There are physical items have been purported to support the existence of a man corresponding to the figure of Jesus. Some of these objects like "The Jesus Box" (http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/06/18/jesus.box/) have been dismissed as fakes, while others like "The Shroud of Turin" (http://www.shroud.com/) are surround by controversy and have not been proven to be either authentic or fraudulent. No piece of physical evidence has been introduced that conclusively proves that the man known as Jesus Christ existed, although there is a fair amount of historical writing that suggests that he did. It should be noted that the question "Did Jesus exist?" and "Was Jesus the son of God?" are considered to be separate questions by many people.

I looked at this question and I would add that in terms of written material the evidence appears overwhelming. Not only are there numerous accounts but there is also fullfilment from the Old Testiment as well. Far too much for me to even begin to include here but as you read the New Testiment even, think about the number of sources and how the story even fits. I think you'll soon see what I mean that there is a wide source of reporting and even a higher source at times. Really is interesting. Personally, I found there to be such a wide degree of uniformity that no one person could have made it up.

The shroud is most likely related to Molay, Master of the Knights Templar crucified by the Inquisition. Check out "The Hiram Key" and "The Second Messiah" byChristopher Knight & Robert Lomas; Arrow, 1997.

There is more proof of the existence of Jesus and his miracles than of Julius Cesaer. The world does not question his existence though. The Bible tells us that most of the world will deny him. It also tells us that the world hates what is good. These questions are merely fullfillment of prophesy. People who are always looking for proof are always going to be looking for something. The Bible says " seek and you shall find ". The knowledge of this world is nothing but knowledge. Wisdom comes from God. Knowledge is not power. If you do not have the wisdom to use it then it is useless. Seek rightousness and wisdom, not proof.

The only thing I can think of that would qualify as physical proof is a body that most everyone agrees is him - like King Tut. We have a body found in an apparently undisturbed tomb with his name and supportive documentary evidence. By this standard, we have no "physical proof" (as far as I know) that Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great or Jesus existed. Almost all historical figures are known by document evidence, not physical proof. So, the short answer is: no. The long answer is, we have better documentary evidence for Jesus life, death and resurrection than that most historical figures from more than about 400 years ago really lived. There is a Roman historian, Josephus, whose writings from the first century referred to Jesus. While not without controversy, this account and its supporting evidence along with the early manuscripts of the New Testament books make a strong case for Jesus' authenticity. That Christians were persecuted and fed to the lions within the lifetime of people who knew Jesus is almost unquestioned, so I can say without hesitation that, according to generally accepted historical record, people who lived in the first and second century, who were contemporaries of Jesus and his disciples, believed he was real and chose to be tortured to death under Nero and others rather than deny that the gospel of Jesus is truth. This qualifies as a very strong case for the authenticity of the gospel since most people will not choose torture or being fed to lions to defend a lie... many wouldn't to defend the truth. Nero ruled from about 54AD to 69AD which was within the lifetime of some of the disciples of Jesus. Much more could be said. The history of people who chose to defend this belief is continuous from the first century to the present. __________ Note to Krista: A birth certificate is a document. The carving on a tombstone is essentially a document. It is exactly the same. Shakespeare is known by documentary evidence. If there is a body in that tomb, it could be most any body (pun intended). Any documents supporting the authenticity of the tombstone are... well... more documents.

Physical proof does exist in the form of testimony. (The testimony of an expert witness is considered admissible evidence in a court of law. The court will also enter written testimony as "physical evidence"). The testimony of a defendant can be considered "proof" as to his or her guilt or innocence and the testimony of a witness is also considered "proof" for or against the defendant. There are literally hundreds of pieces of "physical proof" in the form of written text, many are literally written in stone, some on parchment, others are biblical. But there is a theological reason for a real lack of "proof", those who accept Jesus as the Savior, do so strictly by faith. The fact that He existed is not "proof" that He is the Son of God, but His testimony and the testimony of others (the list is huge, biblical and secular) regarding His miracles, death, burial and resurrection certainly prove it.

In response to what somebody had said earlier, I don't think that it matters about if there's proof that Jesus existed. That's what faith is: believing in something that you can't see. It's in the Bible, so that should be proof enough.

Yes there is proof that Jesus existed. during excavations archaeologists found ancient Roman census records that stated a person named "Jesus of Nazareth" there.

There is the existence of Christians around the world. If Jesus had not existed, how can the Christian religion and its start be explained. Also the early writer Josephus, in his writings, mentions Jesus. And there is historical proof that both King Herod and Pontius Pilate also existed.

Apart from circumstantial evidence, I am not aware of any hard, physical evidence that can be used to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus existed. There are historical writings and other records of his existence, but if you're looking for a grave or a body, you're not going to find one. He was supposed to have risen from the dead and ascended into heaven, remember. How could there be a body left? So there's no grave, no birth certificate, no guided tours of Jesus' house. All we have are the bible and other eyewitness accounts. There are shreds of evidence such as those mentioned in other posts, but with the loss of history in that area, especially with the sacking of Jerusalem in AD70 (and hence the destruction of the genealogical records kept in the temple), there is no physical evidence that dates back to the time he is supposed to live. Where does that leave us, then? We have a few bits of history pointing to him, and the eyewitness accounts of dead men and women. We have a book that to the natural, selfish man is controversial at best, and cannot be proven beyond doubt. So all we have is faith. Isn't that what Christianity is based on? *Stamps foot* "That's not good enough. I want proof!" You're not going to get any. Why? "A wicked and adulterous generation demands a sign? I tell you that no sign will be given except the sign of Jonah." "Even if I did tell you, you would not believe me." These were his supposed words to another disbelieving people. Where there's faith, there's no need for proof. Where there's proof, there's no need for faith. If God wants us to live by faith, why would he give us proof?

No. Second-hand witnesses do not consitute "eyewitnesses". Four-hundred people testifying that they saw the risen Jesus are of no value if their individual testimonies are not written down and notorized in one form or another. Because there is no physical proof that Jesus lived, that does not mean that he didn't. If you KNEW he lived, then the Christian religion, which is based upon Faith, would be in vain. Why try to prove the unproveable?

No there isn't, of course that in itself is by design. God requires that we beleive in Jesus because of the word. Jesus is the word, so our belief is based on the oral testimony of a handful of people who lived at the time. Thier records correspond so accurately with each other and the writings of the old testiament, that that in itself is quite miracalous. Logic, faith and a desire to know the truth is what convices us of the reality of Jesus, not some relic.

None of these conjectures would stand up in a rational court of law. 1) Josephus? I don't think so. Ephesus managed quite sloppily to alter the text to include Jesus. Jesus, the brother of James is like saying, Jeff, the brother of Mike. The names were that common. 2) A census that says "Jesus of Nazareth"? Again, not very likely. Where is the documentation? Nazareth, the town, did not even exist until 100AD. 3) Why do the Gospels correlate so closely? Because they were written by the same man, or group of men, assigned the task by the Nicene Council in 310AD. These are not "real" documents. They are novels written to bolster the position of the New Church under Constantine. 4) Why would there be a Christian Church if Jesus had not existed? Again, Constantine needed a socio-political-religious organization to allow him to rule in peace. As the head of State, he was also head of the Church. Very convenient! 5) It IS about faith. There is absolutely no documentable proof that Jesus or the Church existed at the time Jesus was said to have walked the Earth. The date 0AD wasn't even set until the 700s AD when the Catholic Church arbitrarily created a new calendar. If you believe in Jesus' teachings, that's great!! Buddha taught very similar things. If you believe that Jesus was the Son of God, the Savior of the World, you had better not settle for second-hand information or tradition. There's a huge disappointment waiting for those who don't seek facts to back up their faith. Whether Jesus existed or was created as a character to build an empire around, it matters very little. What one does as a "believer" is more important than the actual character. Believe what you will, Christian, Jew, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, or any other sect or culture. Just be true to your beliefs.

Yo, peeps! You CANNOT use the Bible as evidence that Jesus existed, so stop doing it. Everyone knows what the Bible teaches. If it is not corroborated by "real" secular evidence, which it to-date has not been, then there is no proof. If you say there are many secular sources, then cite them here please.

hello Krista, i dont know much about Jesus myself, yet i have been studying proof of his existence recently in an RS lesson. well though this is not PHYSICAL PROOF, the new testament and christian texts were not the only evidence, take Roman writer Tacitus for example, he absolutely hated the christians, yet in his account, he didnt deny Jesus's existence, he comfirmed it. There were also other historians such as Josephus who was a Jewish man. so we know the New Testament is not completely byist. Historians also know that they are accurate copies, since they were written in a very close time to when Jesus had lived. there are also 3000 ancient greek manuscripts, all supporting each others statements, therefore the information has come down to us pretty accurately. finally this is sort of physical proof...well incase you didnt know, in the past, archaeologists have discovered these acrostic stones, believed to be secret christian symbols.When written out they spell PaterNoster meaning our father in　Latin, commonly used in the beginning of prayers. there are only six in the world, and if you think about it, like someone said before, because christians were threatened and banned from worshipping Jesus, therefore they had to do it secretly with these stones. Showing how dedicated and how they believed he existed, if he didnt noone will go this far, that his teachings will spread all over the world through secret codes! info on rotas-sator square (the stone thing) http://www.cotswold.gov.uk/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=293&cAction=MUSEUM_ITEM&objectId=886 hope this helps!

I'll tell you right now, there is no "proof" of Jesus existence, that we know of. There is only evidence. Written documents are as much evidence for his existence, as for just about any other Historical figure. Documented evidence, might even be "better" than a supposed tunic of Jesus', because there are multiple sources documenting it. And yes, the bible is "one" of those sources. Here is a good article on the subject. Honestly, you have to be one desperate atheist, to go so far as to deny that Jesus existed, and yet keep on believing somebody like Archimedes, did... http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html

Historically inaccurate? Oh, please! You can't get an historically accurate record of 911 much less two millenia of history. Different book, different history. You obviously missed the point. It isn't about the history because NONE of it can be proved. NONE OF IT!!! It is entirely about Faith because Faith is the only thing that matters to any believer. History is for the non-faithful. And after Faith, LOGIC!! Why do people believe what they read just because somebody wrote it? Figure it out!

In terms of physical proof, one can conclude that a man named Jesus did live. The real question is if that man is who the bible says he is. I am not aware of any physical proof that he is. If one takes the gospels of the Bible as truth, why is that none of the following claims of the Bible are mentioned in the history of other people(s): 1. If a star appeared in the sky directing wise men and kings to his location, why do we not find accounts of the event in other cultures mentioning kings leaving his or her thrown to go star chasing. If not accounted for by those who, according to the story, found Jesus, shouldn’t their at least be a report of a new star in the sky by someone? anyone? Stars have been studied and documented by many cultures for thousands of years. 2. During his death, why did the Jewish scribes not document something as massive as the curtain of the holiest place in the temple being torn as reported in the gospels? 3. If God, the creator of all, turned is back on the entire Earth causing darkness and Earthquakes while Jesus was on the cross, why didn't at least a few culture's of the world report the event? As much as I want to believe, I would like to see at least one claim made by the gospels appear elsewhere in some other sort of history text of any type (just one will do). To date, I have found none.

wow this one is going to be interesting watching. I can't say there is physical proof, but then again i havn't looked nor do i plan on looking. Does not make me a non-believer of Jesus or god, i just don't care to get all hyped up about something.

If you mean written documents by someone other then the Christian Church there are these documents. All of them highly mundane with not one mention of the miricals surrounding him. However, we do not have a body or a grave site that can be authenticated as truely being his.

It is very difficult to prove physically someone existed 2000 years ago. There is no physical proof. I do belive Jesus Christ existed and he is the messaiah and the Saviour and the everlasting Lord! All the Holy Bible teaches us are the things which are happening today. The places and the incidents and the occurance mentioned in the Holy Bible are present and existing today. So i belive that Lord Jesus Christ did walk on the earth.

It is my understanding that in the times Jesus was supposed to have lived, as well as the times predating them, the royalty as well as the people had a wicked little way of dealing with people who they feared or who were controversial like Jesus. Take a certain Egyptian Queen who was completely erased from all historical documents simply because of her power and influence and as i remember she was murdered as well. So is it too much to believe the same isn't true with the man named Jesus. A man who is considered the most influential person in history. Is it too much to believe that He who had many enemies, especially with the Roman empire he was sending into upheaval, wouldn't be a prime canidate for such an act as an erasal of all written and physical documentation. This being said it is historical fact that Jeruselum was sacked, pillaged, and pretty much burned to the ground by the romans. Like the libraries of Alexandria huge peices of knowledge and history were lost to the world when Jeruselum was destroyed. Let us also not forget the Crusades during Medievil times when people wared against one another and burned the histories of their enemies as a warning. Is it not then quite possible that the lack of physical proof written or otherwise is a direct result of humen fear of those who don't share the same thoughts. Furthermore, the argument that Christianity mirrors other religeons is substantial but not relavent. Since the beginning of recorded history and probably the beginning of humanity people have been searching for the reason for their existance. No matter what religeon you believe in there are central points. These points help govern the world and all state genrally the same idea, treat yourself and all those around you with respect and dignity and live a life of truth. Also common to all religeons there is one omnicent being that outshines and over powers all other dieties. For example in Greek times Zues was the king of the gods, in egyptian times Ra was the most powerful and most commonly the pharoh's choice. Even the first religeon belived to have existed shares the same ideas that there is one God with three parts; Brahman consists of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. This being said is it not possible that all religeon is modeled from one another and it doesn't really matter what one you believe in as long as you believe. The question of Jesus' existance can be debated till you are blue in the face but as no one lives that lived then, and unfortunatly time and destruction has claimed much of the proof, it must be believed by faith, but there are outside religeous sources from the bible that speak of Jesus. His name is mentioned in the Quran for example and even non-christian believers of other faiths acknowledge his existance even if they don't acknowledge his divinity. In closing, there may have been entire buildings filled with artifacts and scrolls proving the existance of Jesus but unfortunatly humankind is cruel to those it doesn't understand and most artifacts are lost to the world forever. "blessed are those who have faith without sight"

"Physical proof”? Over two thousand years – matter turns into dust. How much proof do we have that Julius Cesar really walked the earth for that part. One historian A. Johnson wrote years ago that "we have more evidence that Jesus Christ died on Calvary, as stated in the Gospels, than we have that Julius Caesar died in the Capitol. We have, indeed, far more. Ask anyone who professes to doubt the truth of the Gospel history what reason he has for believing that Caesar died in the Capitol, or that the Emperor Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West by Pope Leo III. in 800”. Regarding the “New Testament” or Christian Greek Scriptures, not only do they verify the Hebrew Scripture account but they themselves are proved to be historically accurate as well as authentic and of equal inspiration with the Hebrew Scriptures. The writers declare to us what they heard and saw, for they were eyewitnesses of and often participants in the very events that they recorded. They were believed by thousands of their contemporaries. Their testimony finds abundant confirmation in references by ancient writers, among whom are Juvenal, Tacitus, Seneca, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Lucian, Celsus, and the Jewish historian Josephus. So in other words, when you check the work of the writers of the New Testament against the secular historians of the time, the Bible checks out as accurate. Sir Isaac Newton, a serious Bible student, was also eminent as a critic of ancient writings, and examined with great care the Holy Scriptures. What is his verdict on this point? ‘I find,’ says he, ‘more sure marks of authenticity in the New Testament than in any profane [secular] history whatever. Jesus was a real person and the impact that his life was felt immediately in the decades after his death as Christianity spread worldwide.

The only proof there is is the fact that jesus existed, but only proof that he was alive, and a man nothing more. The bible merely mentions him as being a divine, there is no actual proof.

Me! Jesus Christ has changed my life significantly and I can't explain it. I feel free!

No. The only "proof" that he existed are the written testimonies of people who lived around 2000 years ago. This is evidence, but not proof.

No. It is broadly accepted that Jesus existed, but some people have also presented alternative theories. Those theories could not be held if we had a physical proof. "The historicity of Jesus concerns the historical authenticity of Jesus of Nazareth. Scholars often draw a distinction between Jesus as reconstructed through historical methods and the Christ of faith as understood through theological tradition. The historical figure of Jesus is of central importance to various religions, but especially Christianity and Islam, in which the historical details of Jesus’ life are essential. Most scholars in the fields of biblical studies and history agree that Jesus was a Jewish teacher from Galilee who was regarded as a healer, was baptized by John the Baptist, was accused of sedition against the Roman Empire, and on the orders of Roman Governor Pontius Pilate was sentenced to death by crucifixion. On the other hand, mythologists, and a minority of biblical and historical scholars argue that Jesus never existed as a historical figure, but was a purely symbolic or mythical figure synthesized from various non-Abrahamic deities and heroes. The four canonical Gospels (most commonly estimated to have been written between 65 and 110 A.D) and the writings of Paul of the New Testament are among the earliest known documents relating to Jesus' life. Some scholars also hypothesize the existence of earlier texts such as the Signs Gospel and the Q document. There are arguments that the Gospel of Thomas is likewise an early text. Scholarly opinions on the historicity of the New Testament accounts are diverse. At the extremes, they range from the view that they are inerrant descriptions of the life of Jesus, to the view that they provide no historical information about his life. As with all historical sources, scholars ask: to what extent did the authors' motivations shape the texts, what sources were available to them, how soon after the events described did they write, and did these factors lead to inaccuracies such as exaggerations or inventions?" Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus Further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis

Yes, there is much historical documentation, though many factions do not consider Scripture to be valid; for instance, there is no proof Alexander the Great existed either (don't stay statues, because there are many statues of Jesus around!), but the world generally accepts that he existed and it has also been documented.

i dont think so

There is one factor not yet considered: Common sense. Why would 12 followers allow themselves to be hunted, tortured, and martyred for something they knew wasn't real? All but John were directly killed for their faith. (John was exiled to an island to die) Maybe- just maybe you could say that one or two were nuts, like Judas, but all of them? and hundreds of other witnesses? Not likely. Also consider the reason that the gospel of Luke was ever written. Luke was a second-hand believer- The follower of a direct desciple. He wrote by investigative reporting. He went where Jesus went, interviewed witnesses, saw the evidence and wrote it all down so that in 2000 years, a bunch of atheists could have proof. His was written separate from the others. The reason they all match up- It happened! Here are a few more non-believer accounts of this Jesus from Nazareth, called Christ, actually being seen: • Cornelius Tacitus, a respected first-century Roman historian, wrote: “The name [Christian] is derived from Christ, whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustus’ death in A.D.14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Nero’s death and finish with Domitian’s death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Nero’s decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesus’ surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christus’ or Christ’s death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record. See —THE COMPLETE WORKS OF TACITUS (NEW YORK, 1942), “THE ANNALS,” BOOK 15, PAR. 44. • Suetonius and Pliny the Younger, other Roman writers of the time, also referred to Christ. Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrian’s government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ]. Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god. • Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, wrote of the stoning of James*, whom he identified as “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead! (*THE JEWISH ANTIQUITIES, JOSEPHUS, BOOK XX, SEC. 200) • Lucian of Samosata was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesus’ name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus. • Mara Bar-Serepion Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion (spelled either Se- or Sa-), who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.

There sure is proff. Just listen to talkradio and you will hear her. here in the Long Beach area she can be heard on AM-KFI640 FROM 12-3 M-F.

Justin Martyr, writing in the middle of the second century, wrote in reference to the death of Jesus: “That these things did happen, you can ascertain from the Acts of Pontius Pilate.”14 In addition, according to Justin Martyr, these same records mentioned Jesus’ miracles, regarding which he says: “That He did those things, you can learn from the Acts of Pontius Pilate.”15 True, these “Acts,” or official records, no longer exist. But they evidently did exist in the second century, and Justin Martyr confidently challenged his readers to check them to verify the truth of what he said.

For events in the lives of Jesus and his apostles, documentary evidence apart from the Bible is quite limited. This is only to be expected, since in the first century, Christians were a relatively small group that did not get involved in politics. But the evidence that secular history does provide agrees with what we read in the Bible. Josephus also mentions James, the half brother of Jesus, who, the Bible tells us, did not initially follow Jesus but later became a prominent elder in Jerusalem. (John 7:3-5; Galatians 1:18, 19) He documents James’ arrest in these words: “[The high priest Ananus] convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others.”11 In writing these words, Josephus additionally confirms that “Jesus, who was called the Christ” was a real, historical person

The Roman historian Tacitus, who was no friend of Christianity. Writing soon after 100 C.E., he tells of Nero’s cruel persecution of the Christians and adds: “Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judaea, the home of the disease, but in the capital [Rome] itself Many have viewed Jesus as he is described in the Bible as an idealized fiction. But historian Michael Grant notes: “If we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus’ existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned

I've got the proof...but I just can't show it to you in the regular sort of way. And I guess the only problem I have with your question is the word "exist...ED".

DO YOU believe in the existence of the man named Albert Einstein? You may readily answer yes, but why? Most people have not personally met him. Yet, reliable reports of his accomplishments prove that he did exist. The influence of his existence is felt through scientific applications of his discoveries. For instance, many benefit from electricity generated by nuclear energy, the release of which is closely linked with the application of Einstein’s famous equation, E=mc2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared). The same reasoning applies to Jesus Christ, admittedly the most influential man in history. What was written about him and the visible evidence of the influence he wielded prove beyond doubt that he did exist. As interesting as the recent archaeological finding of the James inscription, described in the preceding article, may be, Jesus’ historicity does not depend on this or any other artifact. The fact is, we can find evidence of Jesus’ existence in what secular historians wrote about him and his followers.

Consider the testimony of Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian who was a Pharisee. He referred to Jesus Christ in the book Jewish Antiquities. Although some doubt the authenticity of the first reference where Josephus mentioned Jesus as the Messiah, Professor Louis H. Feldman of Yeshiva University says that few have doubted the genuineness of the second reference. There Josephus said: “[Ananus the high priest] convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (Jewish Antiquities, XX, 200) Yes, a Pharisee, a member of the sect many of whose adherents were avowed enemies of Jesus, acknowledged the existence of “James, the brother of Jesus.”

Tacitus, born about 55 C.E. and considered one of the world’s greatest historians, mentioned the Christians in his Annals. In the account about Nero’s blaming the great fire of Rome in 64 C.E. on them, he wrote: “Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.” The details of this account match the information regarding the Jesus of the Bible. Another writer who commented on Jesus’ followers was Pliny the Younger, the governor of Bithynia. In about the year 111 C.E., Pliny wrote to Emperor Trajan, asking how to handle Christians. People who were falsely accused of being Christians, wrote Pliny, would repeat an invocation to the gods and worship the statue of Trajan, just to prove that they were not Christians. Pliny continued: “There is no forcing, it is said, those who are really Christians, into any of these compliances.” That testifies to the reality of the existence of the Christ, whose followers were prepared to give their lives for their belief in him. After summarizing the references to Jesus Christ and his followers by the historians of the first two centuries, The Encyclopædia Britannica (2002 edition) concludes: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.”

“The New Testament supplies nearly all the evidence for a historical reconstruction of Jesus’ life and fate and for the earliest Christian interpretations of his significance,” says The Encyclopedia Americana. Skeptics may not accept the Bible as evidence of Jesus’ existence. Yet, two lines of reasoning based on Scriptural accounts particularly help to establish that Jesus actually walked the earth. As we noted, Einstein’s great theories prove his existence. Similarly, Jesus’ teachings prove the reality of his existence. Take for example the Sermon on the Mount, a well-known discourse that Jesus gave. (Matthew, chapters 5-7) The apostle Matthew wrote of the impact of that sermon: “The crowds were astounded at his way of teaching; for he was teaching them as a person having authority.” (Matthew 7:28, 29) Regarding the effect the sermon has had on people over the centuries, Professor Hans Dieter Betz noted: “The influences exerted by the Sermon on the Mount generally far transcend the borderlines of Judaism and Christianity, or even Western culture.” He added that this sermon has “a peculiarly universalistic appeal.”

No, quite frankly, finding physical evidence of him would totally destroy the christian faith. Their would be two forms of physical evidence to to found of his existence. DNA on a item he came in contact with, or actual parts of his body. The first one would be competely useless, however, unless you already had a confirmed control to test it against (i.e. a confirmed part of his body). So basicly the only way is to find his actually body or pieces of it to have evidence of his existence, But doing so would mean he never rose into heaven. This would definitively destroy all religons who consider him the son of God, because it would debunk one of their primary beliefs. As a side note, written accounts, statues, paintings, and stories about Jesus is circumstancial evidence, not physical evidence.

The New testament and the Holy Quran are the physical proofs of the existence of Prophet Jesus(Peace be upon him). However, the old testament and the new testament have been altered later and has been mis-presented the personality of Prophet Jesus Christ(Peace be upon him)

I have to say that I myself have read many differnet papers and books on the jesus subject. And that I have read three different versions of the bible from cover to cover. And I do understand that all people need something or someone as a power to believe in, as so that they feel that there is really some reason for our lives here on earth. And I myself still have a question that is u answered. That is is there any proof of jesus' existence. Well I see everyone speaking of written word and pictures painted on items like rocks as there proof. Yet on the other hand I could say that BIGFOOT really does exist. And others would not believe this even though there is documented proof by thousands of living people. And written proof from throughout time of this creature. Along with American Indians drawing and painting about it's part in our history. So is Jesus just as real as bigfoot or is bigfoot just a real as Jesus ???? Not counting aliens they have documentation as far back as the Mian ruins in Mexico. And in some religions today still believe in beings from other worlds today. I feel that Jesus is only as real a being as each one of us makes him in our own lives. But as far as proof no noone has yet found any hard core proof(physical that is). Like where is even one single item spoken of in the bible . Lamp stands of pure gold, or the 'ARK', or even one single silver footing from a place of worship, or a sacrafical table. No there is not one piece of real proof.

Out of Darkness says to NOT use the bible as proof of Jesus' existence.. Does he think that the "bible" came to us as it is today? In one big compilation? It didn't. jesus himself used the old testament (see temptation by the devil for some quick ones), and the Jews also, got the Law.."professional, highly trained" Transcribers wrote, and rewrote the word... then there was a moment of silence... 300 years...THAT IS LONGER THAN THE UNITED STATES HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED!!!!.... then comes Christ.. and his death, and the history written thereof..New Testament.. There are over 300 foretellings of Christ.. for just a few to happen in one man three hundred years later..the odds are insane.. The jews knew who they were looking for..and when he came and fullfilled all that he said he would in the Old testament...come on, for real, even God says that you would have to be blind, and foolish to not believe just by looking at the creation of the earth... Go to Crazylovebook.com It has a video, the awe factor of God... to see how insanly tiny we are in an enormously large universe..our telescopes are not even able to see it all...to see all the galexies..and not a single one is as beautiful as ours.. after watching that video watch the other one he has..even if you dont listen to him (he's awesome) just look at the back drop.. Our beautiful beaches, the forests..wow.. I was driving and I was looking at some birds flying over a pond, I was in awe watching the birds of the air..wow...to even think that we evolved is ignorant. This earth ball that is spinning at an amazing 1000mph around a sun at 67,000 mph... COME ON!!! it doesnt take much.... I believe that if the dead philosephers and scientists that we still admire..Einstein, Darwin, etc... had they the ability to see what we can now see... the amazing things that have been found just since they have died... COME ON!!! GOD IS SO GOOD.. and he wants to show us HOW GOOD.. and he will one day..and this is the promise that my life stands upon... through Christs selflessness I have been given another chance.... Adam and Eve messed it up..Thank You Father that you kicked thier asses out of the Garden, so that they wouldn't eat from the tree of eternal life.. cause I REALLY wouldn't have wanted to live forever in these conditions.. I cannot wait until the government goes back to him...cause clearly..we are not made to govern ourselves...we are to look to him... VOTE FOR GOD!!!

is there any to prove that he didnt

Well from some of the other ABer's answers I've seen here already. I don't know if I could explain it any better of Jesus existing. I guest if you need proof. Then maybe by attending a congregation, like in a "Holy Spirit Christian revival". Something this world needs, but is lack of now days. There you may get your answer. Kind of like "Jesus" says in the book of Matthew Ch:18 V-20..Quote.."For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."....Unquote...Good Luck my FRIEND. Plus 5 for your question.................M.C.S.

No, because he only exists in a ancient novel.

Unless someone was a Royal who got his face and name engraved on a coin, or was otherwise so prominent that his name was recorded on a stone or bronze monument that has survived, there is virtually no surviving physical evidence (let alone proof) that ANY single ancient individual known to history existed. For example, there is no surviving physical evidence that Plato, Socrates, Livy, Tacitus, Sappho, Cornelia Mother of the Grachi, or any of Caesar's wives ever existed. There is no surviving physical evidence that Philo of Alexandria or Flavius Josephus ever existed. All documents that refer to them are only very late copies, dated centuries after they existed. Documentary and institutional evidence, however, is another matter. And the documentary and institutional evidence for the existence of Jesus is substantial, and in fact far greater than that for most notable historical persons from ancient times, none of whose existence is doubted by historians. The fact is that the claim "Jesus never existed" or at least "*may* never have existed" is only asserted by cranks and dilettantes ... and 1 Professor of Philosophy, 1 Professor of German literature, 1 Swedish university administrator with a background in Folklore - all of them working out of their field and none of them Historians - and now one and only one PhD in Ancient History who only got his doctorate last year - and he only publishes his claims in pop books as he grandstands to get some good hype from the ignorant non-academic press. And please don't mention Freke & Gandy: they definitely fall into the Crank/dilettante category - neither have PhDs in anything, nor does either one hold any degree in History. They haven’t got a peer reviewed paper or scholarly monograph between them but no one ever said that a complete lack of the relevant qualifications should prevent someone writing a book on Jesus. Publishers positively encourage it because these sorts of books make a lot of money. They are called ‘wah-wah’ books in the trade which, as you can tell, isn’t very flattering, and they are not to be taken seriously. HarperCollins, who publishes "The Jesus Mysteries," has even decided to use a special imprint called ‘Thorsons’ for everything they publish in the field. This is a good idea as it distances their still quite respectable name from some of the trash they need to bring out to stay in business. If you doubt that, try me! Better yet, just call up any History Department in any accredited university, and ask to speak the resident expert on 1st-2nd Century Classical and/or Near Eastern History. Ask him whether he thinks it's seriously arguable that Jesus of Nazareth did not exist. Ask him if he has any colleagues or knows of any other historian alive today who think that Jesus did not exist, or at least may not have existed. Ask him if it is the general scholarly consensus that Jesus of Nazareth was an actual historical person living and preaching in 1st Century Galilee, Samaria, and Judea. As my old Roman History professor at Cornell (Dr. Alvin Bernstein, himself a secular Jews) said to a cock-sure crank sophomore insisting "there's no evidence" - Bernstien responded, "Either these are the words and deeds of Jesus of Nazareth, or they are the words and deeds of someone living at the exact same time, in the exact same place, with the exact same name!"

Absolutely not.

I'm not going to act like I know the answer like this "Castrate" guy,who thinks he does.Look there are millions of pieces of evidence that point in both directions,so all you can do is speculate and believe what makes the most sense to you.Anyone who thinks they know is a fool,because everything(for the most part)that we learn comes from other peoples opinions and solutions and after we look into them we evaluate and then come with a conclusion based on the information we have,which in time develops our opinions."I don't know what I believe,but I believe what I know."is a phrase I've made for myself because I personally don't beleive that Jesus existed,but everything I base that upon could be fabricated bullshit,but so could the bible.This question is to hard to answer,but I'll gladly debate with anyone who thinks they know the answer.

There is no piece of physical evidence in existence that has not be questioned and/or denounced as a fake. e.g. The shroud of Turin has been carbon dated and shown to be a 13th/14th century fake. There are unlimited arguments from Christians designed to protect the basis for their beliefs, on the other hand their are unlimited arguments from atheists/non christians designed to dismiss the Christian faith. The only rational solution for someone intent on questioning christianity (or any religion) is for them to look at the evidence and then to look at the source and veracity of that evidence. For example, you might see the bible as unquestionable proof that Jesus existed, however the bible was written in Greek and more than 300 years after the events (directly relating to Jesus) that it proports to document and can therefore not be reasonably held to be 'evidence' of any kind. My own research into the subject led me to no conclusive evidence whatsoever... The populous of each religous movement (Muslim, Christian etc) believes that theirs is the true 'God story'... basically they believe whatever their parents condition them to believe (ever heard of a devout Christian child born to a Muslim family living and growing up in a purely Muslim community ?). Muslims protect their faith by punishing those who convert to another religion with death. Christians are not as harsh (well, not these days... but they used to dole out similar punishment). Invariably, behind every religion there is; Power and Wealth, always in the hands of the controllers of that religion, never in the hands of the believers themselves. At the end of the day, the decision, as always, will be your own...

Well, guys I just wanna say to all of the none believers. FACT, GOD does exist, it can be seen around us, just look at the night sky and old testament prophies and wonder you none believer. FACT, if JESUS is not the path to GOD then what is? Think logically people, why would GOD choose any other way to him. Does JESUS not make sense to you even taking all the facts mentioned above you none believers? If you wan't physical proof, PLEASE look at the thousands off miracles that have been done through the name of JESUS, gooogle it!!! If none of the comments mentioned here are apealing to you then I'm afraid you will never be convinced ever, and these comments will be used as EVEDENCE against you none believer on JUDGEMENT DAY. JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY TO GOD. DON't BE BLIND AND SEE THE FACTS, IT's JUST COMMON SENSE AND THINK ABOUT IT CAREFULLY BEFORE BEING CONVICED BY OTHER PEOPLE THAT JESUS IS NOT THE WAY. I don't want to judge anyone, but people REALLY there is no other way to GOD other than CRISTIANITY that would justify the PATH to GOD. Compare religions if you are having dificulty and your eyes will open.

I don't know if there is or isn't any physical proof that Jesus existed. But i do know that there are all kinds of facts that are scientifically verifiable for a lot of things that we cherish as truth today. The bible is one of a unique source. It was given to us by a gay king during a time of sexual perversion (again). In the book that christians and non christians study from that mentions the destruction of two towns, they allow themselves to read something that was authorized by a gay king who's boyfriend worded the eliquent language that is used in the bible. This type of information is provable. This type of information has been logged in the archives of history. Now, what the writers of the bible did was used provable, traceable and qualifiable events to mark the unprovable, untraceable and unqualifiable images and landmarks. And likewise, they have used recorded images and landmarks to justify and make appear to have existed, the unrecorded events that are recorded in the bible. There are major icons such as Abraham, Moses, Isaiah and even the great prophet Elijah that are nowhere in the history books of ancient Egypt and Jeruselem. There are events that are not traceable through the history such as The Great Flood and The Battle of Jericco just to name a couple. Now it would make since to say that all that came before the first pharoh of Egypt and the first king of the children of Israel was not recorded. However, after the pharohs of Egypt and kings of Israel were established, things were recorded. Surely bible scholars and regular people of today should be able to find some shred of evidence to verify the existence of one of these powerful, prominent and extremely important figures/events that are the cornerstone of the foundation of a major world religion. The excuse should not be, "You have to just believe". All the evidence of these events/figures got lost in the archives of Egyptian and Israeli scrolls/modern-day history books. What's puzzling, to a lot of people I'm sure, is the "fact" that all the evidence got burned, lost, stolen or hidden and the only one that survived all of that just so happen to be the bible. But what's equally puzzling is the position some of the bible believers take against the uncovered, found, reclaimed and salvaged books such as The Dead Sea Scrolls, The Aquarian Gospel and The Gospel of Barnabas just to name a few. These word walking, tongue talking, self abasing, demon chasing, God obeying, spirit praying, praising God, without delaying men and woman of the bible will not accept the conversation of the other books. They infatically oppose the idea that their bible might be in error. Now I'm not trying to say that the bible is wrong. What I'm really trying to say is in everything that you study, find the origin of the item you are using as a tool to guide your eternal soul... If you value yourself then it is of extreme importance that you value what you allow to pass through your eyes and into your mind. To some it might seem real stupid to research information to see if it's real or not. But I say to those people, we live in an information world and if you were not into doing research then you would not be reading this response now.

the best evidence is the manuscript evidence. Not just the bible; josephus, eliezer, and the babylonian talmud are extrabiblical jewish sources that afirm what the bible says. Roman sources are from tactius and pliney. Tactuis even affirms that he was exicuted in Judea when Tiberius was emporer and when Pontius Pilate was governor(A.D.26-36) there's really no physicl evidence for any historical figure unless you find there bones or palace. Jesus left niether. Just His Word and Spirit, and actually though they are not physical, they have changed the physical.

I don't know about physical proof...but think... Can you think of any other person whose birth has split the entire history of the world into two...! (ofcourse I'm talking about BC AD)!

no it is based on faith

No, you have tio have faith. that is what Christianity is based on.

Not Jesus himself... But David and solomon. Yes. Speculative proof yes.

There's not much physical proof of anything from 2000 years ago yo...

There is no physical proof. There's no physical proof of lots of things that are accepted as fact.

Good question, I hope to find some interesting answers.

I thought they found his blanket or shroud or something ... didn't they? http://www.shroudstory.com/

No.

+5 Every nun I ever met had a splinter of the true cross. If you put all those nuns splinters together they could build the Golden Gate bridge. Jesus did exist,no legend could change history, no myth could change the way we measure time. Jesus is at the right hand of the Father but one day the nations will bow to Him as He returns in glory

Of course

Is there physical proof that Jesus existed? What would you accept as physical proof? If I showed you some nails and told you they were from his carpentry shop, would you believe? If I showed you a dated invoice from Samaritan Sawyer Services for delivery of 400 board feet of seasoned and sawn cyprus cedar with the delivery signature of Yeshua Ben (illegible) would you accept that? If I had a copy of his donkey drivers license would you accept that? Of course you wouldn’t. Because physical proof that one particular person, especially a Hebrew peasant, in a roman province, on the edge of the empire, no longer exists. And if it did exist, you would question its validity as proof. So physical proof, no. Documentary evidence, now that is a different story. Suppose I tried to convince you that in November of 1963 the president of the united states was killed in Dallas Texas by a man with a crossbow. Would you accept that? No, because there are too many witnesses that saw what happened. Even though this took place 46 years ago. Well there is evidence that people within 30 year of the execution of Christ were dying for their faith in him. That he lived is well documented. There have been those that maintain that the writings of Flavius Josephus were modified to include references to Jesus. Fine, please present to me your proof in the form of manuscript, codex or scroll that shows the text that predates the earliest copies we have that contain reference to Jesus. Unless you can show that, the assertion that forgery must have occurred is simply unsupported supposition. We have copies of manuscripts of the gospels that are dated to within 35 or so years of his death. Show me any other contemporaneous person for whom we have such early documents. Even his enemies at the time did not dispute his existence. The Babylonian Talmud (http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html#PARTb) refers to Jesus and does not deny he existed. They make reference to his being hanged, and being crucified could be construed as being hung. There is more than adequate documentary evidence that Jesus existed. There is documentary evidence that he was crucified by the Romans and considered dead. This evidence is both inside and outside the gospels. People with access to the official roman records made just decades earlier made the circumstances and manner of his death clear. That he was buried in a know location is clear. A guard was placed at his tomb to prevent there being any attempt to steal the body. Both the Romans and the Sanhedrin knew where it was. In fact the Sanhedrin asked the Romans to set the guard and seal the tomb. There is even evidence that points to the fact of the resurrection. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, then his body is somewhere. 1 Why didn’t the Romans produce the body? It certainly would have quelled the uproar that this sect was creating. The false tale of his resurrection would be squelched quickly if they had paraded the body for all to see. 2 Why didn’t the Sanhedrin produce the body? It would have ended the division and heresy that the Christians brought on later. They couldn’t because the body wasn’t in the tomb any longer. If I made the claim that John F Kennedy rose from the dead, talked with dozens, ate and drank, was seen by more than 400 witnesses, many of whom still lived and was then bodily taken up to heaven before witnesses, you would say I am cracked. You could go to his grave, dig him up and prove I am a liar. End of story. According to Christian tradition Jesus showed himself to be alive, by many proofs for forty days before ascending into heaven. And fifty days later the disciples received the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. So within 90 days of his death, people were proclaiming the risen Christ to the world. Presenting the “good news” with such vigor that they readily accepted death rather than deny it. Deaths that they feared enough to go into hiding to avoid just three months previously. To those that WILL NOT believe, no proof will ever be sufficient. To those who believe, no further proof is needed. Herbert Spencer once said, “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. That principle is contempt prior to investigation.” Or if you prefer it more biblically, Proverbs Chapter 18 Verse 13, “He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.”

The calendar.

Yes. Israel!

No. Of course, physical proof of a man who lived 2,000 years ago is a lot to ask for. There is some historical (non-biblical) evidence for Jesus, which is more than one can say for some people who are commonly believed to have lived.

You dont need proof whether Jesus existed or no, Even people who are cannibals bow to something in fear or honour maybe a tree or a stone , the reason they dont know about a living God, Whatever it is we need an example to follow a person who has spent a good life on this earth from the birth of his life as written in the holy bible. So you may not belive in the Christ but take his example and Live just as he lived thats what he wants, Praise the lord

You cannot answer a question on whether or not Jesus existed by quoting someone or something(The Bible or authors of it)when they are just as questionable! Here's the only truth we know....All religions ,all of them only know ONE thing for sure. And that is..NONE OF THEM KNOW FOR SURE!!!!Simple isn't it?

Anything that you can find from that time, you would need DNA to have proof!!!!

What good would DNA be? If you found DNA that you thought belonged to Jesus what would you compare it to? DNA evidence has to be compared to a base sample.If we had a base sample of Jesus DNA we wouldn't be asking the question.

Yes, there is good evidence that he was what is known as a "Hebrew Mystic". Although he was a rabbi, his teachings put him in the fringe of Jewish teachings. But recognize that above all, he was Jewish and that he would have never done or said anything to deny his heritage or beliefs. The writings of Josephus as well as many of the other writings of the time all verify that there was a real man named Jesus Christ, who had a strong following, and a relatively small but devout group of Jews who were loyal to his teachings following his death who continued to cause trouble for the Roman leadership. But many of the common modern traditions about Jesus have their genesis in the reign of Constantine. Until Constantine, nobody had been able to unite Europe. He accomplished this by including a little of each of the older European religions and incorporating them into his new "universal" religion. Understand that "Catholic" is roughly translated to mean "universal".

Yes, historical literature. Is there proof Alexander teh Great existed? Yes, historical literature written down four hundred years after he died; funny, no one questions his existence.

Doubts about Jesus were sown when certain German theologians of the late 19th and early 20th centuries portrayed Jesus as “a fictitious figure of the ancient Church.” Their impugning Jesus’ historicity led to a controversy among scholars at the beginning of this century that reached the public at that time and still has an influence today.. But this conclusion that Jesus was “invented” is simply not justified. Why? Bible scholar Wolfgang Trilling comments: “The controversy as to whether Jesus ever lived, in other words whether he was a historical figure or a myth, was settled. The question was resolved in a scholarly manner, at least in such a way that serious-minded people no longer see the problem as an academic issue.”. However, the ignominious execution of Jesus as a contemptible criminal provides “the most convincing argument against opponents of the historicity of Jesus,” states Trilling. Why Because the execution “encumbered, even hindered, the dispersion of the new faith among Jews and non-Jews.” If the execution of Jesus the Messiah was such an effrontery to both Jews and Gentiles, it hardly would have been an invention of the apostles! Furthermore, Jesus’ death is attested to as an historical event not only by the four Gospels but also by the Roman writer Tacitus and by the Jewish Talmud. Other events during Jesus’ life are also viewed as internal evidence of the credibility of the Gospels, hence of what they tell us about him. For example, would the followers of Jesus have fabricated his coming from Nazareth, a place seemingly out of favor Or is it likely that they would have invented his betrayal by Judas, a trusted companion? Does it seem realistic to think that they would have made up a story about Jesus’ being abandoned by the rest of the disciples in such a cowardly manner? It is surely illogical that the disciples would have constructed particulars so detrimental in nature and then proclaimed them far and wide! In addition, the art of teaching employed by Jesus was characterized by a unique style. Jewish literature of the first century contains nothing comparable to his illustrations. Which anonymous person could ever have “invented” such a masterpiece as the Sermon on the Mount? These arguments all tend to corroborate the trustworthiness of the Gospels as reports of Jesus’ life. There is also external evidence for the historicity of Jesus. The four Gospels portray him against a specific, accurately detailed, historical background. Places, such as Bethlehem and Galilee; prominent individuals and groups, such as Pontius Pilate and the Pharisees; as well as Jewish customs and other peculiarities were not simply concocted. They formed part of the structure of life in the first century, and they have been confirmed by non-Biblical sources and by archaeological findings. There is, thus, convincing evidence, both internal and external, that Jesus is a historical person.

http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

2 billion temples across the entire planet

Outside of the Scriptures, Tacitus makes a provocative reference a century after the fact. That is about it.

He may have existed. That doesn't mean he was the son of that guy whatshisname? jehova? Just a regular guy

there is recorded data saying a man named Jesus existed back then It's the magical flying powers that gets people

There is very little mentioned of a jesus by historians of the times. References were to a masiah ,but did not identify the son of Mary and Joseph blah blah bla.....

Hi physically no,With history yes.The Jewish writer Josephus wrote about Him being crucified.And the biggest proof is that in His name the lame walk,the sick get healed,the bad spirits go away.IT's Holy Spirit will provide gift such as the ones for miracles ,for healing,the gift on tongues,the gift of prophesy.I've seen this gifts.I've seen how spirits leave a person,I've seen my son get healed from his heart condition,I was profetized my job,my fiancee,my future.I've asked for anything and He gives it to me by His name.I've seen too many proof to not believe.

Physical proof his body went to his father...But the catholic church has a piece of the actual cross..

The Roman historian Tacitus attests to his life and death. No one has falsified his comments . Josephus twice attests to Jesus. One of these occurences is disputed to be a later interpolation, but not a single manuscript has been found that ommits this. In either event, the non-disputed passage still attests to Jesus' existence as a historical figure . Pliny the Younger attests to Jesus . The Talmud of the Jews attests to Jesus. It even attests to his miracles claiming them to be worked by sorcery . Celsus attests to his life, his miracles, and the fact that he claimed to be God . Lucian attests . so many more proofs exist. No other figure of the time is as well attested . With the exeption of John, all the disciples were brutally murdered for their testimony. Not a single shred of evidence exists to the effect that any of them ever recanted their testimony at any time . The first converts who where visitied by the risen Christ likewise suffered torturous death with calmness and singing. Why, because they were not lying. +5

had anybody heard or other people in history with the same dogmas and ideology as christians? there are too many and way before jesus' time around 3000BC there was Horus... the egyptions believed him to be the son of god, born of a virgin, at age 12 taught the word of god in temples, at age 30 was baptized and started a ministry, was crucified and rose from the dead on the 3rd day.... there are many figures "documented" in history and jesus just happens to be the latest figure... so christianity is just another spin off of these past religions... dont just take my word for it check the net, check publications and hieroglyphics with interpretations... -Joel christian for 20 years now AGNOSTIC

Jewish records, roman records, secular writers from that period all agree he existed. their were abundant proof that he existed; people just had a problem with him being who it was said that he was.

None whatsoever... All the crap written in the by-bull-shit was written long after his alleged death by people who wanted to rake in all the money of Europe at the time and now are raking it in all over the world spreading the same old, worn out myths.

If there WAS "physical proof" that Jesus existed--how many NON-BELIEVERS would believe it? If one needed "proof" in order to become a "believer"--what would be the purpose of having "FAITH?"

NO.

That Shroud of Turin thingy.

Absolutely not. The shroud of turin isn't evidence either.

Not that iv ever heard of no.

I saw a TV show that show that archeologists were discovering a few things from the time and place of Jesus. I haven't read yet what it was of it they cataloged the stuff yet. One of my friends visited Jerusalem and said he saw the barrel that contained the water Jesus changed to wine. He said there were also other Jesus artifacts that he saw on his trip as well as "historical sites" that were referred to in the Bible.

No. And there is no physical proof that my great great great great great aunt lived either.

It depends what you mean by 'physical proof'. Do you mean a body? If so, no, but, if the Gospels are true, then we can't expect there to be one. The Bible clearly shows that the resurrected body is in Heaven. If, however, you mean 'historical proof", then there is plenty, much more than for most other of his contemporaries. We know Pontius Pilate existed. For most of the last 2000 years, however, the only historical proof for him was in the Gospels and a brief mention in Tacitus, Philo of Alexandria and Josephus ! It is only very recently that the Pilate Stone was discovered in Caesarea, confirming his name and title. For Julius Caesar, the earliest surviving manuscript of his major work, the Gallic Wars, dates from the middle ages and is not complete. Yet for Jesus, there is so much more. The gospels date from within a generation of the events, and copies of some of them date from within 70 years of the autographs. The sheer numbers of Biblical manuscripts drowns out the numbers of mss for any other ancient text, and the general agreement in the text, even in the translations into other European, Asian and African languages, indicates the accuracy of the scribes. If you have any more questions, please ask.