proof of Jesus

[_Wes]

Ok, I'm a believer - I have no issues with this personally - but from scientific, or maybe from a non-believer - or even peer-reviewed article kind of thing - what is the standard for proof of Jesus existance?

I have gotten into debates on some online forums with some scientific-history types who want proof of some kind - and I thought this would be a good place to ask.

For me - belief is enough - but this has turned into something that is strenthening my faith - so I'm trying to follow up as best I can.

Thanks! :)

[National Intelligence Director Phoenix]

Ok, I'm a believer - I have no issues with this personally - but from scientific, or maybe from a non-believer - or even peer-reviewed article kind of thing - what is the standard for proof of Jesus existance?

I have gotten into debates on some online forums with some scientific-history types who want proof of some kind - and I thought this would be a good place to ask.

For me - belief is enough - but this has turned into something that is strenthening my faith - so I'm trying to follow up as best I can.

Thanks! :)

First off, I'm wondering what you mean by scientific history. We can't study history the same way we study modern events. If I want to compare the effect of gravity on falling objects, I can do so repeatedly and then determine my results. If, however, I'm studying history, I'm studying that which is non-repeatable and I have to use evidence more akin to forensic science.

Let's look at some basics though. For more, I'd suggest checking out JPHolding's www.tektonics.org.

We have secular writers speaking of Christ such as Tacitus, Seutonius, Mara-Bar Serapion, Josephus, and others.

We have four gospels written within a generation of the events that they describe that are thoroughly backed by archaeology especially when compared with the book of Acts.

We also have the evidence of the existence of the early church. The church had to come from somewhere. It's most interesting that the movement started in Jerusalem right next to where the events took place instead of rather far away where there could be no testing.

The ultimate reason Jesus's existence isn't accepted is because of miracles and Jesus's unique claims to deity. If what we had in the NT was merely a wise man walking around telling us ways to live with no deity claims and no miracles, it would be far more accepted than it is.

I would say a good place to start then could also be seeing if someone is begging the question by discounting all miracles a priori.

Hope this helps!

[Jaltus]

Also remember that the Jews of His day did not debate His existence or His miracles, they debated His paternity and His claims about Himself.