Other than the Bible, is there historical proof that Jesus existed?

well thank you for posting that complete trash.

the bible said fucking nothing

> Jewish sources

Attached: post-71856-1320336768.jpg (406x395, 20K)

>A fucking christian website? lol You christcucks really are the fucking worst.
The website isn't the source, retard. It lists a few sources. (There are more than are listed on that website, mind you, but it does contain some.)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlegon_of_Tralles
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_historicity_of_Jesus

gardentomb.com/
+972-2-539-8100

>Shroud of Turin
lol the cloth itself is younger than the time he existed, by hundreds of years

Is there any proof that trannies are women? Liberals believe that.

it does not exist, if it did the church would plaster it everywhere
this religion is nothing but mind control for the masses, just like the other big 2, Abraham and Mohamed never existed either

also you should ask for HISTORICAL PROOF

>christcuck

Spotted the Jow Forumseddit fag

Attached: 1508100401037.jpg (979x740, 125K)

>Pic related
Also, a quick jewgle search will show you scholarly records

Attached: Blind Faith.jpg (1024x864, 196K)

We know Pilate existed for sure and we know he got in trouble and executed for killing Jewish insurrectionarybwhen he was explicitly told to avoid doing shit like that so there’s that. Also Tacitus and Josephus (controversial)

Shroud of Turin

The shroud of Turin is a confirmed LARP.

Only one of those quotes are from the New Testament. And it's from a Pauline script, which is directly attributable to a distinct schism, by Biblical scholars, between the espoused beliefs of Jesus and that of Paul.

as opposed to being mind controlled consumer, kill yourself.

All word of mouth. No written testimony at the alleged time of the life of Jesus.

who cares, memeflaggot
read the bible if you want the real deal

the Quran

What real deal? Anything can be a giant book and claim to have encyclopedia knowledge of world events. It's called postmodernism. The Bible predicted postmodernism by being it's conspirator.

talmud talks shit about jesus son of pantera
flavio josefo
tacito
plinio
suetonio
luciano
celso

turin

search for the blood test of christ by ron wyatt, maybe fake, but it something

soon with the temple prophecies

Blessed and redemptionpilled.

Attached: 1531382725749.png (600x500, 420K)

bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources

Retard

From the Annals, Book 15, chapter 45

Consequently, to get rid of the report, 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, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.

Written by the Roman historian Tacitus, circa 100 AD.

the major evidence of Jesus nowadays is the fact that (((they))) controls everything and (((they))) hate Christ... since before he firts time comes

Retard. Word of mouth by way of Christians, reported by Tacitus, is not a valid sight and evidencing of Jesus. This was after Jesus' time, and it was reported to Tacitus, which took the claim at face-value and recorded it for the sake of explaining the Christians' presence. Moron. Idiot. And a christcuck faggot, you are.

>which
*whom
Tacitus reported what Christians informed him of, and nothing more. He even called it a "superstition".

>A Roman imperial historian writing about one of their colonies, calling out Pontius by name, doesnt mention the resurrection, just Christ, in the year 100, 250 years before the first church was built, when Christian's had zero political power anywhere, is a Christian source

>Christians
>A sect of Judaism informing the most powerful empire in the world of anything
>Not their own governers writing to the empire about what's going on in their provinces
>But twenty beggars walked from Israel to Italy in 40 ad to tell the empire that Jesus existed

>Literally just dialectic nonsense
Reasoning by induction, about pre-History, using ancient sources, using Bible Studies criterion in negative theology to justify their religions existence, and the beliefs of the masses, with positivist notions of the present political strata subsumed into the assertions.

Wrong. I just explained that that is exactly what he was doing. Explaining the presence of Christians to the Roman authority, and recording the Historical precedence. Exactly like I said, learn to read.

Pilate and the Romans didn't kill Christ. It explicitly states he found Jesus to be innocent.

We have few scattered historians and associated documents who vaguely mention that a religious man called yehu-something was a thorn in the ass for jews in some backwater roman province so they nailed him on a stick. We can say that this much is reasonably true. It isn't enough to claim that everything in the bible is true. If you want to ask whether there is proof that jesus exist, and if by jesus you mean the exact character as depicted in the bible, the answer is strictly no. That exact character is not proven to exist. His exact deeds are not proven to have happened. If that shit was proven there wouldn't be faggots arguing about it every day.

you sure there's no proof?

Attached: Proof of Zeus.jpg (1920x1080, 786K)

Based Australia.

Bump for this thread.

So is it all make-believe? Come on pol, I got taught by my Polish mother and grandparents that it was the Jews aka the rich men of the temple who had Jesus set up

Attached: 1500692229403.jpg (287x512, 17K)

The point being, Catholic and Christian sources could be biased. Jewish sources, for no reason ever, would ever falsify in the affirmative that Jesus existed.

It's making the harshest critics of Jesus being Christ admit that He existed. Hence, it's an Opus Dei website...

If you read the bible, it's basically the history of how the Jews have been trying to outjew God for as long as they've existed, and some, I assume, are good people.

Attached: 1537965239344.webm (1280x720, 1.58M)

It doesn't even matter whether he was real or not because the character of Jesus Christ in the New Testament and the religion build upon it is real and the teachings the culmination of thousands of years of Mesopotamian and Aramaic cultural influence. The world would be dominated by Talmudists, Taoists and Hindus if not for the new testament.

>christcucks
Show real flag kike

Attached: 1534317882738.png (637x332, 57K)

Christianity is a jew slave religion. In ancient times polytheistic empires would assign lesser gods to conquered tribes(an ocean god for sea-front cultures, a hunting god for forest cultures).

Having your own deities and beliefs creates an inherent nationalism that isn't allowed amongst an occupied people.

In a culture with it's own religion your people are the chosen people. The hero god/messianic figure is your ancestor. The world revolves around your people.

Attached: images (15).jpg (264x191, 12K)

lmao another memeflaggot

I could've sworn that there was some sort of documentation about the earth quake and record of his sentencing.
I'll look and see if I can find sources. Jews may have a record of it too.

Josephus and Tacitus. Look it up. They had no reason to make it up. The Bible has been corroborated every decade including this one already. Look it up.

Attached: 123Oy2324Vey34.png (1903x413, 101K)

Roman reference:
Acknowledging someone named Jesus suffering "an extreme consequence" (note that this was written after Jesus death around 60 AD, user)
>the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

>Nero fastened the guilt ... 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 ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome....[5]

Jewish historian:
>Perhaps the most remarkable reference to Jesus outside the Bible can be found in the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus. The second, less revealing, reference describes the condemnation of one "James" by the Jewish Sanhedrin.
>Called the "Testimonium Flavianum," the relevant portion declares:

>About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he ... wrought surprising feats.... He was the Christ. When Pilate ...condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared ... restored to life.... And the tribe of Christians ... has ... not disappeared.[17]

Source:
>bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources

I just selected a few references from this website that seemed to be the most creditable and closest to the time Jesus lived. I do believe that Jesus existed and He is the savior of all people btw. Thought I'd better disclose that.

Attached: 1493615521635.gif (500x387, 1000K)

Christianity is just a ploy by the Jews the placate the masses. You follow any Abrahamic religion, you're their pet.

>I dont like your sources so they don't count
You're just as bad as the christcucks moron.

Even though I couldn't find any sources that date back to when he was living, it is understandable. Rarely did great figures get written about, unless they were in government or legal system, until after their glory came to fruition or they died anyways. Other histornians do agree, as seen down below.
There could be a reference about Jesus dating to before his death, but I want to move on to other things with my day. Hope this contributed to the thread OP.

>Nearly all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[54][56][57][nb 13][103] There is no evidence today that the existence of Jesus was ever denied in antiquity by those who opposed Christianity.[104][105] Geoffrey Blainey notes that "a few scholars argue that Jesus... did not even exist," and that they "rightly point out that contemporary references to him were extremely rare."[106] Bart Ehrman states "Jesus is not mentioned in any Roman sources of his day",[107] but explains that this is not at all surprising, since the vast majority of historical figures from antiquity are not mentioned in contemporary sources,[107] and further states that the sources written after Jesus's death provide ample evidence to support his existence as a person.[107]

Attached: 1483774222188.png (612x567, 17K)

Funny how the jews are always behind anti-Christianity movements...Hummm. It's almost like...Pic related.

Attached: 1539153158392.jpg (513x900, 146K)

Attached: FuckChrist.jpg (900x1616, 325K)

I'm sure someone else will mention the secular/non Christian sources, but I just as G to say that it's absolutely ignoramus-tier retarded to discount the Bible. The Bible isn't some mystical book made with magic, it's a collect of different writings many of which include historical literature. The Gospels are historical biographies, 3/4 written by guys who actually communed with Jesus, and another written by a historian. They've been consistently proven right in terms of mundane details. They're the best historical sources for the life of Jesus by far. Certainly, if you met Christ to the effect that you have enough information for a biography, then it's a no-shit that you're going to be a Christian. If you're to meet God in the flesh, you're not going to be an atheist afterward.

This is something to consider as well. The bible has proven to give very accurate historical descriptions of the time. Descriptions that match up well with what's established and recorded history.
But I can understand wanting to look for sources outside of it too to back it up and validate it. The truth doesn't fear questioning.
Unlike the [spoiler]holocaust[/spoiler]..........

The proof is in the Talmud. Talmudic (aka Orthodox) Jews absolutely agree that there was Jesus that was crucified. They hate him.

Also Josephus (Greek historian) mentions Jesus Christ.

Tacitus mentions JCh.

Pliny the Younger

That's a telling point that opponents of Christianity never denied the existence of Jesus. Modern day atheists are attempting to evade the truth by pretending it doesn't exist.

Attached: Sanhedrin 43a - Eng - PART 1.jpg (3240x4320, 3.04M)

Attached: Sanhedrin 43a - Eng - PART 2.jpg (3240x4320, 2.82M)

Attached: Sanhedrin 107b - Eng - admitted censorship highlighted.jpg (1620x2160, 901K)

No, there is no historical evidence Jesus existed. Jesus is a meme, created by Jews, to replace the original monotheistic religion of Zoroastrianism and later native European faiths (Paganism). Jesus' teachings are demonstrably based in Zoroastrian theology.

get the fuck in here faggots

Don't even bring it up with Christcucks. The substantive issue is whether Jesus was the son of God.
Who cares if the myths were based on one or more real people if the supernatural accounts themselves are false?

to be fair. there wouldnt have been much reason for the great writers and historians of rome to write about Jesus when all the shit was going down.
To them, at the time, it wouldve been one of the many petty religious disputes between foreigners in a distant land they didnt care about.
Even afterwards they considered christianity to be a jewish sect popularized by slaves and of no significance, just one of the many religions of nations they had conquered.
They wouldnt have cared enough to write about it until maybe when they started openly defying the emperor, but even then that was nothing unusual.
They would become very interested after the conversion of constantine but there was alot of water over the dam by then
Unfortunately youll only get the genuinely interested writings from the gospel and the talmud as the jews and christians were the only ones really concerned about it from the beginning

>i won't accept souces from people who agree with the position i want to refute

Please kys. Source: i wont accept your desire to live when you say it

What’s false is the notion that you are anything but extremely gay

Plus, only the wealthy elite could read/write.

Aside, is anyone interested in an offline version of www.jewishencyclopedia.com?
>filedropper
>/jewishencyclopedia

St Thomas Aquinas' Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5.

543
>And it should be good that to love (“diligere” = to value/esteem) someone is to will him good. But there are two kinds of good: eternal life, and charity intends this, because I am bound to love my neighbor as myself for eternal life; the other is temporal, and in this I am not bound to love my neighbor except insofar as these things lead to eternal life. Hence while preserving charity I can wish some temporal evil on my neighbor to the extent that it would give him the occasion of doing good and attaining eternal life. Hence Gregory says in his Morals that the sign that you do not love your neighbor is when you rejoice in his ruin; but I can rejoice in his temporal ruin to the extent that it is ordered to his good or that of others or of the multitude. [He is not talking about taking matters into his own hands, but rather hoping they learn their lesson.]

483
>Second there is an error of certain men who said: “You shall not kill” means men; hence they call it homicide when secular judges sentence people according to the laws.
-To paraphrase the rest of 483, St Thomas Aquinas then concludes that with judges it is something that is something God understands as being done on His behalf and the judge is essentially His proxy. This is called “Divine Right”.

Attached: 1497394493384.jpg (288x190, 21K)

533
>”Give to him who asks of you.” Here he says that we should do good to evildoers in two ways: by mode of simple giving and of loaning. As to the first, he says “who asks”: “If you have much, give abundantly” (Tobit 4:9); “If I have denied to the poor what they desired (Job 31:16). But it is objected that the poor cannot do this. Likewise, if the rich were always giving, nothing would remain of them. Augustine resolves this in two ways. The first, thus, because you should not give everything that someone asks, for not something indecent or unjust or irrational or something that you need more; but when someone asks rightly, you should give: and this is a precept if you are bound, a counsel if you are not bound. Jerome, though, says that it is understood as referring to a spiritual good because that can be harmful to no one.

531
>Mystically however, it should be known that the man who strikes you in the face insults you in your sight: “If a man is lifted up, if a man strike you on the face.” (2 Cor. 11:20)

He also mentions that “striking” is an issue of personal revenge which can refer to physical assault, taking things, and personal restriction. Matt 5:39-42 i.e. personal retribution is prohibited.

Attached: 1480979957232.png (310x255, 207K)

529
>But it should be seen how these sentences of the Lord may be understood. For two kinds of objections are made, according to two errors. One as Augustine says in his letter against Marcellinus, IS THE ERROR OF THE GENTILES, who argued that without retribution no state could be preserved. It is how a stand is made against enemies, and thieves are punished; which measures must be done thoroughly, or the state would perish. On the other hand, heretics say that the Gospels support revenge and do not wish to take away those things that pertain to society by abolishing it. Hence it should be said that THOSE PROCEED FROM A FALSE UNDERSTANDING.
>For someone can resist evil in two ways: out of love for a public good or for a private one. But the Lord did not intend to prohibit us from resisting evil for the good of the community, but rather that no one should burn with revenge for his own private good. For nothing preserves the society of men more than that a man not have the power of doing evil for his own private ends.

-Here the church fathers and saints literally state that people who assert “Love your enemies and turn the other cheek” means to be a pacifist and a cuck are “stupid goyim.”

Attached: 1464592025802.jpg (1143x1135, 321K)

I decided to share this here, thought it would be the place people would appreciate it since this is a thread on looking for answers. With the midterms coming up there's a lot of Anti Christian shilling going on and anons need to be instructed as much as possible. God bless anons

No, jesus christ was just a rip-off of zoroaster, there's literally no account of him existing by writings other than the bible, everything else is hearsay

youtu.be/g1SiGGYdR-s

Attached: 1522445975707.png (1523x3893, 1.95M)

Attached: 1522553544251.jpg (1500x2057, 893K)

Attached: 1534082177186.png (1520x7754, 1.42M)

Attached: 1533326846056.png (1503x9841, 1.18M)

Attached: 1522555311863.jpg (900x600, 282K)

Attached: 1534082869725.png (1600x5614, 1.89M)

Picking and choosing/reinterpreting some non-stupid Bible verses and pretending all the retarded ones don't exist, you diningenuous pieces of shit

Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

Matthew 4:8
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (KJV)

>Science then
You mean, "Shit we pulled out of our ass and are pretending or presuming people believed, but we won't provide sources or anything"

Jesus Christ is a fictional character created by fallen angels. He never existed. The Bible is a product of fallen angels. This is just one of the gigantic red pills coming for humanity.

Even atheist historians argue that there is a plethora of proof for a historical jesus
U have to be a hyperlefty tard to disagree

>fallen angels descend from heaven and write books about fallen angels and heaven to distract from the fact that theyre fallen angels from heaven

Attached: 436D6348-FF92-4F8E-95F1-A553330D1C17.jpg (125x116, 12K)

Jews and Muslims believe in a historical Jesus yet they aren't Christians.

Arguing against the historicity of Jesus is just an extra "fuck you" against Christianity. If that does not work fine, fine, there was some jew who got crucified and his cult got a little out of hand...300 years after the fact. whoopdedoo.

Meanwhile, 100 years after Mohammed moves from Mecca to Medina you have a continuous islamic Caliphate from Pakistan in the east to southern France in the west.

The Shroud of Turin is proof that Jesus Christ existed.
>inb4 pagancucks and kikes say B-BUH DEY TESTAD DA CLUTH AND IT DATES TO 1,000 A.D HEHE xD
fucking idiots, they tested a small portion of the Shroud which was burned in the year 1,000 A.D and the monks sowed a replacement patch unto the original shroud of turin.
what a cohencidence that they tested the area they knew was far older than the rest of the cloth, but never texted other parts of it.

Also the Blood type found on the cloth is RH-, and RH- blood is only found on one place on earth, Europe.
Once again confirming that the White Adamic Race was created in the image of God himself, and Christ descends from a pure Adamic lineage as stated in the Holy Bible.
Pic related, now get rekt fucking pagancucks and kikes.

Attached: shroudofturin.jpg.png (1292x8757, 3.91M)

I refuse to believe the the slam-dunk proof for God is some magic piece of cloth that popped into being around 1390 when the entire catholic world was all about hunting and collecting (((relics))).

if you are a fedora tipping nigger cock sucker then that's on you
But God does exist and he created the White Adamic Race in his image.
Our Aryan Ancestors have always worshipped God.

His existence is generally accepted as historical fact but there is no concrete proof and the earliest accounts appear fifty or so years after his supposed death..... so it comes down to faith

And then he put a magic piece of cloth in an obscure north-italian town for a few try-hard catholics to fawn over? Give me a break.

If Thanos or Dr. Manhattan were real they'd just fart life into being while romping through the cosmos and you can bet that if they wanted you to know they existed, they'd just show up and either execute or recruit you on the spot having looked into the future and all the possible timelines and determined your worthiness no further trials or tribulations necessary instead of playing this retarded game of peekaboo that Yahwe's doing.

There is NO proof actually from the time period. NOTHING. Even Josephus's stuff is agreed by scholars to be a forgery. Biggest scam in the history of humanity next to Islam.

> he put a magic cloth
The cloth was brought to Rome from The Holy Land
>If Thanos or Dr. Manhattan were real they'd just fart life into being while romping through the cosmos and you can bet that if they wanted you to know they existed, they'd just show up and either execute or recruit you on the spot having looked into the future and all the possible timelines and determined your worthiness no further trials or tribulations necessary instead of playing this retarded game of peekaboo that Yahwe's doing.
> unironically using avengers reference
fucking kek, I bet you hide in your house talking shit about Christianity while the moslems roam outside and cuck you fucking limp wristed faggot .

2000 years people.... 2000 years and he's still coming back..

Yes in the Quran