For anyone who gives a crap Login to Kupika  or  Create a new account 

This diary entry is written by SithWedgie. ( View all entries )
Previous entry: in category (general)

For anyone who gives a crapCategory: (general)
Saturday, 27 March 2010
01:25:19 AM (GMT)
Ladies (I don't know if any men actually read this o.O) I give you Josephus.

In short, Josephus lived during the first century and wrote about many of the events
which occurred before and during his time.  For some events his is the only
accountancy we have.  He was a traditional Jew, and was most likely never a

He wrote of Jesus in his work "The Antiquities of the Jews".  He also wrote of John
the Baptist and Pilate as well. 

I do not write this to give evidence of Jesus' claim to be the son of God and the
messiah, but to give an example of a non Christian source which can help confirm that
Jesus indeed existed.  But, this is certainly not the only evidence.  If you throw
out reason, that Phraisees as well as Roman men of power saw Christianity as a
possible threat to their control and if Jesus had not even existed, they would have
made full use of this information.  For the first true Christian church began 50 days
after Jesus' death.  

Then again, if you are a person who simply throws out any information which is at all
questionable in validity, then surely you must throw out most of the historical
accounts of anything which occurred before 1000 AD. For many of them only have a
single known recording.  And even then, some of the great events were written even a
hundred years after their occurrence.  Keep in mind that oral tradition was very
strong, and men had better memory of oral conversations at this time. 

Here's a question.  Did Buddha exist?  What evidence is there?
Last edited: 27 March 2010

Oroborus21 says:   27 March 2010   973216  
people who say that Jesus wasnt an actual historical figure havent
done any research. there is more evidence that Jesus was an actual
person then that Homer ever existed and yet students and academics and
common people frequently refer to Homer as a real personage in
SithWedgie says:   27 March 2010   963068  

thanks for the comment.

I guess when its that far back they look primarily at a person's
reason for recording something.  If they don't seem to have a motive
to skew information, then it goes rather unquestioned.

Since there's a lot hinging on the validity of Jesus' life, actions,
teachings, and resurrection, people go over it with an incredible
amount of scrutiny as well as skepticism. 
Oroborus21 says:   27 March 2010   642438  
i think only a person completely biased or totally irrational or just
simply ignorant of the facts would question whether he lived. 

even for non-christians or non-believers, when one considers the
impact upon all of human history, the fact that the most common dating
system in use is based on his lifetime/year of birth (even if slightly
off), and so on, has to be acknowledged as a testament to the
importance of Jesus.

to think that some rather "unlettered" persons (besides Saul/Paul)
could simply make up a story about a person and that story would be so
powerful to have the impact upon history and upon individual's lives
that it has had, would make them the greatest story tellers in the

the impossibility of that alone should demonstrate to any reasonable
person that there is undoubtedly an essence and core of truth at the
heart of the story. 

Only a true living person could inspire such devotion and a following
and while it is debatable whether Jesus intended to found a church or
simply a movement with a body of followers, there should be no doubt
that there was something extraordinary there.

Josephus and other scholars have noted that there were many persons
claiming to be messaiahs, various rebels against the Roman rule and
quite a number of sects and followings during those centuries around
the time of Jesus. 

That Jesus's disciples and the early Christians were different is
proved by the fact that his followers are still with us today. It
would be sheer stupidity and arrogance to think that all of
christianity and the millions of people throughout the ages were based
upon something ordinary much less something untrue. 
SithWedgie says:   27 March 2010   664405  
for your 5th paragraph Jesus once said "Go and make disciples of all

As for everything else, I really have nothing more to add.

What is your personal religion?
‹✖ мocкιηg вιя∂; ✖› says:   27 March 2010   512687  
Wait, he was Jewish?
I thought Jewish people believed in Jesus too?
‹[[Deja Voodoo]]› says:   19 July 2010   912568  
Awesome diary. It wasn't there to point out that any side was wrong
in this hot debate, but put a little historical accuracy in the
picture. Not many people have successfully accomplished such feat. My
only thing is that you didn't include the fact that even though Jesus
is a real, historical figure, but there isn't any true historical fact
that he is, in fact, the Messiah. There have been people throughout
all of history claiming to be the son of God, or even the Devil
reincarnate. They all created their own grouping of people who
believed them. 

There was a real man who was truly crucified, who was believed to be
the Messiah, the lamb, the son of God who is now known as Jesus. But
there is no true historical knowledge that proves it, just like there
is no historical knowledge to prove that others, such as Anton LaVey
is a true deity as well. That is left to faith and belief from those
who understand that there was a real Jesus.

Once again, very interesting post to read. It would have been
excellent news if I didn't already know this from hundreds of
documents I've poured over in my life.
SithWedgie says:   19 July 2010   372753  

*nods* This article is to support the existence of Jesus.  Whether he
is the true messiah or not is not its aim.

Thank you for taking the time to read and respond to this. ^ ^

What kind of historical evidence would support that he was the
messiah?  Hypothetically speaking, what kind of things would you look
for or expect? 
‹[[Deja Voodoo]]› says:   19 July 2010   575679  
I personally don't believe there are any historically accurate pieces
that prove that he is the Messiah. However, if you consider the Bible
and other Biblical writings pieces of historical works, then the Bible
could be considered historical evidence. Other than that, there is
really nothing to prove he is the Messiah. There are historical
evidence in drawings during this time of a Jesus of Nazareth
performing miracles, however they are not considered real piece of
accurate history by any historian since the Inquisition. 
SithWedgie says:   19 July 2010   880419  

Many events in the distant past don't have substantial evidence or
even more than a single record.  Since many religions lack "historical
evidence" we could instead take a look at content.  To your heart do
the teachings of the bible, the qua ran, and or the records of
Buddha's verbal teachings sound true? 
‹[[Deja Voodoo]]› says :   19 July 2010   221885  
That's precisely my point. To the average Christian, Muslim, or
Buddhist- historical fact never matters. What truly matters is if you
have true faith in the teachings of whoever taught it.


Next entry: Something a little different in category (general)
Related Entries
‹< Dragon-tamer-1995 >›: My ramble on misunderstanding of Christianity. Rants. Click with caution.
kat0814: Some pretty cool quotes...
‹~// Sara \\~›: the Christianity talk.
Rin_Sohma: Saint Patrick. Not a Leprechaun, a murderer. No he was not a leprechaun.
NeverMyown: I am a Faker

About Kupika    Contact    FAQs    Terms of Service    Privacy Policy    Online Safety
Copyright © 2005-2012