Drake - as above

10) Columbus - as above

11) Nero - contemporary accounts, writings, coins with his face on, busts.

Know what I think? You have no idea what historical evidence actually means. Look it up.

And would you mind returning the favour and telling us what historical evidence is there for Jesus? Anything will do?

I'll wait.

They are all mentioned by several historians who have no particular interest in the fact of their existence - objective sources.

I don't doubt the existence of Jesus because that would make no sense to me. Religions are not based on "ideas" or even theologies, but on the reality of the very significant and independent power of Divine authority. No human being can "create" a true religion (this does leave out Scientology) even though they can sure mess it up over time.

If you click here on the link you can download for free King Arthur Gold: http://bitly.com/1qXIxp3

it's completely free and it's very fast to install

King Arthur’s Gold is a game set in the time of legends. There are castles that need to be built, and he meets that need to be destroyed, and of course gold that must be mined.

It's the best game.

I spent most of my academic career as a professor of religious studies at a secular university in the American Midwest. Very few historians and religion scholars doubt the existence of the Historical Jesus. (That is the technical term, so to speak.) This "Jesus never existed"mantra is largely an Internet phenomenon, a kind of cyber-tabloid headline that gets attention but never much notice from serious scholars. It is not a matter of believer vs. non-believer nor theist vs. atheist. It is just a Flat Earth society tactic for bored teenagers looking for some attention.

So I wouldn't expect to find much intelligent dialogue on this topic on R&S, if I were you. It is much like trying to reason with the people who claim that astronauts never walked on the moon. You just can't get anywhere with them because they don't care about facts nor the consensus of historians and religion scholars.

Sure, plenty of scholars doubt the Biblical accounts of Jesus' miracles and they don't accept the divinity of Jesus. But other than a few renegades who find it a good way to get attention from the media and tabloid rags, the existence of Jesus (the founder of the religion that has the most followers) who lived in the first century simply isn't a topic that gets debated at the annual AAR and SBL conferences. (I mention those academic societies because I've been a member of both for some 40+ years. Both societies consist mostly of professors and the scholars you tend to see on Discovery channel documentaries.)

Indeed, the issue is much like some of the other popular questions that have been posted thousands of times here in R&S. Everybody got tired of posting the same answers. Much like the Apollo moon landing debate, it was kind of fun for a while -- to converse with people who sincerely believe it a hoax -- but eventually it got boring. In fact, the moon landing debate can be fun simply because some people truly DO believe what they are saying. But I came to the conclusion that other than each new crop of teenaged atheists who wrongly think one has to deny the historical Jesus in order to be a good atheist, most of the loudest R&S deniers didn't believe a word of what they were saying. And some eventually admitted that they just loved to torment the Christians on R&S. That is what it is about, for most of the deniers.

According to my interpretation of the Bible in Rev. & Dan. Obama is going to win the election because he is referred to as King #7(Rev. 17:10) who Dies a few days after he will raise taxes(Dan. 11:20) The Anti-Christ will be the next President after Obama! I have Biblical proof of this in Revelations 17:10! Where it says; There are 7 kings and 5 are fallen These 5 fallen kings are as follows here- In June 2004 there were 5x living pres. when George W. Bush was President! They were- 1.Gerald Ford 2.Jimmy Carter 3.Ronald Reagan 4.George H. W. Bush 5.Bill Clinton That means that George W. was king #6 and that makes Obama #7 and the Anti-Christ will be #8 who was 1 of our 7 previous presidents! At no time in world history has there ever been 5x kings living all at the same time when king #6 was in office! and the future king #7 was also alive also at that point in time! What you need to realize hear is that Obama is not going to raise our taxes before the election. So therefore according to Biblical prophecy Obama who is king/pres. #7 will raise our taxes after he is reelected and die with in a few days(Dan. 11:20)! The Anti-Christ will become our next President just a few days after Obama Raises taxes and dies!

***That should suffice for now.***

Not now, not ever. It's just a really ridiculous argument. Sorry. Every one of those people wrote extensively themselves and had volumes written about them. The only "evidence" of Jesus is the gospels, which even Christians know wasn't written by Jesus by by men who very likely never met him, AND is filled with errors, inconsistencies, and superstitious nonsense that no one believes could have ever happened.

Had someone in the Middle East at that time actually been doing all the things that the gospels claim he did, there would be MOUNTAINS of written records documenting this man and his miracles. There are none. Only the gospels, which, strangely enough, have stories in them that are remarkably similar in theme and character to stories from ancient mythologies that came long before them.

It's mythology dude. Just deal with it.

Tomoyo, why don't you first demonstrate how a book filled with inconsistencies could possibly disprove its own inconsistencies?

Evidence:

1. We have writings from many of these people in their own handwriting.

2. We have writings from people who knew personally knew these famous people.

3. We have artifacts (clothing, personal items, etc.) that belonged to these people.

4. The existence of the ancestors and descendants of these people is also historically well-established.

5. We can visit the graves of many of these people. If we like, we can dig them up and maybe even do a DNA analysis to show that their descendants are still around.

Of course, none of the above applies to your Jesus. Personally, I believe someone like his existed and was responsible for some interesting ideas, but he certainly was not any sort of god.

Torg

Yeah, except we have actual first hand records and collaborations of these peoples lives.

The best we have for Jesus is secondhand accounts from people who heard stories from people who had never met him.

Now, I'll be fair and admit the same thing I always have: Jesus Christ was probably a man that DID walk the earth, DID preach brotherly love, etc etc. The real question is "Was he the 'son' of God or not?"

Comparing the evidence for Jesus' existence to that of Shakespeare's is not only intellectually dishonest and lazy, it's just flat out stupid. And at the end of the day, while I personally think he existed, that does not change the fact that is no real overwhelming evidence to show he ever walked the earth.