In October, Jeffrey Tayler wrote in Salon that the Qur’an “backs up jihad, suicide attacks (“martyrdom”), beheadings, even taking captive women as sex slaves.” This was singular for Salon, which usually whitewashes the truth about Islam and jihad and excoriates those who expose it as “racists” and “bigots,” but now it is clear why Tayler was able to get away with it: he is supremely hostile to Christianity. Here, he gives a characteristic Salon Christmas greeting: Jesus likely never existed, but Muhammad’s existence is well established.
“Let’s make Bill O’Reilly’s head explode: We desperately need a war on Christmas lies,” by Jeffrey Tayler, Salon, December 22, 2014 (thanks to Scott):
Some 2,000 years after the alleged event, religious scholars, despite their best efforts, have still found no proof that Jesus even existed. Although it might seem reasonable to suppose such a one as he walked the earth in the Middle East, historical records kept by the Romans (then in charge of Judea and Samaria) and contemporary chroniclers make no mention of him. The Gospels are not historical records and don’t count; they were composed decades afterward. It has even been credibly proposed that Paul and his cohorts created the savior with strokes of their quills by mythologizing history. Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad.
I think Tayler is somewhat overstating his case, but I welcome investigation of the existence of Christ and the reliability of the New Testament narratives. I wonder, however, if Tayler has ever seriously investigated the existence of Muhammad, even as he takes it to be “established beyond the shadow of a doubt.” In my book Did Muhammad Exist?, I show that there is serious reason to doubt that he did. These include the facts that:
1. In the contemporary accounts written by the people the Arabs conquered, the writers describe the conquerors in detail, but make no mention of their having a new prophet, a new religion, or a new holy book. This is extraordinary, since the conquests themselves were supposed to have been inspired by that holy book and prophet.
2. Those early accounts call the conquerors “Ishmaelites,” “Saracens,” “Muhajirun,” and “Hagarians,” but never “Muslims.” They don’t seem to know this word, which is likewise extraordinary, since it is supposed to be the only word the conquerors called themselves.
3. No record of Muhammad’s words or deeds appears until more than 125 years after he is supposed to have died. No record of Muhammad’s reported death in 632 appears until more than a century after that date.
4. The Arab conquerors, in their coins and inscriptions, don’t mention Islam or the Qur’an for the first six decades of their conquests. Mentions of “Muhammad” are non-specific and on at least two occasions are accompanied by a cross. The word can be used not only as a proper name but also as an honorific.
5. The Qur’an, even by the canonical Muslim account, was not distributed in its present form until the 650s, over 20 years after Muhammad is supposed to have died. Yet no contemporary account even mentions the Qur’an until the early eighth century.
6. During the reign of the caliph Muawiya (661–680), the Arabs constructed at least one public building whose inscription was headed by a cross – a symbol abhorrent to Islam.
I await Salon’s investigation of these issues! But I won’t be holding my breath. For Salon, outside of Tayler’s October piece, Islam is non-white, non-Christian, and non-Western, and hence good, while anything associated with the heritage of most Salon writers is ipso facto evil and to be condemned.
Angemon says
I remember a certain debate with islamic clerics on the subject and their expert opinion was that muhammad was proven to exist because it says so in the quran and ahadith. Circular logic at its finest.
Angemon says
Here’s the debate:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/video-robert-spencer-and-david-wood-debate-anjem-choudary-and-omar-bakri-did-muhammad-exist
gravenimage says
True, Angemon—we’ve run into this circular logic many times. And while scholars (and the general public) freely lampoon such circular logic when it comes to the Bible, we see it very seldom when it comes to the Qur’an.
This is partially out of fear, and partially out of the exaggerated “respect” for all things Islam.
Huck Folder says
islamouroboros
Salah says
@ Angemon
“..muhammad was proven to exist because it says so in the quran..”
Well, let’s fight fire with fire: Jesus exists because…it’s in the Qur’an!!!
marco says
Touché!
terry says
Salah,
“Well, let’s fight fire with fire: Jesus exists because…it’s in the Qur’an!!!”
Your comment combines wit with good analysis!
Darren says
Whether Jesus existed or not, I’ll take an ideology that says love thy neighbor over kill all those who disbelieve.
mortimer says
‘The-proof-in-the-pudding’ argument is a good argument. Islam contains no Golden Rule and much that is in direct contradiction to the Golden Rule.
terry says
Darren,
Inspiring comment!
Pere LaChaise says
All I can say is that this Jeffery Tayler must be cryptomoslem to use this phony logic of theirs, esp. matter-of-factly slipping in the Jesus-as-prophet-of-God meme.
Christians never considered Jesus a prophet but moslems always begin with the lie that God has no Son.
Brian Hoff says
Here is proof that Muhammad did exist in this video from one non-muslim scource https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2NhK-EEXmU. Not very states of Empire mint they own gold or silver coins. It cost alots of money to set up your own mint, it easyier to use than other nation or empire gold and silver coin. The Caph only start to mint they own coin when the Estern Roman Empire started to place cross and religish texts on they coinage.
Angemon says
Brian Hoff posted:
“Here is proof that Muhammad did exist in this video from one non-muslim scource https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2NhK-EEXmU”
Huh, Brian? That’s an excerpt from Tom Holland’s “Islam: The Untold Story”. While Tom does not clearly dispute muhammad existence as a real historical figure (meaning he doesn’t exclude the existence of someone called muhammad during the time islamic theology claims he existed), he believes that islam (quran included) was created in the early years of the arab empire by human hands:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwo5xpO390k
Out of curiosity, muslims reacted to Holland’s documentary about as rationally as a spoiled child who threw a tantrum after being told that there is no Santa Claus – we was accused of being anti-islamic and told on twitter than he should hire bodyguards.
Neil says
BAAL the one they call (Allah) is nothing more than a blood thirsty serpent who has brain washed many in this world in believing that he is the one true God, but there is one and his name is Immanuel (JESUS CHRIST) whose name they’ve tried to rid from the lips and ears of those who believe and trust in him and for one who claims that there is no evidence that he ever existed then the writings in the Quran are false because they too also believe in him.
boakai ngombu says
Robert, the points you’ve raised are certainly reasonable for examination, for they do lend to the suspicion that Muhammad (lately contrived; full of lusts) did not exist.
the supposed prophet, who is to be emulated, is a grotesque. and Taylor is a dhimmi, given to say anything to save his neck.
” If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad,” he wrote.
as I understand, if you doubt Muhammad existed you might loose your head and a least your property and position. one dare not doubt [which is interesting. by comparison the Unique God desires that folks test the TRUTH, examining Biblical Scripture to know what the testimony is.
in this Taylor is a coward, should he believe what he has written. he’s already rejected what should be tested and I doubt that he has read the “noble” Koran (the shepherd, for the adherent) which is so human a book
Pere LaChaise says
“Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad.”
The wise guy is utterly ignorant of Who Jesus Is. No one even faintly familiar with Christianity would call Him a prophet – St. John the Forerunner (Gr. Prodromos) was THE FINAL PROPHET, who made straight the way for the final revelation of God in the Flesh, Jesus Christ.
This Tailer piker defines Jesus according to moslem ratiocination, which begins with their hypothesis that God has no Son, so they relegate Jesus to prophethood, behind even their own Arab nabi, Mhd.
It’s disgusting to see this kind of stuff passed off as ‘scholarship’ in mainstream media. The continued misstatement about Jesus accrues to a truism as it has among moslems. We who know our Christian faith reject moslem lies.
somehistory says
Jesus was…is… a Prophet. He foretold, or prophesied, what was to come as a *sign* of the time of the end and His return to set all things right. He gave John the Revelation, which is a book of prophecy about what was to happen that He had not already given to His apostles (Revelation 1:1 “A Revelation by Jesus Christ…”).
In Mark 6, Jesus is preaching…which is what prophets did, he performed miracles, which is also what some prophets did and He gave future happenings for which He told His followers to be on the watch…but the people of His home territory did not accept Him.
When asked about this, He replied that “a Prophet has no honor in his home town among his relatives.”
Luke and John also reported on this. Isaiah 42 foretells this role for the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
Jesus definitely performed the work of a True Prophet of the True God.
particolor says
Is there a Dead Prophets Society ??
Sarah says
Mohammed (piss be upon him) existed but did the angel Gabriel really give him the koran? There is clear evidence that Mohammed (piss be upon him) made it all up. That is why he (piss be upon him) says that Allah sanctions polygamy and marrying a 6 year old girl. If he (piss be upon him) didn’t have a 6 year old girl in mind I don’t think he (piss be upon him) would say that Allah said that.
jewdog says
One reason I doubt the existence of Mohammad is simply that an early and full application of Islam at the time of the Arab conquests would have resulted in so much intolerance, that the ensuing anarchy would have meant the certain re-conquest by outside invaders. It is only in modern times that there is a broad awareness of Islamic doctrine thanks to increased literacy and the internet. The result is that many Islamic countries have been torn apart by Inquisition-like strife.
Instead, Islam probably was invented to justify and regulate the Arab conquests many years after the initial conquests and has only gradually spread to all levels of society over the centuries. Eventually, it will either be rejected by its current adherents, or some outside power will come in and conquer the region.
albert says
That the murderous slave trading paedophile Muhammad existed is beyond doubt the horror, depravity, torture and death caused by his birth has stained human existence for 1400 years, without the invasions and massacres of other nations just think of the misery his existence has caused for our sisters down the decades, for that alone he should be roasting on a spit for eternity.
Neil Jennison says
There is ample evidence of the existence of Jesus….however doesn’t Islam rely on the existence of Jesus anyway? Albeit a perverted version of his existence?
Bezelel says
Unlke the Holy Scriptures that are knit precisely together over thousands of years without contradiction, the POS koran was and is made up as it saw fit for the occasion. It is full of contradictions that are justified as needed. The fact that Jesus is mentioned in the koran is only for islam to claim credibility by plagiarizing and twisting for their own purposes.islam is built on faith in lies made by liars with no faith or conscience.
somehistory says
The guy does not know of what he writes. There are others, besides the writers of the Gospels, who wrote of Jesus, The Christ, Josephus being one.
At one time, the existence of Pontius Pilate was questioned with some saying the only references to him were found in the Bible.
And to make the statement that because the Gospels were written “decades” after Jesus and therefore, “don’t count”…would have to be applied to most of what we read today as history. How many books in the library at the local school, written about Columbus, Caesar, Titus, etc., were written in the years of their lives? The Book of Luke documents rulers at the time of Jesus’ birth. These have all been proven to have been rulers at the time and the localities stated.
However, his saying that if we wish to *believe* in a prophet, we should believe in the murdering, raping, liar who supposedly wrote the koran after hearing from an angel, is just plain stupid. Belief in the True God and His True Prophet, Jesus Christ, makes one a better person, full of hope for a better future. Belief in the false prophet the man advocates makes one a murderer, liar, etc. And what is more, no historical record exists to *prove* this guy even existed, And no evidence exists, such as an os or other verifiable relic to prove he was who he claimed to be.
It also reminds me of something Jesus’s brother James said about belief in the One True God, “…..Even the demons believe and tremble (James 2:19).” The demons know…”believe”… that The True God exists, but because they are evil, they “tremble” or shudder at the realization of His existence.
The guy should wait until he has some knowledge before writing. That way, he won’t look or sound so foolish or make such ridiculous statements based on his own wishes. Much like his chosen *prophet.*
Lee says
Tacitus also mentions Jesus. Historians’ agreement on the existence of Jesus is widely known, so I presume Salon is click-baiting. Wikipedia is a good starting point for interesting footnotes for readers unfamiliar with the issues – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus – and the issue was resolved (again) here in Australia 2 years ago – see http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2012/12/24/3660194.htm
I’m an atheist, but there’s no question that Jesus existed for anyone not ideologically blinded. Nor is there any question that he and his followers stopped the stoning of women and men (except for Islamic countries) promoted the Golden Rule, and saved civilization from living under 7th century Mohammedanism.
somehistory says
Lee,
All true. There is enough evidence that Jesus lived so that people should not be mislead by writers like the salon guy who speaks what he wishes to be rather than what is.
And, atheists should not fear or hate Christians for believing in such a Man as Jesus was. We pose no risks of life or limb to non-believers and only wish others well. True Christians endeavor to follow as closely as possible what Christ said as the Way to live and treat our neighbors.
He foretold that “the thief comes to steal, kill and destroy (John 10:10).”
Lee says
“…atheists should not fear or hate Christians for believing in such a Man as Jesus was.” Well said – and further, we atheists and humanity in general owe Christians an eternal debt of gratitude for their spreading of the values of Jesus, and just as importantly for their defeating the Muslim invaders in battles such as Tours and Vienna.
Naturally I’d like to think if there had been atheist leaders of the 700s or 1600s they would have been as principled and courageous as the Christians – but I’m not delusional. As you pointed out in your first post, following Jesus brings out the best in people – whereas copying Muhammad brings out the very worst in people.
It’s sobering to think of what the world would be like today if Jesus hadn’t existed, hadn’t sacrificed himself, and if Christians hadn’t formed their religion around him. Would there have been an ideology with the power of drawing people together to fight Islamic invaders as Christianity did? Since no other ever appeared, I don’t think so.
And that means that but for Jesus and the Christians, Europe would have fallen in 732, and here in (nearly) 2015 there would be little to no advancement in civilization (or technology), and head-chopping, torturing, raping, and enslaving psychopaths like ISIS would have ruled the entire globe for the past millennium.
particolor says
Earth.. Uninhabited now for 100 Years ! Last seen on the Planet were 6 Arabs with no hands ! Caused by stealing the last object !! The Planet is a Serene and Beautiful Blue Ball in space now !! …Mahound was Right !! “Religion of Peace !!”.. Amen…………………
IQ al Rassooli says
Tayler wrote:
Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad.
The fact that Tayler spoke of Muhammad as a PROPHET negates Tayler’s credentials for facts and authenticity since Muhammad in 99% of his Quran and Hadiths was called “Rassool Allah” meaning “Messenger of Allah” but not prophet.
Moreover, neither Tayler nor any other human being can find a single prediction by Muhammad that came out to true.
Ernest Renan’s famous assertion that, “Islam was born in full light of history” contradicts most of the information that we have about this subject based entirely on the Islamic records
As Mr Spencer amply demonstrated with his questions about Muhammad’s existence I would like to add that no one actually knows the date of Muhammad’s birth, the true details about his parents and growing up for the first 25 years of his life.
The following ten years after Khadijah married him are also totally obscure. We have more information about Muhammad from 610 AD till 632/33 Ad when he died.
What Muslims and their apologists very deliberately and for good reasons neglect to point out to people is the fact that humanity has only the words of a Pathological Liar called Muhammad bin Abd Allah that he received revelations from the supreme Pagan god of Arabia called Allah over a very long period of 23 years as and when he needed revelations.
In all Islamic scripture there is not a single record of any of his wives or most intimate companions having ever heard Muhammad & Gabriel talk to each other or seen them together.
All that humanity has or will ever have are the words of a single creature called Muhammad unsubstantiated, uncorroborated, unwitnessed by anyone else except Muhammad
In no court of law would Muhammad’s testimony be taken seriously
All the above statements do NOT mean that Muhammad did not exist because no author of any fictional character could possibly concoct the absolute evilness of Muhammad. His obscene degrees of Pathology ( Psychological & Sociological), Narcissism, Immorality, Indecency, Intolerance, Misogyny, Mendacity, Vileness and total Ungodlyness manifested by the Hadith reports
For Tayler to try and discredit Jesus but support Muhammad is itself a form of intellectual and moral inversion by a sick mind (that of Tayler) because even if Jesus did not exist, his message is for Life, Love & Peace while that of Muhammad is a message for Death, Hate & War.
IQ al Rassooli
Kafir & Proud!
mortimer says
Well written. This is logical if Islam’s canonical writings are historical, but the more they are examined, the more scholars challenge their thousands of anomalies. We simply cannot know which, if any, of the versions of the hadiths are correct. And without the hadiths, the Koran is an endless dialogue between the angel and the messenger that has no historical context to it, and even no geographical location, since Mecca is never mentioned in the Koran…only the ruins that lay around the city of Petra.
There is less to the historicity of Islam than Tayler imagines, but he was too rushed or too lazy to read a book on the historicity of Islam…so he merely spoke through his hat. Poor journalism.
terry says
“In no court of law would Muhammad’s testimony be taken seriously”
Thanks a lot IQ, for this rich comment, especially the very enlightening above quoted phrase!
gravenimage says
Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad.
…………………………..
This is *very* odd—only Muslims refer to Jesus as a “prophet”—certainly, Christians do not.
Moreover, Tayler doesn’t appear to be just making a greater case for the historicity of Muhammed—never mind how iffy this is in and of itself—but by his phrasing, he actually appears to be *calling readers to Islam*—something that is strange even by the standards of Salon.
This is especially odd, since Tayler has defended atheist Richard Dawkins against charges of “Islamophobia” by Reza Aslan and his thug accomplice David Lean.
mortimer says
‘Even if’ there were historical evidence that proves the existence of Mohammed (there isn’t), there is no evidence that the Koran or hadiths have provenance from Mohammed. Scholarship shows they are both contrived from a number of disparate sources. The Koran shows evidence of having been thrown together rapidly in an undisciplined manner and without much editing, as if it were needed for some great event or on an imperial deadline set by a caliph or some other dictatorial ruler.
Tayler hasn’t read a book on the scholarship, so he’s completely guessing. His editor hasn’t read any Islamic historiography either and so he just let’s it pass. Bad journalism.
terry says
“he actually appears to be *calling readers to Islam*”
Yes, you’re right, it actually seems to be that’s exactly what he’s trying to do, here!
Ross Busby says
Even if you believe that the warlord Muhammad existed, the Koran is simply a poor knock off of the Bible so that Muhammad could convince his ignorant followers to lay down their lives at his will.
Their ignorance is exemplified in the story that Muhammad told his followers that he was chosen to ride up to heaven on a horse in order to meet Allah….and no one laughed.
Cave Chimps with guns can be very dangerous.
particolor says
So are Pigs in Space !!
Champ says
Question: “Did Jesus really exist? Is there any historical evidence of Jesus Christ?”
Answer: http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html
Excerpt …
There is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.
BlueRaven says
“People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.”
Champ – this is not a good statement because the Mohamedians are dying like flies all over the place because they believe Mo to be true. To know something is true, no one can ever answer in their entire life. No human being will ever know the Truth – the science has proven that over and over again for centuries – if you know Physics, then Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle tells exactly that.
Champ says
Very good point, Blue Raven …
That said, the information from “Got Questions” is written from the perspective that Jesus Christ is the truth, and islam is based on demonic lies.
Champ says
Blue Raven and Others,
The main point and “Question” related to this headline, which is outlined in greater detail from “Got Questions”, is what I want the reader to focus on; not the lesser issue that you have raised …
Question: “Did Jesus really exist? Is there any historical evidence of Jesus Christ?”
Answer: http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html
Yes, Jesus did exist!
Bezelel says
Merry Christmas and thank you for the link.
Champ says
You’re welcome, Bezelel~ …and Merry Christmas!
BlueRaven says
Happy Christmas Champ.
Champ says
Thank you, Blue Raven …Merry Christmas to you, too! 🙂
Kepha says
Shows how progressive comment always sticks its foot in its mouth when it tries to talk “intelligently” about traditional religion: If Jesus didn’t exist and Muhammad did, it all goes to show what an utter stupe Old Mo was, since his Qur’an takes Jesus’ existence for granted, and works very hard to enlist him to Islam’s side.
No Fear says
If Jesus did not exist and Mohammed did exist then obviously Mohammed lied about Jesus in the Quran.
BlueRaven says
I have a huge doubt if Mo ever existed that he was ever a Prophet. There is not a single thing in the Kuran that constitutes any prophecy. A messenger of God would NEVER marry a six years old child, and terrorize people by killing and torturing with whom he disagreed. He would never consider slavery is the right stuff for his followers. He will never promise 72 after life whores who die for his cause.
The best I can make of Jeffrey Tayler he is a willing clown and a spin doctor. Whether Jesus existed or not his messages are clearly directed at humanity and for humanity, unlike the vile stuff spread around by his preferred ‘prophet’. I have no doubt; he is funded by CAIR to write this piece. This is what CAIR want everyone to believe.
Wellington says
Although during the nineteenth century some credible Biblical scholars proposed the possibility that Jesus didn’t exist, this is no longer taken seriously by virtually any respected historian or Biblical scholar over the past century or so. This “idea” was laid to rest long ago, though amateurs like Jeffrey Tayler tend to keep it alive for consumptioin by others who also don’t know the current state of historical and biblical scholarship. The Nag Hammadi finds in 1945, which brought to light other writings about Jesus (e.g., the full Gospel of Thomas), though understandably rejected on religious grounds as not canonical by conventional Christians, just make it all the more difficult to discount that there was an historical Jesus. In fact, it approaches the ludicrous to maintain that Jesus never existed and was created by others. Debates about who Jesus really was are real and interesting but to assert that this person is a fiction cannot withstand scrutiny.
mortimer says
Indeed, since the 19th century, archeology has tended to confirm many points in the NT; furthermore, scholarship on the non-Christian references to Christianity (including graffiti) have further confirmed the earlier dating supported by most NT scholars today. However, the reverse is true with Mohammed. Islamic archeology points to the fact that no Islamic religion existed as late as 705 AD the caliphate of Khalid ibn Walid…who himself was unable to find anyone to explain the procedure of the Islamic pilgrimage. Khalid was the leading ‘Muslim’ and knew nothing about one of Islam’s pillars. Nor did all mosques point to Mecca until around 750 AD, until which time most pointed to Petra and the Western ones in Spain and North Africa pointed on a bearing south by south-east. The conclusion we reach from Islamic archeology alone is that Islam came into being over 100 years after Mohammed and was created by the caliphs, rather than by Mohammed. Thousands of anomalies in the Islamic texts show the chaotic method used to create Islam. Among several versions, no one knew for sure, which version if any was true. It appears that Islamic scholars are supported the non-historicity of Mohammed and the stories about Mecca. The Saudi government is destroying dozens of sites associated with Mohammed, his family and early Islam. If they were genuine and beyond question, no one would consider destroying them. It appears that even the Saudi Royal Family realizes there is little or no archeology to support early Islam in Arabia. That’s because Islam was created in Iraq, Syria and Persia…most by Persian converts.
BBrian Hoff says
You believe this crap. First these overedudrate egghead are being mislead by Allah.
Know Thy Enemy says
The only thing Allah is capable of doing is to mislead people! Brian, how do you know YOU have not been misled by Allah??
Angemon says
BBrian Hoff posted:
“You believe this crap. First these overedudrate egghead are being mislead by Allah.”
BBrian, why would allah mislead someone? Are you saying that not believing in allah or muhammad is the result of allah’s interference? Why would allah make someone not believe in him while telling someone else to fight those who don’t believe in him? Whoa, that allah fellow sounds like a first rate sociopath.
Huck Folder says
Angemon – ‘allah’ (mo’s sock-puppet) is the Greatest Deceiver – their name, not mine. So far she has deceived 1.5 billion, even deceived them into slaughtering each other, while BOTH sides scream at each other like mad women: “allahu ackbar”.
That delightful warcry is used every time they murder someone or blow up a mosque.
They probably shout that too when they orgasm (especially with a Bacha Baz).
I’ve seen it translated as “MY god is the GREATEST” (of the 360 heathen idols in the kaaba latrine). al-Lat was mo’s favorite, henceforth ‘allah’.
I think that the ouroboros Book of Hate™ is the world’s greatest collection of illogic – worthy of an entry in Ripley’s. The fact that MDs like Brian Hoff and 1,499,999 others believe that venal crap, (which would challenge the common sense of the average seven-year-old), speaks volumes about brainwashing, total delusion, and taking leave of your senses.
I do hope that I haven’t offended any sensibilities here. Not.
particolor says
To the Contrary !! I’m off to the Mosque for my Midday Brain Washing ..BYE !!..
Kepha says
I figure that if the New Testament, Tractate Sanhedrin in the Talmud, and the witness of the Pliny-Trajan correspondence agree that Jesus was crucified in first century Judaea, Jesus existed.
Frankly, I wouldn’t put too much stock in the Nag Hammadi texts etc. giving the “real skinny” on early Christianity. Egypt is one of the few places where you can have writing being done and it getting preserved–the place is dry, so if something gets buried some distance from the Nile, it will last and last. Goes for human and animal bodies, too. While I’m thrilled that we have things like 4th century Codex Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus; and the Rylands Papyrus of Paul from before 200 A.D. showing a text basically the same as we have today, especially since so many other pieces of ancient literature are attested from manuscripts millennia later than the initial composition, we still can’t rule out the possibility that Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus were preserved because the communities that held them thought them inferior while wearing out and recopying better exemplars. And given that the desitnations of Paul’s letters and the Johannine materials were to places north of the Med (Asia Minor, mostly), I’d give a little more weight to what scholars call the “Byzantine” text type. Unhappily, Greece and Asia Minor get a little too much rain for too much truly ancient material to survive–unless it gets carved in stone.
Keep in mind that something like the Coptic Gospel of Thomas was probably translated from a Greek original; and it is clearly later than the canonical Gospels (some of its material seems to depend on the canonical material). The chief use of the Nag Hammadi texts is that they confirm that Irenaeus of Lyon, in his _Against Heresies_ (ca. 160 A.D.) gave a pretty fair account of what various heretical groups were teaching even as he refuted them. Further, I suspect that these Gnostic texts did not have very wide currency. For example, Tatian (a little earlier than Irenaeus) used only the four canonical Gospels in his Diatessaron (a harmony of the Gospels woven into a continuous narrative, which today survives complete only in Arabic, I understand, the Syraic and Greek versions being now lost or barely reconstructable from fragments in other ancient writers), even though he became a Gnostic shortly after his mentor Justin Martyr died. Hence, the picture is Gnostics fishing among proto-orthodox Christians for prospective converts and saving their own writings for their “initiates”.
Well, I’ve digressed a lot. Of course the professing Christian Uncle Kepha has no doubts about Jesus’ historical existence. But, since I go on the general principle of guessing that where there’s smoke there’s fire, I must admit that I’m also not all that impressed by the suggestion by our esteemed blog host and some others that Muhammad was a fiction.
For those interested in the historicity of Jesus, there were some videotaped interviews made with Martin Hengel, a distinguished professor of New Testament at Tuebingen, shortly before he died. They’re on youtube, and worth hearing (but be forewarned that the Herr Doktor speaks with a marked German accent and sometimes struggles to find appropriate English).
bobm says
mention another prophet to this airhead…. how about Isaiah?…. read Isaiah 53.. never mind moh; the prophet of naught.
BlueRaven says
The Kuran states Mo cracked the moon with a punch – the statement that we have verified to be false. I guess Jeffrey Tayler will go along with the pathetic theory that moon landing was faked so he can protect Mohamedian’s butt. The guy is pathetic and possibly with a pathological disorder.
Brian Hoff says
Here is the than video that show that the moon was spil over 1400 year ago and put back together here is the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gS-Pzk-Luos#!.
BlueRaven says
Normally I don’t care much for crack pots like you. I thought I give it a try for once. That video on the posted link is even for the worse than the crack pots. It is for the brain dead Muslims. The real problem with your kind of tripe is that you love to believe anything whatsoever that makes Mo look good. You crap pots would kill someone if they bring reality on to the table.
If Mo split the moon with a finger about 1400 years back, why didn’t the Chinese and Indians and anyone else on this planet report anything unusual that defied the laws of physics. The Chinese are known to have made pretty good notes of several unusual activities in the sky. It would have been reported by every living civilization at the same time if it had split.
If the moon were to ever split, it will remain apart till the Kingdoms end. That would have affect on the Ocean tides. There is no known record of that either. The split would have affected the lunar cycle big time, there is no record of that because the people been using the Lunar Calender for over 4000 years throughout the world.
If you believe in that video in the link you posted without questioning its validity there is no hope for you. You are going to remain a crack pot. That is not a way to live a great life on this planet.
mortimer says
I read Jeffrey Tayler’s article and found it very sophomoric. A serious error in it is that atheists are the most-discriminated-against group. To what ‘group’ do atheists belong…the Atheists’ Union? He made the mistake of trying to be polemic, intellectual and humorous in the same breath and did poorly at all three.
TH says
What are atheists for anyway? They define themselves negatively. How do they explain the most important quesiton before any philosopher: Why does anything exist rather than nothing? They have no reasonable response and have recourse to chance. Theyy have blind faith in something which is unreasonable.
Kepha says
I’m not sure that modern “atheism” is truly a strictly negative identification. It denies the Christian God, but listen to an “atheist” long enough and you’ll find the deification of some created thing or mental construct–Carl Sagan’s “The Cosmos is all that ever was, and all that will ever be” (itself a paraphrase of the Upanishads’ panegyric to the pantheistic entity Purusha) or Karl Marx’s Historical Necessity come to mind. Consider the ease with which we moderns speak of “Mother Nature”–a modern Diana of the Ephesians, perhaps? Or, observe the hero worship that goes on in secular culture. Having some appreciation for the ways of the Far East, this last impresses me as akin to how the illustrious dead get deified where Abrahamic tradition has not yet sunk a deep and pervasive root.
Eddie and Don, don’t worry. I really am just a knuckle-dragging pithecanthropus with nothing like the erudition and ejjukashun each of you has in your little fingers.
Huck Folder says
mortimer:
“I read Jeffrey Tayler’s article and found it very sophomoric.”
When I first read that, I thought you said: soporific.
particolor says
If You pull it long enough its bound to feel Precocious !
Super(caliph)ragalisticextracalidoscious
cronk says
Typical Salon hatchet job by a guy who is just another angry, militant atheist cultural Marxist. These guys are easy to spot, they all make excuses or are silent in regards of the violence done by Muslims against Christians, gays, women, children, etc.
No, instead they love to use the press megaphone bash Christianity and Christians because it’s safe , they won’t find death threats in their emails or answering machine and CAIR along with college students demanding their company fire them.
Just pathetic.
msgoldberg says
Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad.
Rather it’s this: among the 54 recorded prophets of Israel, 48 men, 6 women, they all had a similar message and their prophey’s were recorded, and can be examined as ‘prophecy’. The so called
final prophet, had not one ‘prophecy’ as described by the Torah and Talmud. None. He was certainly existent, and his pedophilia, his mass homicidism, his hypocrisy, his faking bible stories the history of which is laughably incorrect, is quite evident. And his ugly, not only not ‘perfect’ behavior, was defective, deficient, unadmirable and taught as the best of the best and the definitive basis of the scourge of the earth known as ‘islam’ or submission, of all others. Yep…. it’s sure as hell real. And the operative word is…. hell.
Kepha says
Hmmmmph. He wants a “prophet”? Why doesn’t young Jeffrey go and try Father Divine? Or Pat Robertson, whom decent 17th century New Englanders would’ve flogged out of town at the cart’s tail for a Quaker.
vlparker says
Well, since neither side in this issue can prove its point it is pointless to argue. But, of course, that would never stop the left from declaring otherwise. Reality and truth has never mattered to them. And it is par for the course that they would choose the side of the evil prophet rather than the good one, whether real or imagined.
As a Deist myself, I do believe Jesus did exist and that he was executed for confronting the tyrants of his day. As far as Mo goes, it really doesn’t matter whether he existed or not, he is very real in todays world, and that is all that matters.
Edward says
“Let’s make Bill O’Reilly’s head explode”. Lets help it doesn’t.
Mr. Spencer should team up with Bill O’Reilly to feature the 5 points of historical truth written in this article. Robert is the one to bust the myth of this mythology maligned gang. Also, hoping that O’Reilly offers to showcase Spencer’s, ‘Did Muhammad Exist?’ book (an Amazon’s mostly 5 star rating) to spread the discovered facts garnered. The O’Reilly show could be a wonderful platform to introduce our next 2016 POTUS. Who possess the most needed strong savvy about world foreign affairs of the dangerous and shaky Middle East. A must for our future security. Robert Spencer for President – 2016!
RG says
First time I’ve ever heard of Tayler. By all appearances I haven’t missed much. But why do I always get the irrepressible impression that these Jesus-haters are just a bunch of overgrown babies whose mothers forced them to go to Sunday School when they were 16?
One thing is for damned sure… This guy never did his homework when it comes to Jesus or to mohammed. This guy is ‘dumb and dumber’ all by himself!!!
Jay Boo says
How would he know if Muhammad existed? Islam forbids scrutiny.
People like this are so intimidated into groveling reverence toward Islam that he would never dare to think otherwise in the first place.
I bet Jeffrey Tayler loves the sound of a call to prayer.
He likely owns a cat and pets it whenever a Muslim is near.
katarzyna says
“We desperately need a war on Christmas lies” – I think this war started in VII century.
“Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Muhammad” – let’s try Wikipedia: “Muhammad Sven Kalisch is a German who converted to Islam at age 15, became the first in Germany to hold a chair in Islamic theology (at Munster University), then in 2008 announced that he had come to the conclusion that the prophet Muhammad never existed”.
“Let’s make Jeffrey Tayler’s head explode”: as No Fear points out JT proved that Mahomet was a liar.
—————————————————————————————————————————————
“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” Isaiah 7,14
Twostellas says
Very typical leftist argument, and let me tell you, the Holy Spirit has led me to know all these arguments beforehand (Thank God, right?) My good friend and neighbor who became a brainwashed Islamist female step by step and I watched it happen in ignorance of Islam, she married a Muslim and his father converted her in Jordan. That happened before 9/11, my heart was already dedicated thank goodness, and that saved me from that snare….she tried quite hard to convert me, but my heart was already dedicated little did she know…very sad situation actually but does makes me feel for the parents and family of radical converts. She did ensnare her sister, and family (as we have seen family is not family unless they convert) …I saw her become brainwashed….scary thing to see happen to a soul I cared for and still do. So, also my son who is a moderate leftist atheist, taught by the best, but never beholden (as our love, my belief in independence and freedom passed on to him, and his soul and mind are very strong.) He is 20. Anyway, I can tell you about this argument as I have seen this thought develop and discussed it thouroughly with him (as with my convert friend regarding islam). My son chose atheism in regards to these arguments, which I see as a strength at this time in the world and in his life. He is 20 after all…..anyway….I can tell you this whole argument and what is taught in this regard and it is this: Muhammed has more evidence for having existed supposively and Robert, I have to hand it to you for seeing this argument coming and writing a book about it, but yes, this is taught to young people, and the kicker is this….that Jesus, if he would have lived, he would have become as Muhammed. Corrupted. Think about that. Muslims, leftists, and atheists, think Jesus was killed in his medina peaceful phase. But as Muhammed preached tolerance and peace at first, the same as Jesus (kinda), Jesus would have eventually become as Muhammed if he hadn’t been crucified. Chew on that for a bit. This is what they think. So, if you’d like to combat that idea…that is the basis it is predicated on.
Kepha says
Twostellas, don’t even entertain for a minute the possibility of “had Jesus lived, he would’ve been a Muslim”. It’s Exhibit A in the case that our Leftist pundits and Ejjikaters are the blind leading the blind and both falling into a ditch. Jesus rose from the dead (and, if he didn’t Paul himself said we might as well all go home and fuggedaboudit) and didn’t give the slightest attestation to Old Mo when Old Mo came around. As for preaching tolerance and peace, the Qur’an strikes me as a tediously repetitious recitation of how much Allah wants to damn everyone who doesn’t buy Old Mo’s claims, and that good Muslims really ought to hasten those unbelievers’ passage to Jahanum (and much as Jesus preached there is a Gehenna, he emphatically DID NOT urge his followers to hasten anyone on his way thither).
Bad neighbour says
Mr Tayler’s contention that Jesus didn’t exist undermines the very foundations of Mohammed’s doctrine. According to the Quran Jesus did exist and will return to rule the world in peace. The existence of Jesus is fundamental to Islamic belief. If Jesus didn’t exist then Islam is a fabrication. Where next, Mr Tayler?
Jack says
That is correct. Except they call him Isa, because they are morons.
Huck Folder says
Islamic State America?
Shane says
O’Reilly’s book, Killing Jesus, was very good and give evidence outside of the Gospels that Jesus existed. I hope that Mr. Spencer gets to have a rebuttal published at Salon.
Desilu says
For Christmas I received a book entitled,”Jesus on Trail”. It affirms the truth of the Bible .But there is no the that. The Vatican has all the original writings and scrolls written at the from which the Bible was writ. Roman, Greek and Jewish records have also recorded the happenings of that time.
Elliot says
Shame then that over a billion christians don’t follow Jesus teachings and follow his desire that ” no word of the (Jewish ) law will be changed”
Instead many still follow the filth of Martin Luther and Origen etc and vilify and transfer and deny Jesus’s Judaism and that his mother father disciples apostles and followers were ALL JEWISH
Any Christian how agrees with the BDS of JEWS / Zionists/ Israel is a 21stC Nazis scumbag and against all the teachings of his Lord Jesus.
Joseph says
What REALLY Happened in the 1st Century. Preview BEN HUR II – EXILE: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_12?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=ben+hur+ii+-+exile&sprefix=ben+hur+II+-%2Caps%2C480
Phil says
This shoddy scholarship is typical of talentless ideologues – whether of the Left or the Right. This is simply rehashing worn-out and falsified theories from the nineteenth century – specifically Bruno Bauer’s ‘A Critique of the Gospels and a History of their Origin’. His motivation (and that of his followers from the University of Bonn) was purely anti-clerical, driven largely I suspect by the fatuous pan-German nationalism of his era.
I’d invite soi-disant writers like Mr Tayler to ignore if he choses the canonical Gospels, which were written during times far closer to Jesus’ crucifixion than the time of the compilation of the Qur’an under the Caliph Uthman ibn Affan was to the formal date of Muhammad’s death, and focus instead on the writings of famous contemporary authors who despised the religion. Josephus, the Flavian Dynasty’s favourite apologist, who loathed the (to-him) heretical Jerusalem Church, mentions Jesus in Books 18 and 20 of ‘The Antiquities of the Jews’. The historian Tacitus, an enthusiast for the extermination of the Christian sect likewise mentions Jesus in his ‘Annals’ 15; 44 – where he records the execution of the criminal Christus under the governorship of Pontius Pilate. Any man who characterized the early church as “a class hated for their abominations” would have leapt at the chance to debunk the Christ mythos, but he accepted the historicity of Jesus based on reliable evidence.
Richard Miller says
Oh Mohammad was real alright, in fact we get 10,000 more Mohammads everyday before lunch, what’s so special about a mass murdering peadophile, the problem with this world is there are too many Mohammads. But Jesus, oh my but couldn’t the World use a few more like Him. That’s the difference, you can celebrate whom you like, but don’t deny there isn’t a choice
Kepha says
Good post, Phil.
Seriously, one issue I have with so much writing on Jesus from the pseudo-scholarship media event called the Jesus Seminar to Dan Brown is that so much of what moderns think they “know” about “the historical Jesus” comes form a 19th century German attempt to squeeze the history of early Christianity into a Hegelian box. This was especially true of Ferdinand Christian Baur (as well as of Bruno Bauer).
As for Jesus, the world can’t have more like him. He was the sinless one, God Incarnate, who worked salvation for us, rather than giving us a code to follow. However, more who trust him and subject themselves to the influence of his Spirit would do wonders.
Merry Christmas.
thehalalporkchop says
The emperor Claudius expelled all Jews from Rome in 44AD. The problem was the Jews were after the Jewish converts to Christ to accept Jewish law like circumcision etc etc.and the fuss was too much for the delicate ears of Claudius. Rome at this time did not distinguish between Christian Jews and Jews so everyone was chucked out. This was recorded by a roman historian called (check it out for yourself) who said the leader of the rabble was a guy called Christos. Who said historians were always accurate. The apostle Paul addresses a couple Aquila and Priscilla in Rome and then later in Corinth.
bc says
Can you try for a bit more grammar. That is barely intelligible
particolor says
Nor Edible !!
St. Croix says
Are you referring to Suetonius as the Roman historian quoted? He was also quoted by Josephus.
I get what you’re saying.
Charles R.L. Power says
The word “proof” is hard to apply to any historical phenomenon. All we can hope for is evidence. Throwing out the Gospels as evidence is just stupid. They may or may not be reliable in detail (I doubt either of the mutually contradictory nativity accounts in Matthew and Luke), but they do show that people within a generation of the purported death of Jesus believed that such a person existed. Even Bart Ehrman, who does not consider himself exactlys a Christian. has written a fine book arguing for the existence of Jesus.
I believe that Muhammad existed as well, though Spencer does point out legitimate historiological problems. I don’t understand how the Shiites could have arisen without the existence of a genuine Muhammad, since there is no dispute that their martyr Ali was a member of Muhammad’s familty. I think the solution proposed in Tom Holland’s In the Shadow of the Sword, that the elevation of Muhammad throughout the Arab world as religious leader occurred considerably later than the Arabs would have us think, explains Spencer’s counterevidence.
ajarrid says
A lovely guy, that Muhammad – child molester.
particolor says
And Admired by His Thuggee’s to this day !!
Custos Custodum says
Mr. Spencer is too modest to mention the really striking point about the timely Salon hit piece: TAYLER POINTS MIRROR MR. SPENCER’S BOOK ABOUT MUHAMMAD.
Given Tayler’s earlier piece, one can be certain that Tayler is aware of Mr. Spencer’s book, so we are simply looking at another instance of Leftist PROJECTION.
The SCARY aspect of this is the Left’s NEED to destroy religion – not, sadly, in the interest of secular happiness for the “people” liberated from their addiction to religious “opium,” but rather, for the Left themselves to assume total control through the vehicle of ideology.
Simply put, the Left’s war on religion continues the trajectory of 20th century “socialists” monsters Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc. into the 21st century.
Jax Tolmen says
This is pure paranoia. As a former leftie (and basically still am a leftie despite my anti Islam sentiment) – there is no willingness to control. Merely a misguided assumption that people are ignorant and should be enlightened. It sounds close to control, but it’s not. There is a profound difference in that control implies totality of hegemony. Enlightenment means merely that you are blind to your own ignorance and thus should be educated for the greater good.
Note how I said it is misguided before you jump up and down about that.
The point is that there is no vast conspiracy to take control of you. Being pro – choice, in favour of marriage equality and so forth does not mean I’m trying to tell you what to do. I just don’t see why anyone should be able to impugne the rights of others when it has nothing to do with them. And I don’t accept the teachings of Jesus as a valid excuse in a free society – since not everyone is a follower of the Bible. I’m not anti – Christian , and I’m not trying to take away your right to make your own choices about what you can and cannot do. Just don’t tell me, my girlfriend or my gay friends what to do either. The left isn’t necessarily against you in this fight – most are just idiots though who need to be shown the way.
Know Thy Enemy says
“The left isn’t necessarily against you in this fight – most are just idiots though who need to be shown the way.”
Good luck showing them the way! It is going to be as easy as showing the way to a Muslim. Read this article about Theo Padnos who went through tons of suffering at the hands of Muslims, yet he clings to delusions about “peaceful” Islam!
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/what-does-it-take-for-an-american-hostage-to-lose-his-illusions-about-islam/
Western Canadian says
“Being pro – choice, in favour of marriage equality and so forth does not mean I’m trying to tell you what to do.”
Your use of the dishonest phrase ‘pro-choice’ gives the lie to your claims of neutrality…. The so called ‘pro-‘ movement is delighted to force the cost of their fetish onto everyone, and non-violently protesting the blood letting can and does result in jail time.
And if you are personally against same sex marriage, do you have the right to NOT supply the cake or to photograph the event??
particolor says
There must be something in the Qur’an about refusing to supply a Cake and Photographer to a Gay Wedding ?? Ill check and get back to You, after I put a Fatwa out on them, if there is !!
Defend Freedom says
As others have noted, most scholars of the New Testament believe that Jesus existed as he was referenced in several non-Christian sources. Furthermore, the gospel of Mark was written about 50 years after Jesus’s death. Paul started writing his epistles about 20 years after Jesus’s death. At that time people who knew Christ were still living and he spoke to them.
The case for Muhammad is much more uncertain. No contemporary sources reference him. The evidence for some of the battles that he supposedly fought seem to be nonexistent. One of the earliest references to Muhammad, in fact, may be using the word as an honorific. Muhammad means praised one and may have been a reference to Jesus rather than to someone by that name. In fact the earliest biography about him wasn’t written until 125 years later. Furthermore, if Muhammad did exist, he certainly didn’t have anything to do with creating the Qur’an.
Elliot says
Today a disturbing story from across the sea. International news sources are reporting that Israeli scientists have been plotting to kill cancer. That’s right, sinister Jewish researchers who are Jewish have unleashed several new and deadly weapons in their insidious war against cancer. They’ve developed a revolutionary new protein that could cause cancer cells to destroy themselves in what can only be described as a massacre of the innocent… cancer cells. Israelis have also developed the first blood test for breast cancer and new techniques using extreme cold that could viciously murder lung and breast cancer cells with minimally invasive techniques. Needless to say, since these techniques are being developed by Israeli Jews, we must defend cancer!
After all, there were cancers living in the Middle East before the Israelis got there. By what right did the imperialist forces of the west decree that Jews could simply move into cancer’s territory and start killing off these peaceful indigenous disease cells left and right? Are we in the international community going to stand by and allow cancers that are just going about their humble business in someone’s breast or lung to be suddenly uprooted and destroyed by the kind of high tech weaponry only Israel would deploy. Every television network should be leading their newscasts with graphic pictures of the pitiful dead and dying cancer cells that have come under relentless attack by Israeli researchers. The New York Times, a former newspaper, should keep a running count of how many cancer cells have been killed in this invasion. After all, only about 40-thousand Israelis die of cancer every year; whereas hundreds and hundreds of millions of cancer cells are killed by Israeli doctors. Do those numbers seem fair to you?
Fortunately, I am able to report that our moral guardians on the political left are taking action as they always do to try to stop the Jews. Or as the left calls them: the JEEEWS!!!
For instance, brave students at UCLA and NYU are calling on their universities to pull their investments from Israel. After all, who can make expert life and death judgements on international hot zone situations better than courageous 20-somethings ensconced in the safety and luxury of university life in Westwood and Greenwich Village? Sure, some might say that they’re spoiled, privileged under-educated children conned into moral absurdity by one-sided propaganda… [thinks this over] But no, no, no, they just want to make sure that Israel is deprived of the funds and support it’s only going to use to wage its unconscionable war on innocent cancer.
Butt you know, the problem isn’t just Israel. In some sense, it’s fair to say that Israel is the bloody tip of western civilization’s cancer-slaughtering spear. After all, over 40 percent of the Nobel Prize winners in physiology and medicine have had Jewish heritage. So I think we know who’s behind the international conspiracy to kill off innocent disease. Therefore let me call on all left wingers everywhere to defend cancer against the Jews of Israel as you’ve defended and continue to defend Israel’s other enemies. If we can stop Israel from attacking cancer then maybe cancer will have a chance to spread worldwide.
Kepha says
Eliot, good one! In the immortal words of Curley Howard, “Ngyuk ngyuk ngyuk!” ( and I don’t mean 肉肉肉 in Hakka–in-joke in case there are any others of that tribe lurking out there).
Then again, it’s the Israelis and a lot of other people trying to get at cancer. But, I suppose with all the Jewish researchers involved in the business, it won’t be long before someone starts defending polio, too (after all, Jonas Salk was Jewish, I understand).
Arthur says
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Short of a documented ancient text that dates to the right period of time and documents the fabrication of any particular religious figure, I think this line of reasoning will always lead nowhere. If the accumulated body of work surrounding Jesus and Mohammed is all based on fabrication, then where is the positive proof?
Given the distortion that occurs in present day media, it is not surprising to me that inconsistency and gaps exist in records. But honestly, I could not prove that my ancestors existed more than 4 generations back. If my ancestors never existed, then I surely must not either. That hardly means I vanish into non-existence for failing to prove my ancestors existed.
The legacy of Jesus and Mohammed exist. Neither will they just vanish on the basis of esoteric argument.
eduardo odraude says
On some of the reasons to think Jesus was an actual historical figure, see: http://www.strangenotions.com/jesus-existed/
Here’s what is at that webpage:
A small handful of scholars today, and a much larger group of Internet commenters, maintain that Jesus never existed. Proponents of this position, known as mythicists, claim that Jesus is a purely mythical figure invented by the writers of the New Testament (or its later copyists.) In this post I’ll offer the top four reasons (from weakest to strongest) that convince me Jesus of Nazareth was a real person without relying on the Gospel accounts of his life.
4. It is the mainstream position in academia.
I admit this is the weakest of my four reasons, but I list it to show that there is no serious debate among the vast majority of scholars in the fields related to the question of the existence of Jesus. John Dominic Crossan, who co-founded the skeptical Jesus Seminar, denies that Jesus rose from the dead but is confident that Jesus was an historical person. He writes, “That [Jesus] was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be” (Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, p. 145). Bart Ehrman is an agnostic who is forthright in his rejection of mythicism. Ehrman teaches at the University of North Carolina and is widely regarded as an expert on the New Testament documents. He writes, “The view that Jesus existed is held by virtually every expert on the planet” (Did Jesus Exist?, p. 4).
3. Jesus’ existence is confirmed by extra-Biblical sources.
The first century Jewish historian Josephus mentions Jesus twice. The shorter reference is in Book 20 of his Antiquities of the Jews and describes the stoning of law breakers in A.D. 62. One of the criminals is described as “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James.” What makes this passage authentic is that it lacks Christian terms like “the Lord,” it fits into the context of this section of the antiquities, and the passage is found in every manuscript copy of the Antiquities.
Josephus
Titus Flavius Josephus (37 – c. 100)
According to New Testament scholar Robert Van Voorst in his book Jesus Outside the New Testament, “The overwhelming majority of scholars hold that the words ‘brother of Jesus, who was called Christ,’ are authentic, as is the entire passage in which it is found” (p. 83).
The longer passage in Book 18 is called the Testimonium Flavianum. Scholars are divided on this passage because, while it does mention Jesus, it contains phrases that were almost certainly added by Christian copyists. These include phrases that would never have been used by a Jew like Josephus, such as saying of Jesus, “He was the Christ” or “he appeared alive again on the third day.”
Mythicists maintain that the entire passage is a forgery because it is out of context and interrupts Josephus’ previous narrative. But this view neglects the fact that writers in the ancient world did not use footnotes and would often wander into unrelated topics in their writings. According to New Testament scholar James D. G. Dunn, the passage has clearly been subject to Christian redaction, but there are also words Christians would never use of Jesus. These include calling Jesus “a wise man” or referring to themselves as a “tribe” which is strong evidence Josephus originally wrote something like the following:
“At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who received the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians (named after him) has not died out” (Jesus Remembered, p. 141).
Furthermore, the Roman historian Tacitus records in his Annals that after the great fire in Rome, Emperor Nero fastened the blame on a despised group of people called Christians. Tacitus identifies this group thusly: “Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.” Bart D. Ehrman writes, “Tacitus’s report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, sometime during Tiberius’s reign” (The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to Early Christian Writings, 212).
2. The Early Church Fathers don’t describe the mythicist heresy.
Those who deny that Jesus existed usually argue that the first Christians believed Jesus was just a cosmic savior figure who communicated to believers through visions. Later Christians then added the apocryphal details of Jesus’ life (such as his execution under Pontius Pilate) in order to ground him in first century Palestine. If the mythicist theory is true, then at some point in Christian history there would had to have been a break or outright revolt between new converts who believed in a real Jesus and the “orthodox” establishment view that Jesus never existed.
Irenaeus
St. Irenaeus (2nd century – c. AD 202)
The curious thing about this theory is that the early Church fathers such as Irenaeus loved to stamp out heresy. They wrote massive treatises criticizing heretics and yet in all of their writings the heresy that Jesus never existed is never mentioned. In fact, no one in the entire history of Christianity (not even early pagan critics like Celsus or Lucian) seriously argued for a mythic Jesus until the 18th century.
Other heresies, such as Gnosticism or Donatism, were like that stubborn bump in the carpet. You could stamp them out in one place only to have them pop up again centuries later, but the mythcist “heresy” is nowhere to be found in the early Church. So what’s more likely: that the early Church hunted down and destroyed every member of mythicist Christianity in order to prevent the heresy from spreading and conveniently never wrote about it, or that the early Christians were not mythicists and so there was nothing for the Church Fathers to campaign against? (Some mythcists argue that the heresy of Docetism included a mythic Jesus, but I don’t find that claim convincing. See this blog post for a good rebuttal of that idea).
1. St. Paul knew the disciples of Jesus.
Almost all mythicists concede that St. Paul was a real person, because we have his letters. In Galatians 1:18-19, Paul describes his personal meeting in Jerusalem with Peter and James, “the brother of the Lord.” Surely if Jesus was a fictional person then one of his own relatives would have known that (note that in Greek the term for brother could also mean kin). Mythicists offer several explanations for this passage which Robert Price considers to be part of what he calls “The most powerful argument against the Christ-Myth theory.” (The Christ Myth Theory and Its Problems, p. 333).
Earl Doherty, a mythicist, claims that James’ title probably referred to a pre-existing Jewish monastic group who called themselves “the brothers of the Lord” of which James may have been the leader (Jesus: Neither God nor Man, p. 61). But we have no corroborating evidence that such a group existed in Jerusalem at that time. Furthermore, Paul criticizes the Corinthians for professing allegiance to a certain individual, even Christ, and as a result creating division within the Church (1 Corinthians 1: 11-13). It is unlikely Paul would praise James for being a member of such a divisive faction (Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd, The Jesus Legend, p. 206).
Price claims that the title could be a reference to James’ spiritual imitation of Christ. He appeals to a nineteenth-century Chinese zealot who called himself “Jesus’ little brother” as proof of his theory that “brother” could mean spiritual follower (p. 338). But such a far removed example from the context of first century Palestine makes Price’s reasoning pretty hard to accept when compared to a plain reading of the text.
In conclusion, I think there are many good reasons to think that Jesus really did exist and was the founder of a religious sect in first century Palestine. This includes the evidence we have from extra-Biblical sources, the Church Fathers, and the first-hand testimony of Paul. I understand much more can be written on this subject but I think this is a good starting point for those who are interested in the (largely Internet-based) debate over the historical Jesus.
(P.S. If you think Jesus was just a rip-off of pagan religions (such as the Egyptian God Horus), then please see my colleague Jon Sorensen’s magnificent takedown of that hypothesis.)
Elliot says
All good BUT ” first century “Palestine”. Oh oh. No such country has ever existed in the history of the world. Jesus was a JUDEAN , a Jew an Israelite from ISRAEL.
The name of the region that included Israel was changed by the Romans in 135AD but it’s STILL Israel to all!
Kepha says
@eduardo:
You might also note that Joseph Klausner proposed that while Josephus’ testimony to Jesus was probably re-worked by Christian interpolators, it can be “de-interpolated” to give a bare factual account, and hence is based on a core original to Josephus. I’ve harbored a suspicion that Josephus, with his positive assessments of John the Baptist and James the Just–as well as the possibility that there’s more of his tertimony to Jesus that is genuine than what Klausner allows–may have been a closet Christian. After all, he lived in an era when the border between “Christian” and “Jewish” was not all that clear to the man in the street, and while the Gentiles were certainly being converted, the Christian movement was probably still heavily Jewish, and might have appealed to someone who had witnessed the Jewish revolt collapse. It’s a topic I might like to research in a little more depth, if I ever get the time.
@Eliot: I’m old enough to remember when people meant Zionist settlers when they said “Palestinian” (after the Palestine Mandate, which disappeared a few short years before I was born), while the people now called “Palestinian” were “Arabs” or “Palestinian Arabs”. But since you mention it, the New Testament never uses the Greek equivalent of “Palestine”, but always refers to Judaea, Samaria, and Galilee. It uses “Israel”, too, but as an ethnonym rather than as a geographic designation.
I myself am thinking oi using the terms “Holy Land” and “‘Eretz Yisroel” in any writing I do about biblical and Christian history from the Persian period down to the Church Fathers.
Jay Boo says
The actual words of Islam’s god.
Muhammad was a sneak
He pretended to respect Jesus Christ
But he was a calculating opportunistic thief.
The crucifixion he willfully denied with his self-serving made up Koran revelation lies.
Muslims claim that every word in the Koran are the literal words from their god supposedly as told hearsay to a angel that we are told who spoke the words to a suicidal narcissist named Muhammad who in turn told them to pagans while also worshiping their deities and finally to his followers who wrote down the words by consensus many years later after agreeing to burn earlier copies of Korans that conflicted with the supposed agreed upon words of their god.
The Koran
No god would ever be caught at a book signing as the author of such duplicitous crap.
particolor says
Romans 1:25 (ESV)
Because they exchanged the truth about God for a Lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is Blessed forever ! Amen.
Kevin says
Evidence that a man named Yeshua existed and was the basis for Christianity:
1) The writings of Josephus: Jewish scholar and outspoken against Christians but mentions Jesus twice in his Antiquities (books 18 and 20). MOst historians agree the second reference was embelished by early Christians but the first is widely considered his work and even the second is thought to be based on something he wrote.
2) Tacitus the roman historian mentions the man Christos who was crucified by Pilate. Since the specific passage in a latter to Trajan is extremely critical of Christianity it is unlikely (at best) to have been a forgery. Despite being a critic of Christianity Tacitus acknowledges Christ.
3) The Babylonian Talmud also discusses the life of Christ
4) Early 1st century Church leaders wrote about the apostles (the fourth pope was appointed by Peter and was probably a disciple of his) and quote the New Testament extensively before the first known copy appears
5) The consensus among historians is that Jesus existed although some question whether all of the events attributed to him happened.
Evidence Jesus was invented…..
Alleged links to pagan deities that legitimate historians laugh at
Is offered nearly 2000 years later by people pushing an agenda (mostly atheists and some neo pagans)
has no basis
Ken Nicholson says
The proof is in Christ’s teaching. No other proof could overcome doubt.
gainny says
“Footnote: If you’d still like to believe in a prophet whose existence has been established beyond the shadow of a doubt, try Joseph Smith.”
Neil Hall says
“No proof that there was a holocaust.”
I m sure Jeffrey would ascribe to this assertion in spite of overwhelming evidence from hundreds of venues to establish the fact that that there was indeed holocaust, 1933-45. Jeffrey probably does not believe in the gulags archipelago either. Or Mao Te Sung’s 50 million perished…liquidated. Or Pol Pot’s destruction of 3 million Cambodians. Or the Turks slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians. Or the persecution and martyrdom of millions of Christians by the Ten Roman Ceasers. Jeffrey is a fool in the Biblical sense. Jeffrey is a virulent, mind numbed anti semite and pro islamic terrorist mole.
Jashua says
How true! Thank you.
BC says
I think it is likely that Madmo did exist because the accounts of him are so evil. The Muslims seem to take pride in the story that he was a thief, rapist and murderer killing with his own hand. Which says a lot about Islam to say the least. They think that is somebody to revere. One would have expected the ‘history’ to be sanitised
By contrast Jesus is portrayed as a man of peace and goodness who never raised a weapon against his enemies, never raped or beheaded anybody. There are also no contemporary accounts of him and the so called 4 gospels were not only written a century or more after his supposed crucifiction but chosen by the ruling power at the time. to be the official account. Women for example who probably played leading roles in the early church are sidelined and Magdelene is defamed as a prostitute
thehalalporkchop says
If the Jews and Jewish Christians were expelled from Rome in 44AD. That is 11 years after the resurrection. It would point to Paul writing the book of Romans prior to this date. The last book of the bible written was Revelation prior to 90AD.If this doesn’t make sense try reading it slower .
hammar says
obama didn’t have a birth certificate either till after the coup (sorry, election) as mohammed didn’t have
a koran till 125 years after his death. But remember time is measured by the Jesus the Messiah alone BCE and AD. Pray always! Shalom.
duh_swami says
‘Everyone knows more about it (religion) than you do, if you give them a chance they will tell you all about it’…Rev Hensley, Universal Life Church, sometime in the distant past…
Did Jesus exist? The problem with all these ancient writers who wrote of Jesus after the fact is ‘eye witness accounts’. People who believe Jesus existed start out with that idea, so they don’t question these writers. But the fact is, none of these writer/historians are available for cross examination. So if you believe ‘love your neighbor as yourself’, and love God with all your heart soul and might, it does not matter who said it, because they have stand alone value.
What is the condition of someone who is actually doing that? The Supreme Commandment is not called supreme for nothing. It is a direct path to the God of your heart identified as love. It makes your ‘cup runneth over’ with love. And where does it run over to? Your immediate environment and beyond. Christ offers this opportunity for those who can see it and do it. That is one reason Christianity is superior to Islam, which has no such pathway.
Kepha says
duh-Swami, I will register a respectful disagreement with your post. You write:
“People who believe Jesus existed start out with that idea, so they don’t question these writers.”
I believe in Jesus, and I have always questioned those writers. Yet somehow they, being dead, yet answer.
I was raised in a very liberal milieu where no statement of “science” or “scholarship” from mid-19th century to 1940’s was to be questioned. The experts had spoken, therefore the matter was settled. Hence, I believed that the Gospels were 2d century works at far remove from the events they described. The kicker came when I started reading the Bible for myself out of cultural interest in my late teens.
I read Mark. In it, he speaks of Herodians, as if nobody who read him had any question at all who the “Herodians” were. Late in the book, he mentions Simon of Cyrene, “the father of Alexander and Rufus” (Mark 15:21) carrying Jesus’ cross. Where were the Herodians “long after” 70 A.D.? Why should “superstitious Greeks of 2d century Asia Minor”, as one know-it-all friend described the first Christians, hear about the Herodians and two sons of Simon of Cyrene as if they need no other introduction? That, on my own, was my early inkling that “the smart money” had missed something glaring in its assessment of the Gospels. I didn’t know it then, but the question my young mind raised about the “assured criticism” was being softened up by itself for the testimony of the late 1st century Papias (preserved in Eusebius) who spoke of Mark writing Peter’s memories for Christians in Rome a good many years prior to Papias’ own time. This made infinitely more sense than the account given by the know-it-all culture in which I was raised.
It got worse when I started to learn Greek, and the prof made us read the first several chapters of John. In John 4:6, it read “Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well…” I quote King James (rather than the RSV which was the first Bible I read) because the KJV has it exactly as it is in Greek. But why the _thus_? Dang it, Fourth Gospeler, where’s the picture to show what “thus” really means? Why this stray word that fits grammatically where it is found, but has nothing else to let us know exactly how Jesus sat? Back bent? One foot resting on one knee? Elbow resting on thigh? How? What is that “thus” trying to say? Maybe the guy who first read the words to a first century congregation (after writing them) could act out the “thus” for them. But he’s no longer with us.
In the 1970’s, a radical “Death of God” biblical scholar and clergyman in England named J. A. T. Robinson wrote a book entittled _Redating the New Testament_, in which he pulls together a lot of findings in archaeology and scholarship to berate his fellow exegetes for continuing to date the Gospels in the late 1st century (by his time, the critics had realized that the 2d century date for the Gospels was untenable) instead of recognizing that we’re dealing with things that were most likely written long before 70 A.D.
In John’s case, much of the topographical detail given (and it is more than in the Synoptics) tallies very well with what we know about Jerusalem and environs in the period before Titus’ destruction of the city. For instance, the five-porticoed pool of Bethesda where Jesus healed a paralytic was long supposed by the commentators to be a reference to the five books of Moses; but the ruins of the actual porticoes have actually been discovered. The same can be said about Gabbatha–the pavement–on which Jesus stood when he was brought before Pilate. Hence, John’s status as a “late” Gospel probably written long after the events is radically called into question. Even the “lateness” of John’s Christology has been called into question by Daniel Boyarin, a Jewish scholar, who roots it in the personification of Wisdom in Proverbs and Son of Man imagery of Daniel rather than in “developments” in the primitive church.
As for Robinson himself, his researches led him to become far more small-o orthodox in the last years of his life. I would urge everyone interested in the question of New Testament dating to read his book (it’s even online).
Please don’t assume that everyone who has come to assent to orthodox Christian positions about the Bible and Jesus Christ are pre-critical readers. In some ways, the Jesus Seminar, the people trotted out by the History Channel, and Dan-Brownesque sorts are rushing to the aid of 19th century German Hegelian criticism.
Kepha says
I’d also urge you to look at Jack Feingan’s _Light from the Ancient Past_, which, at this stage, is unfortunately somewhat dated. Also check William Ramsay’s _Paul: World Traveller and Roman Citizen_, which describes archaeological findings relevant to the Book of Acts. You may also wish to peruse F.F.Bruce’s _The New Testament Documents: are They Reliable?_.
Finally, keep in mind that today’s “experts” and debunkers have ways of becoming tomorrow’s debunkees. Consider what Robert has done to many of the “official” scholars of comparative religion when it comes to Islam!
Keith Lehman says
http://veritas-et-theologium.blogspot.com/2014/06/renewed-crusades-not-learning-from.html#more
Kimberly (Yahalomit) says
Flavius Josephus was a Jew born some time around 30 AD (near the date of Jesus’ death according to the Gospels). He was a Jewish military leader who later became a historian for the Romans. He might be considered a Jewish apologist. In any case, Josephus wrote extensively, and is probably the best source we have for historical events in 1st-century Palestine. The bias of his reporting is debated, but what is of interest here is the two references in Josephus to Jesus. The main citation is from Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews 18:3.3, popularly called the Testimonium Flavium. It says in part: “Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works–a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; Pilate…condemned him to the cross…and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” We know that after Christians took over the Roman empire through the conversion of Emperor Constantine, various forgeries and alterations (sometimes called “interpolations”) were made in documents. The Testimonium Flavium is widely thought to have been one of those interpolations.
Cornelius Tacitus (c. A.D. 55-120)
“But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the price could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, 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 originated, but through the city of Rome also.” (Annals XV, 44)1 He mistakenly refers to Jesus as “Christus”, however this was a common practice among the pagan writers at that time.
He supports the fact that Christ existed, and was put to death by Pontius Pilate – agreeing with the Christian scriptures.
Thallus, a Samaritan-born historian who lived and worked in Rome about 52 A.D., wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world (Habernas, VECELJ, 93). “Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as as an eclipse of the sun – unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably, of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.1) This quote testifies that the gospel accounts of darkness falling upon the land about the time of Christ’s death were well known, and thus required a naturalistic explanation from non-Christians.
Thallus did not dispute that Jesus has been crucified — he was more concerned with coming up with another explanation for the darkness that enveloped the land.
First it was the name of the Roman governor Pontius Pilate found in a monument in Caesarea, Israel, in 1961. Then came the discovery in 1990 in Jerusalem of an ossuary, a burial box for bones, bearing the name of Caiaphas, the high priest who condemned Jesus. Just recently it appears the most spectacular of all archaeological finds relating to Jesus has surfaced.
Another ossuary has come to light. The ancient Aramaic words inscribed on the limestone box state that it belonged to “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.”
Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, (61 AD – ca. 112 AD) : “better known as Pliny the Younger, was a lawyer, author, and magistrate of Ancient Rome. According to Wikipedia: “Pliny is known for his hundreds of surviving letters, which are an invaluable historical source for the time period. Many are addressed to reigning emperors or to notables such as the historian, Tacitus. Pliny himself was a notable figure, serving as an imperial magistrate under Trajan (reigned AD 98–117). Pliny was considered an honest and moderate man, consistent in his pursuit of suspected Christian members according to Roman law, and rose through a series of Imperial civil and military offices, the cursus honorum.”
In his correspondence with the emperor Trajan (Epistulae X.96) he reported on his actions against the followers of Christ. He asks the Emperor for instructions dealing with Christians and explained that he forced Christians to curse Christ under painful torturous inquisition:
They were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of a meal–but ordinary and innocent food.So not only was Pliny aware of Jesus Christ, he also provides description of the activities of the early church. In a later writing he details persecution against Christians:
“Even this practice, however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations. I therefore judged it so much more the necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition.
In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have denounced to me as Christians is this: I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For whatever the nature of their creed might be, I could at least feel not doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved chastisement. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome.”
Julius Africanus and Tallus
Sextus Julius Africanus (c.160 – c.240) was a Christian traveller and historian of the late 2nd and early 3rd century AD. He is important chiefly because of his influence on Eusebius, on all the later writers of Church history among the Fathers, and on the whole Greek school of chroniclers
Julius Africanus quotes the writings of Tallus, who was a first century non-Christian historian. In his Chronicles, Africanus quoting the historian Tallus, explains the reason for it being so dark during the day time on the day of crucifixion of Jesus Christ:
“An eclipse of the sun’unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died.” Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18.
How many do you want? Apparently, you sir are not much of a Historian. Let’s see, Oh yes.
The Quran
‘Īsā son of Maryam – upon him and upon all the messengers be peace! – existed as a matter of certainty for all believers in the Quran.Allah says Issa is an ordinary Islamic prophet in sura 5:75. Allah says he gave Issa an Injeel in sura 5:46 Muslims say this Injeel is a Gospel To Muslims, Jesus – or ‘Issa – is a saviour, a reformist, the Messiah (the anointed one), the “Word of God”. He was elevated to heaven. He could cure the ill, raise the dead, fashion inanimate objects and blow life into them, all by the Will of God.
You need to go check your historical facts.
zichronot says
Never use Josephus.He can be shredded.But the others you have are perfect.You can shed an atheist/muslim in about 45 second if you phrase it correctly with JUST drawing them in with ..do they believe Tiberius Caesar was real.(never come across one who didn’t)And then draw in the fact that In total, nine early non-Christian secular writers mention Jesus as a real person within 150 years of his death. And that is the SAME number of secular writers who mention Tiberius Caesar, If we were to consider all Christian and non-Christian sources, there are forty-two who mention Jesus, compared to just ten for Tiberius.This is an easy fast debate and Everyone should be able to make atheists,liberals and muslim shut up.
duh_swami says
Did Mahound actually exist? Both the Quran and hadith are very cleverly written and assembled. Hadith try and verify Mahound by including everyday stiff, like his advice about head lice. There is no reason to include those type things except to verify his existence. But are hadith trustworthy? It may be possible for a chain of transmitters to accurately transmit a short hadith of one or two sentences, but it stretches credibility to think those really long hadith about where they went, what they did, who said what to who about what, could be accurately transmitted orally. No ones memory is that good.
And who selected these transmitters, and who interviewed the reporters?
In my view, it is all man made from the Quran on, there was no Gabriel, and if there was no real Mahound, the clever would have had to invent him.
Lesley Robinson says
Who honestly gives a toss if a sexually deviant pedophile camel trader and piss drinker existed in the backward swathes of Arabia in the 7th century? I don’t.
Gail Griffin says
I don’t care. It is the idea that matters. Jesus was good. He didn’t recommend slashing of necks or stoning of women. Mohammed did and he made it so your family would even kill you if you saw through his bogas religious doings and said something negative.. Clever but evil
jay says
Exactly, whether they existed or not is rather mute at this point in the game, (although still important to study and investigate). Their values and the cultures they are the foundations of are what matters in reality. And all one has to do is look at their stark differences to see which one is a “prophet” the same way Jim Jones was, only smarter, more brutal, primal more outrageously uncivilized which was his and his followers greatest strength (and continues to be). Not their ‘message’ but their brutality and follow or die implementation. Jesus gave the message, he raised no armies, took no wealth, and preached a spiritual faith. Whether he was real or not is insignificant, it’s what he taught.
So screw Salon and every “atheist”, which should be called anti-Christian and antisemite because all their ideologies are based on is to hate Christianity and Jews (or Zionists as they say because that’s the PC way to say filthy jew now). It isn’t ‘for’ anything, their whole identity is based on being obsessed with what they don’t believe in until everyone else agrees with them. No wonder they love Mohammed.
particolor says
There was NO Choice with Mohammad !! You either Agreed with Him or joined the Headless Horsemen !!
Kepha says
I respectfully demur. Paul himself said that if Jesus did not rise from the dead, we might as well all go home and forget about it (I Cor. 15). I believe the existence or non-existence of Jesus is a very important question. One reason why the Left entertains notions about Jesus’ non-existence is because getting the public to accept such a position removes an obstacle to their own progress.
jay says
He’s just being a good dhimmi, denigrating and weakening the enemies of Allah for his masters.
zichronot says
Lets just BLOW this outta the water.For the Ignorant bit of Garbage that it is..
Salon’s totally ignorant! There are so many outside sources on Jesus.It’s agreed by all scholars that he existed.This is NOT something debated! Scholars KNOW he did exist..The sources are so many that to try, would drown you in evidence and you would never be able to finish the debate Epic fail Every single time.
In total, nine early non-Christian secular writers mention Jesus as a real person within 150 years of his death. That is the SAME number of secular writers who mention Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor during Jesus’ time. If we were to consider Christian and non-Christian sources, there are forty-two who mention Jesus, compared to just ten for Tiberius(this is not my full debate on Jesus.. I have this debate mastered and EVERY single person who wrote of Christ is known well by me.Like an old friend.(everyone believes Tiberius existed..I can win JUST on that point .Everyone I have come across believes in him.. It’s just Jesus they want to “pick” on.. and by the time I am done I can get an agreement Jesus lived.But Tiberious..might not have ..
Emperor Hadrian (a.d. 76-136) wrote about Christians as followers of Jesus.
Emperor Trajan (a.d. 56-117) wrote letters mentioning Jesus and early Christian origins
Cornelius Tacitus -56 A.D. – 117 A.D. Plinius Secundus, Pliny the Younger {61 A.D.-112 A.D} Justin Martyr {100 A.D.-165 AD.} Thallus, the Samaritan-born historian – {52 A.D} Julius Africanus and Phlegon of Tralles {80 A.D.-140 A.D.} addresses Thallus explanation. Celsus- 178 A.D-Tacitus (a.d. 55-120), the greatest early Roman historian, wrote that Christus (Greek for Christ) had lived during the reign of Tiberius and “suffered under Pontius Pilate, that Jesus’ teachings had already spread to Rome; and that Christians were considered criminals and tortured in a variety of ways, including crucifixion.”(just a few)
This guy is ignorant and speaking a “certainty” that can be smashed to bits in about 45 seconds.Just what I like to grab and debate.And this is one of my Very favorites..hehehe Snarky atheists have ZERO chance ..and it happens so fast they have to save the texted to review it and try to pull it apart..
Eric says
The evidence is overwhelming and no honest historian worth his salt would make the non-existence claim.
particolor says
Muslims should Invent a Gentler one now to compete and bring themselves back into world Favour ??
RNC says
“isa: as they call him is driven from “Jeso” or Jesus. And how about the Jewish historian account about the existence of Jesus? It looks like people love to talk about thinks they don’t know.
fidobite says
Salon? Who gives an f what comes from this nothing site?!? I’d sooner go to an islamo-satanist site for my info! Ha! What a joke!
John says
I was assigned to work in India for a few years. While there I learned that there exist plenty of evidence of Jesus having traveled through the East including India. And these are not evidences that was written decades later but while he was actually alive.
There are also additional testimonies to his life that fills in gaps of his life missing in the West, but possessed in both Buddhist and Hindu scriptures. And there are areas now in control of Muslims that still possess the original gravestone believed to be of Jesus’s mother and even direct writings from Jesus’s sermons in the Pali language that are more extensive than the Bible. Theologians have tried to gain access to them and to translate them but access have been denied, and the language is lost.
Jesus was a real and authentic historic figure.
particolor says
And..Sosayallofus !!
Lyndon Weggery says
There’s plenty of comment before me to prove the historical existence of Jesus. It’s no surprise that Islam wants to destroy the founder of Christianity’s credibilty because to succeed is to replace their beliefs onto an unsuspecting world.For my money if I was embarking on a journey of choosing between the two as a serious enquirer I would first look at the lifestyle of the two founders and then draw my own conclusions.For my money as a committed follower of Christ there is just no comparison.”By your fruits you will know them”.
particolor says
That’s what they are after ! Your Money !! They wont work for it ! So stop offering it to them !!
AnneM says
Did not this writer forget that the famous “Shroud of Turin” proved once and for all that Jesus is very much for real.
Washington says
‘JESUS’ “CROWN OF THORNS” SHOWN AT NOTRE DAME
Mar. 21, 2014
PARIS (AP) — An ancient relic that many Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s “Crown of Thorns” has made a special public appearance at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. The crown — a circular band of branches encased in a gilded, golden tube — is being displayed for three days to mark the 800th anniversary of the birthday and christening of King Louis IX of France, who acquired it in 1239. The relic was first mentioned by Jerusalem pilgrims in the 5th century and was transferred to Constantinople in the 10th century. The artifact has appeared in special ceremonies a handful of times in the last hundred years: in 1997, and in 1939 on the eve of World War II, to celebrate seven centuries since it came to France.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/jesus-crown-thorns-shown-notre-dame
This lady says more in one minute than some preachers say in an hour. I love this!
Jamie Muller says
What about the genealogy of Jesus. He has the complete genealogy Matthew and Luke. Can’t that be a proof?