The proof of the existence of Jesus


#1

Christians have never been able to offer convincing proof to the many doubters in the world who just do not believe that Jesus (pbuh) ever lived.

Actually, the good news that most Christians are not fully aware of is that it is none other than the Qur’an which is the proof that he existed.

This is because if the story of Jesus did not really happen, then for what plausible reason could there be for an Arabic scripture to unreservedly proclaim a Jewess named Maryam (Mary) as one of the greatest women who ever lived and name a whole chapter in the Qur’an after her and yet by comparison, not even once mention the name of Amina (ra), the mother of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) within it?

Simple logic therefore dictates that the story of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) and his mother Maryam (ra) must surely have been true for the Arabs to wholeheartedly accept and accord such a high and mighty reverence for them.


#2

Actually, there are several external proofs, aside from the Gospels and the Qur’an, that point to a historical Jesus.

Personally, I think the historicity of the Gospels are proof enough that Jesus existed. The same persons who do not accept the Gospels as history because they are primarily religious texts, would similarly discount the Qur’an.

Thank you, however, for helping to make the case of Jesus’ historicity. :tiphat:


#3

Actually the Koran does not really prove that Jesus existed. That would be like saying a book about Star Wars written hundreds of years after the movie came out proves that Luke Skywalker really existed. Of course I believe Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, really existed, but that is faith based on primary sources (the apostolic witness), and the Koran is a tertiary source at best. Just because He gets referenced in a book after the fact does not count as proof.

Scott


#4

Hello and welcome to the forums.

Here is the information about early historical document on Jesus Christ. The information is divided into three sections: pagan sources, Jewish sources, and Christian sources.

newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm


#5

Simple logic would dictate that the writers of the Koran had heard the Gospel stories. That doesn’t prove anything other than the Koran was influenced by Christianity.


#6

Simple logic would dictate that the writers of the Koran had heard the Gospel stories. That doesn’t prove anything other than the Koran was influenced by Christianity.<<<

If 3 brothers went to the same school and was taught by the same teacher at different time intervals, would it be a big surprise then if all 3 of them ended up with similar notes?

Likewise, why is it so hard for Christians to believe that Muhammad can have somewhat similar notes to Moses and Jesus (pbut) when all of them did indeed attend the same ‘class’ and were taught by the same ‘teacher’?


#7

so now you are off topic. Open another topic regarding Muhammad please.

and what does (pbut) mean?


#8

It is the abbreviation for ‘peace be upon them’.


#9

Thanks but why only ‘them’? we all need that. :slight_smile:


#10

The Koran also provides indisputable proof that Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse.


#11

**Sorry to bust your bubble but **if you studied Jesus from a History stand point, you would know that the original and first debates among the “new Christians”, Jews, and many pagons. Was not that Jesus did not exist, but whether or not he was in fact the son of God, or even Divine.

The new Christians of His day confirmed that they believed he was the Son of God. The “Docetists” on the other hand maintained the belief that Jesus only appeared to be Human.

The word Anti Christ is only used in the letters of John where John defined that an anti christ designates anyone who opposes and attempts to subvert the lordship of Jesus, the Christ.

After the death and resurection of Jesus, the early Church was growing fast, converting more and more over each and every day, witnessing their personal (actual) first hand experience as living witnesses of the truth of Jesus Christ.

Of course as the Church grew some of the local churches established by the Apostles went astray in their beliefs and that where you see Apostles like Saint Paul write letters back to the peoples and Church commnunities of Cornith see 1st and 2nd Corintheans, Epeshia, and so forth… those letters were written to those newly established churches, correcting them on their mistakes and preaching to them the Truth.

Of course as we go farther out, and before trains, planes, and automobiles, this was harder to control and the Pope had a very hard time over many years as the head bishop of many churches over many lands. Its just a blessing that everyone made it to the counsil of trent, and other counsels through out our 2000 year Church History.

After Luther and the reformation of course we are not arguing the same thing as they did at the time of Jesus on who am I , or who was he? But instead we have a lot of different churches preaching different gospels today with various doctrines of faith.

But for all Christians doesnt the Bible warn us not to add to or take away from the gospel of the Lord. Jesus Christ selected 12 men to be His Apostles and taught them and left them His Church and one in particular the Keys as Pope, St. Peter, he gave them all the power to forgive and retain sin here on earth. Jesus set up our Church. And for 2000 plus years we have been fighting and correcting every heresy that has come a long, at first with the Docetists and now all those protesters that are Protesting the word of God and His Church.

**Again will all due respect Sir, take a hard look at history before you claim that **“Christians have never been able to offer convincing proof to the many doubters in the world who just do not believe that Jesus (pbuh) ever lived.”


#12

Yes, well actually both Christianity and Islam were derived from Judaism.


#13

There are the works of 1st century Jewish historian Josephus, He claimed that 1he witnessed the execution of St. James, saying he “was the brother of Jesus, who was called the christ”. Like the bible the word “brother” was used in the time not just to indicate blood relationship.

He also stated that it was common Jewish knowledge that this man existed and was crucified under Pilate on the date of the passover, this reference has been tainted by medieval censorship because we know Josephus was Jewish and would not have said “Jesus the christ”. But the other reference uses the terminology “who was called the christ”. Historians generally recognize this is still genuine evidence that first century Jewish people knew about Jesus, even though Medieval tampering ruined the most important piece of the puzzle.

The other and stronger piece of evidence comes from the also Jewish source of rabbinic teachings of the time period contained in the Talmud and Tosefta. These documents mention an individual called Yeshu who was executed on the eve of the Passover the day before the Sabbath. The Jewish people them self say it is proof of Jesus Christ’s existence and have used that name as the Hebrew name for Jesus. They even recognise that their Jewish leaders of the time were the ones to have him executed, because the reference says this man used black magic to perform miracles(I.e “he casts out devils with the help of devils”). Certain ancient manuscripts of the documents even have Yeshua(the well known Aramaic form of Jesus) suggesting that the “a” was later dropped because it was silent.

It also mentions that this person had disciples and one was called Matai and another Thaddaeus. The other 2 mentioned are Buni and Netzer. The first 2 are obviously Matthew and Jude(Who’s last name is Thaddaeus.), while the later 2 are believed to have been John and Andrew(although that is not known).


#14

Also there is now quite substantial evidence that Jesus was born in the year 2BC or even 1BC. At least when incorporating all elements of the gospel birth accounts with external evidence and coming to a logical conclusion of dating.

Firstly, historians now generally recognize that Josephus made a mistake in one of his references to the year that King Herod the great died. The logical conclusion now is that he died in 1BC and not in 4BC. Early manuscripts show that in the 15th century a mistake(a dang TYPO!) was made in the copying of the Antiquities manuscripts. It originally said he dies in the year 1BC in the first and most significant reference to the year of death. Yet there is now discrepancies in his original text because later on he mentions a calculation of it which turns out to be 4BC which explains the error in copying(because of a possible error by Josephus himself or an earlier copiest), someone thought they’d get rid of it by changing the first reference of 1 to 4, hence sending Christians everywhere on a wild goose chase for 5 centuries until the copy error was discovered.

second, we now know there was an edict from Rome in 2BC which resembles the Census mentioned in the Luke Gospel. It was a patriot edict which required all citizens of the Roman Empire to pledge their alliegence to Rome. Statues were erected in towns to comply to this order. Of cause this was not the census under the emperor mentioned in the actual gospel, but that particular census order occurred in 6AD and was a mistake of the gospel author. The Patriot edict however completely fits the bill for the census in all other ways, it required all citizens to register(“to be counted”)… It may have taken a while for this census order to reach israel accomodating a year 1BC birth, as such an undertaking is quite a giant administrative count that it could have taken something in the order of several months to complete, but it was likely in 2BC.


#15

The point that I am trying to make on this thread is that there is really no reason at all why the Arabs at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should accept a Jewess and her son Jesus (pbuh) to a positon of reverence if their existence is in any way doubted.

One only needs to look at the way Jewish scriptures refer to Ishmael (pbuh) in such disparaging and insulting terms like “wild beast of a man” in order to understand why this is so.

With this in mind, it therefore does not make any sense whatsoever for the descendants of Ishmael to willingly accept Maryam (ra) and her son to such an exalted position in the Qur’an if there was even a tiny element of doubt in their minds regarding the truth of their existence.

The scriptures of the Jews can be accused as having an agenda to promote the ascendancy of the Jewish race in God’s plan but there is no way that the Qur’an can ever be considered as such.

Therefore, when the Qur’an unreservedly proclaims a Jewess and her son with such reverence, then it surely means that the Qur’an carries a lot more weight in ascertaining the existence of Jesus (pbuh) than the scriptures and writings of the Jews and early Christians.


#16

how is that even relavent reasoning. is the youngest of the three religions. why don’t you tell everyone here why you don’t refer to allah as “father” as we christhians and jews do?..

ish was not the promised son, he was the result of man once again taking matters into his own hand, instead of trusting God.


#17

While it is interesting your thread’s first post implied that you reasoned there was no other clear evidence. That view needs to be corrected because the Jewish religion supports his existence and the fact he was executed on Good Friday, but say he wasn’t their messiah, this is their official position and it is because their historical documents record a man called Yeshu who’s death and sketchy details of his life oddly fits somewhat the description of what happened to Jesus.


#18

hamba2han,

“With this in mind, it therefore does not make any sense whatsoever for the descendants of Ishmael to willingly accept Maryam (ra) and her son to such an exalted position in the Qur’an if there was even a tiny element of doubt in their minds regarding the truth of their existence.”

OK… So there was no doubt. Why would there be? This seems to be a false delimma.

”The scriptures of the Jews can be accused as having an agenda to promote the ascendancy of the Jewish race in God’s plan but there is no way that the Qur’an can ever be considered as such.”

No, the Quran promotes Muhammad’s agenda, not a Jewish agenda. Moot point.

”Therefore, when the Qur’an unreservedly proclaims a Jewess and her son with such reverence, then it surely means that the Qur’an carries a lot more weight in ascertaining the existence of Jesus (pbuh) than the scriptures and writings of the Jews and early Christians.”

What is really ironic is that a religion would promote Mary and Jesus, both Jews, centuries ago (and still claim to do so now) and then proclaim all Jews apes and pigs and try to kill them all a few hundred years later. In the words of Muslim apologist everywhere, that does not make sense.


#19

So why , according to this logic, are there still doubters in the world???

Mohammed simply added the story of Jesus to his false prophesy to make it sound more credible.


#20

Hello hamba2han and welcome.

I think I understand what you’re saying. That the Quran is an asset for Christians because it confirms the existence of Jesus’ existence. That the Quran can be used to prove Christ’s earthly ministry.

As a historical document, this could indeed be shown to be so. However we do not rely upon historical records solely for our faith. Indeed the early church existed for many years without the use of historical records to prove Jesus’ earthly existence; indeed existed before the Bible or even before the Quran was written.

The issue is that as Christians we do not regard the Quran to be anything other than a historical document. We do not accept it to be a divine revelation and do not accept the portrayal of Christ in that document to be necessarily accurate. But thank you for making your point anyway.

Yours in Christ

Paul


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.