The objective of this thread is a factual investigation into the historicity of Jesus. It seeks to present the supportive evidence for his existence and validate or refute those claims. What it does not propose to do is ‘prove’ Christianity. While I appreciate the sincerity of everyone’s faith, I do ask that people refrain from obfuscating the objective by interjecting arguments based on personal beliefs. To that end, I am not interested in scriptural justifications unless those scriptures have definitively been proven to be authentic and factual. In other words ‘because the Bible tells me so’ should not be considered as evidence within the context of this investigation. That being said, I hope the moderators will leave it in this section as it does not pertain to religious belief and is a historical thread.

In 115 CE, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

"To dispel the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits, and treated with the most extreme punishments, some people, popularly known as Christians, whose disgraceful activities were notorious. The originator of that name, Christus, had been executed when Tiberius was Emperor, by order of the procurator Pontius Pilatus. But the deadly cult, though checked for a time, was now breaking out again not only in Judea, the birthplace of this evil, but even throughout Rome, where all the nasty and disgusting ideas from all over the world pour in and find a ready following."
Annals 15 : 44.

The passage quote above is generally considered authentic and not a latter interpolation. It implicitly infers the existence of a religious heretic known as 'Christus', having originated in Judea during the reign of Tiberius, that was executed by Pilatus. Any reason why it should not be considered as valid evidence supporting the existence of Jesus?

I guess history matters not....well bring in the bible toting Christians then...

The 1980 discovery, and subsequent rediscovery, of the ossuary of the family of Jesus.
*Ossuaries bear the following inscriptions: Yeshua bar Yosef
(Jesus son of Joseph), Maria (Mary), Yose (Joseph), Matia (Matthew),
Mariamene e Mara (Maria the Master, Mary Magdeline) and Yehuda bar
Yeshua (Judah, son of Jesus).
*Ossuaries date to the approximate time of Jesus’ life
*Statistical improbability of finding a family ossuary containing the members
of Jesus’ immediate family and dating from approximately the 1st century
CE.

"Based upon the assumptions I’ve made, I see numbers that should make
you stop pause,” described Andrey Feuerverger, Professor of Mathematics
and statistics at the University of Toronto.

The criticisms that I found of this controversial discovery are based on little more than bias and not factual consideration. Essentially it’s ‘that cant be Jesus’ tomb because Jesus rose from the dead.’ It bears a more unbiased scrutiny. For example, were bones found in the ossuary and what is the approximate biological age of the bones found in Jesus’ own ossuary and do they bear any forensic evidence of physical trauma as would be expected from a Roman crucifixion?

The ossuaries were empty, if I remember right. The show was quite compelling, though.

Thanks noone...that's one bit I couldnt seem to get an answer for...I didnt watch the show and only recently...with the start of this thread..took any interest in the discovery...

Yes, very interesting, but not definitive. I would've liked to have seen more evidence from the program, but they only have limited knowledge. Not really good enough to say, with certainty, that this was christs' tomb.

(its not that I dont have interest..I was in Osaka for 3 days. Tomorrow I go to Kagoshima.. when I get back I will have time to contribute).

I understand, Vet. I look forward to your insight when you return.

I can only find one reference to that quote online, so I dunno.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=of...%22&btnG=Search

That said, my gut feeling is that there was a man named Jesus, but evidence is surprisingly sparse. Even if the Tacitus quote is correct, there's a chance that he was repeating a myth.

http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm
Josephus, first century Jewish historian, wrote about Jesus. The life of Jesus is real recorded history.

Flavius Josephus was not a Christian.

But both Josephus and Tacitus were writing long enough after the fact that they could have been repeating myth.

Tacitus wrote Annals less than 100 years after the death of Jesus...hardly enough time for recent events within Roman history to have degraded into myth. He was born into Roman citizenship little more than 25 years after the given date of Jesus' execution. Further, Tacitus was a serious roman scholar, politician and historian whose recounts of Roman history..especially those events occurring shortly before and during Tacitus' own century...are held in high repute. The historical works of Tacitus are considered scholarly and authentic.

Ok...this wiki entry says he was probably from Italy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus
Also, the lifespan at that time was only about 40 years on average, so 100 years is a few generations.
Considering the length of time, and the distance between Italy and Israel, he could have been repeating a myth, I think. There's really no way to know for sure, is there?

No, I dont think there is....but he is generally considered a reliable source on Roman history...are we doubting his reliability because its warranted or because we have some preconceived doubt of Jesus' existence? I wonder and am also asking myself as much.

Well, what he's relating about Jesus did happen quite a while before he wrote it. The accuracy of various stuff can probably be judged on a probability scale, I'd guess.
For example, that Rome suffered fires is very, very, very well documented, so there's no reason to doubt that part. On other things, he could have talked to firsthand witnesses.

On other stuff (like the existence of Jesus)...I think it's just an unknown. Could be right, could be wrong. But it is evidence that Jesus existed. It's just not great evidence. We have him, Josephus, and the NT, and that's it.
Not the most compelling case, but I've seen worse, too.

What do you think about the ossuary?

Can you find a good link on it?

I've yet to find an unbiased link...they are all one sided..either for or against..

there is no historical evidence outside the bible of jesus christ existing. There are many historians who lived in jesus's area at the time he supposedly exists and none of them wrote a thing about him. Of the 4 documents that are so called recorded evidence of jesus's existence 3 refer only to the word Christ or Christus which is a title not a name so it could easily refer to someone else.

The 4 is by jospheus and is a proven forgery:

http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

Jesus is a personification of the sun not a real person.

Josephus hasnt been proven a forgery, evidence suggest that certain parts may be interpolations. That is all.

Tacitus did not 'just refer' to Christus but to a man carrying the title Christus, who was also, as Tacitus notes, a heretical Jew leading a heretical Jewish sect and executed during the reign of Tiberius...can you name any other potential person(s) that this description easily refers to?

Who are the other historians that you speak of? As there are many, you say, lets have some names...