Did Jesus Exist?

[truefusion 3]

Do you want me to psot when you said that radio carbon dating doesnt prove existence of Ashoka ??. you have clearly said that. So I am not putting words in your mouth.

Infact you are going what we say is tangential with all that you are saying. If you want to debate then debate statement by statement and not just saying a lot of words that confuse the reader. look at what you are saying :

 

Clearly if the Christian God is the ULTIMATE GOD ( which is easy to prove he is not ) ..then why doesnt he come down to earth in human form or any Form ( as he can do anything ) and make the world a better place. Why does he has to send a son who doesnt achive anything that is peaceful after his death and performs small time miracles which a lot of Saints all over the world have done Like sai baba. Infact if Jesus was god's son then why didnt it happen that peace and honesty came down on human beings. You would surely agree

that after 2000yrs of Jesus existence , man has only degraded much and there is more corruption and wars eveywhere. Clearly you are missing the point. According to me Jesus was a good saint and that many like Jesus come and go. Only when God descends himself which he has done in the form of Krishna , Rama would things be set right for a a long time and then again the same set of events will occur. That is more logical than a unseen HE God who claims he is the final God but doesnt have the guts or mind or will to come down in any form and set an example of how life should be lead.

 

Also we are going away from the discussion. So all of us agree now that Jesus 's existence isnt proven historically till now ?

 

I would like you to post where i said i did not believe in carbon dating and where i said that drawings prove the existence of a written character. Me stating that radioactive carbon dating does not prove the existence of Ashoka does not imply that i don't believe in carbon dating.

 

God does not have to come down to earth to make it a better place. If He had to come down because there is no other way, wouldn't that mean He is less than Himself? Why does an all-powerful God require to come down in order to save? The arrival of Jesus and the crucifixion of Jesus is merely God being consistent with what He had declared in the past. God does not fail to save, nor does He choose to save everyone. Saving a person does not imply a better world.

 

In Scripture, God does not fail to perform miracles publicly. You mention Sai Baba; which one do you speak of? I found two, and neither have been attributed miracles that come anywhere close to what Jesus is said to have performned. In fact, all the miracles i could find that are attributed to anyone called ''Sai Baba'' can be likewise performed by another human being.

 

You contradict yourself when you mention that it is better if Krishna came down instead of Jesus though both scenarios you claim will yield the same outcome. Tell me, why do you support your argument when you have in the same paragraph contradicted it? Why does Jesus bringing peace for a short time mean that Krishan bringing peace for a short time is therefore better than Jesus? You have not in any way shown any difference between the two in your own statement, how then can you claim that one is better than the other? (That is not to say that you accurately respresented anything Biblical.)

 

You haven't shown anything that disproves Jesus's existence. Historically speaking, evidence can only come from what is written; there is no other method for verifying the past. You can bring up the argument from archaeology, but that in itself does not prove that a certain person existed. If someone digs up a golden coffin within a tomb in the pyramids of Egypt, there is no way to tell who the skeleton in the coffin belongs to. If there is a name on the coffin or a stone tablet above the coffin with a name on it that says, ''Here lies [whosoever],'' one can only assume it is whosoever. Logically, that is not convincing evidence, but reasonably we have no other choice but to make the assumption.

 

Concerning the Bible, there are many dates, people and places mentioned in there. Much of the people mentioned are rulers of the land during that time. Mentioning the ruler of the land was one of the best ways to provide a range of time for the readers. Many historians will affirm the existence of the rulers and places. We know many of these places exist because they still exist today. If they provide a description of the location, you can go there today and see if anything has changed. These would-be minor things actually imply the accuracy of what is written. It follows that if they accurately represented all these things, that they would likewise accurately represent whatever else they write about.

 

If i am not mistaken, there is not much mention of geographical or historical figures within many of the scriptures of Buddism or Hinduism, if any. In fact, you even implied this when you were calling the Bible a childish piece of work. This historical and geographical representation found in Biblical Scripture is one of the reasons why i claim the Abrahamic religions are more down to earth.

[sukhi 2]

I would like you to post where i said i did not believe in carbon dating and where i said that drawings prove the existence of a written character. Me stating that radioactive carbon dating does not prove the existence of Ashoka does not imply that i don't believe in carbon dating.

 

So you say that the Christian missionaries who all the time were trying to make all Indian great people mythology would accept the existence of Ashoka when they found ample proof for the same ? I don think so. Christian cult people never ever will belive anything that is not 110% sure. Ashoka is proven by all scientific methods one being radiocarbon dating.

 

God does not have to come down to earth to make it a better place. If He had to come down because there is no other way, wouldn't that mean He is less than Himself? Why does an all-powerful God require to come down in order to save? The arrival of Jesus and the crucifixion of Jesus is merely God being consistent with what He had declared in the past. God does not fail to save, nor does He choose to save everyone. Saving a person does not imply a better world.

 

By the same logic that why God who is so powerful wouldnt come down himself then why does the SAME POWERFUL God need a broker ( messiah /prophet ) on his behalf to come down ? you cant apply 2 different logics to same God. are you understanding logic ?

 

 

Hindusim has more precise dates than Biblical date based on astrnomical and moon date not just a obscure date which begins with a non -existing person Jesus. Astrnomy was btw invented in India. We have much more depth in dates than simple tribal solar calenders. Go and study Indian Astronomy and dates of all Rama , Krishna clearly mentioned in the scriptures.

you are mistaken my freind because you have not read anything other than the Bible. Hindu Scriptures detailing God's human form birth are in depth written in the their biographies and also these places exist in India.

 

Sai baba did many miracles and he changed lives of lakhs of people and hence he is on par with Jesus. the system of miracle is considered a deception now. So saying Jesus did miracles and hence he is divine etc makes him more look like the brand of miracle - workers who are increasingly being terms fakesters.

 

Sorry All your arguments are illogical and full of lies. I am not interested in debating with a liar and a cultist. It is just a waste of time debating logic to an illogical guy.

[truefusion 3]

So you say that the Christian missionaries who all the time were trying to make all Indian great people mythology would accept the existence of Ashoka when they found ample proof for the same ? I don think so. Christian cult people never ever will belive anything that is not 110% sure. Ashoka is proven by all scientific methods one being radiocarbon dating.

By the same logic that why God who is so powerful wouldnt come down himself then why does the SAME POWERFUL God need a broker ( messiah /prophet ) on his behalf to come down ? you cant apply 2 different logics to same God. are you understanding logic ?


Hindusim has more precise dates than Biblical date based on astrnomical and moon date not just a obscure date which begins with a non -existing person Jesus. Astrnomy was btw invented in India. We have much more depth in dates than simple tribal solar calenders. Go and study Indian Astronomy and dates of all Rama , Krishna clearly mentioned in the scriptures.
you are mistaken my freind because you have not read anything other than the Bible. Hindu Scriptures detailing God's human form birth are in depth written in the their biographies and also these places exist in India.

Sai baba did many miracles and he changed lives of lakhs of people and hence he is on par with Jesus. the system of miracle is considered a deception now. So saying Jesus did miracles and hence he is divine etc makes him more look like the brand of miracle - workers who are increasingly being terms fakesters.

Carbon dating cannot prove the existence of a character or object that is written about, only the character or object can do so. Take for example someone saying the world is coming to an end; the only way to know that it is true is to wait till the world ends. And that is one way on how to prove the validity of any written work. For example, if something is written, saying that if you visit a certain place, you will find a certain something, and if you go there and find the very thing that was written about, then you'll know the written work to be true (though it is possible that such a thing has been moved), at least concerning that written part. The more it is shown to be true, the more weight the written work carries. Therefore, if the Bible accurately represents the time and events it mentions, the more of a trustworthy source it becomes, and so anything else written is more likely to be true. The more likely to be true, the less likely anything contradicting would be true.

I've told you already, Jesus's coming is merely God being consistent with what He declared in the past. You may want an inconsistent God, but that is not a God that is mentioned in Scripture. There is no contradiction here. Try not to ask a question i have already answered before you even asked.

Saying ''astronomical and moon date'' does not prove it is more precise. You have to provide an example.

The Bible mentions many places and does not stick to only the land of the Jews. It touches upon Asia, Africa and other parts of the East.

Changing lives and performing a few miracles does not put him on the same level as Jesus. But you haven't done away with the ambiguity of Sai Baba. There are multilpe Sai Babas out there, each originating from India, each having miracles attributed to them, each existing near the time of the other.

It is just a waste of time debating logic to an illogical guy.

I suppose you are right.

[OpaQue 15]

Don't be offended.. I don't mean to interrupt you abruptly.
 

Saying ''astronomical and moon date'' does not prove it is more precise. You have to provide an example.

This is a topic of history and Astronomy. If you are a master of these two subjects, you can actually use the references of the constellations, stars, moon, planet and derive an estimated time.
 

Astronomy is a natural science that deals with the study of celestial objects (such as stars, planets, comets, nebulae, star clusters and galaxies) and phenomena that originate outside the Earth's atmosphere (such as the cosmic background radiation). It is concerned with the evolution, physics, chemistry, meteorology, and motion of celestial objects, as well as the formation and development of the universe.

Astronomy is one of the oldest sciences. Prehistoric cultures left behind astronomical artifacts such as the Egyptian monuments and Stonehenge, and early civilizations such as the Babylonians, Greeks, Chinese, and Indians performed methodical observations of the night sky. However, the invention of the telescope was required before astronomy was able to develop into a modern science. Historically, astronomy has included disciplines as diverse as astrometry, celestial navigation, observational astronomy, the making of calendars, and even astrology, but professional astronomy is nowadays often considered to be synonymous with astrophysics.

During the 20th century, the field of professional astronomy split into observational and theoretical branches. Observational astronomy is focused on acquiring data from observations of celestial objects, which is then analyzed using basic principles of physics. Theoretical astronomy is oriented towards the development of computer or analytical models to describe astronomical objects and phenomena. The two fields complement each other, with theoretical astronomy seeking to explain the observational results, and observations being used to confirm theoretical results.

Amateur astronomers have contributed to many important astronomical discoveries, and astronomy is one of the few sciences where amateurs can still play an active role, especially in the discovery and observation of transient phenomena.

Ancient astronomy is not to be confused with astrology, the belief system which claims that human affairs are correlated with the positions of celestial objects. Although the two fields share a common origin and a part of their methods (namely, the use of ephemerides), they are distinct.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy

 

 

According to this Source, Indian Astronomy is as old as Babylonian astronomy:-

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_astronomy

 

Indian astronomy âthe earliest textual mention of which is given in the religious literature of India (2nd millennium BCE)âbecame an established tradition by the 1st millennium BCE, when Jyotiᚣa VedÄnga and other ancillary branches of learning called Vedangas began to take shape. During the following centuries a number of Indian astronomers studied various aspects of astronomical sciences and global discourse with other cultures followed.

It is just a waste of time debating logic to an illogical guy.

 

• a person living in the domain of LOGIC will think of time while discussing knowledge & want wisdom as a fruit.
  
• an illogical guy will think only of DEBATING using his known knowledge to evolve his faith.
  
• MORAL of STORY: Truefusion and Sukhi are like India & China.
  

   

   

  
  

[Bikerman 2]

From Wiki :

 

 

 

Sorry they found out that BC and AD are not reliable in the scientific and historical community and hence read below :

 

From Wiki :

 

 

 

We use this scale now as it is more scientific. Doesnt prove Jesus Existed historically in fact your arguments are further weaking the existence of Jesus.

 

So do you accept that Krishna Existed ?

 

You make a good point but I have found it better on this one (because the use of BC/AD is so ingrained with many) to adopt another system - BCE and CE (before common era/common era). It has less of a religious tone (though we have to face the fact that all western dating systems are based on the hypothetical birthdate of Jesus).

 

On to the issue at hand.

The evidence for a historical Jesus is weak. We have the gospels - written between about 50CE and 150CE depending on which theory you go with. As far as the contemporary historians, this, to me, is the main problem that proponents of a historical Jesus need to address. People either don't know or ignore just how many contemporary historians/writers there were and that not a one of them even mentions a 'Jesus'

A friend (historian) prepared the following list, which is not exhaustive but gives an idea of the numbers I'm talking about :

WRITERS WHO SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED JESUS

PHILO

Philo Judaeus wrote very many books about Jewish religion and history, in the 30s and 40s, living in Alexandria, and visiting Jerusalem. Philo was contemporary with Jesus and Paul, Philo visited Jerusalem and had family there, he developed the concept of the Logos and the holy spirit, he was considered a Christian by some later Christians, he wrote a great deal about related times and peoples and issues. If Jesus had existed, Philo would almost certainly have written about him and his teachings.

 

WRITERS WHO PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED JESUS

SENECA

Lucius Annaeus Seneca wrote many philosophic (Stoic) and satirical books and letters (and Tragedies) in Rome. Seneca wrote a great deal on many subjects and mentioned many people. He was a Stoic, a school of thought considered sympathetic to Christian teachings. In fact, early Christians seemed to have expected him to discuss Christianity - they FORGED letters between him and Paul. How else to explain these forgeries, except as Christian responses to a surprising VOID in Seneca's writings?

PLUTARCH

Plutarch of Chaeronea wrote many works on history and philosophy in Rome and Boetia in about 90-120 CE. Plutarch wrote about influential Roman figures, including some contemporary to Jesus, Plutarch wrote on Oracles (prophesies), Plutarch wrote on moral issues, Plutarch wrote on spiritual and religious issues. Plutarch's writings also include a fascinating piece known as the "Vision of Aridaeus", a spiritual journey, or out of body experience, or religious fantasy -

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

If Plutarch knew of Jesus or the Gospel events, it is highly likely he would have mentioned them.

JUSTUS

Justus of Tiberias wrote a History of Jewish Kings in Galilee in late 1st century. Photius read Justus in the 8th century and noted that he did not mention anything: "He (Justus of Tiberias) makes not one mention of Jesus, of what happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did.". It is surprising that a contemporary writer from the very region of Jesus' alleged acts did not mention him.

 

WRITERS WHO COULD HAVE MENTIONED JESUS

DAMIS

Damis wrote most of what we know about Apollonius of Tyana. He was a philospher and mystic exactly contemporary with Jesus and who was rather similar to Jesus - enough for some authors to argue they were one and the same person. If Damis/Apollonius had known of Jesus, he could have easily have been mentioned as a competitor. A story in which Apollonius bested Jesus in debate would not be un-expected.

PLINY THE ELDER

Gaius Plinius Secundus wrote a large Natural History in Rome c.80CE. Pliny wrote a great deal - his Natural History mentions HUNDREDS of people, major & minor - writers, leaders, poets, artists - often with as much reason as mentioning Jesus. (Of course like many other writers he talks about astronomy too, but never mentions the Star of Bethlehem or the darkness.)

It is not at all un-reasoble for this prolific writer to have mentioned Jesus or the Gospels events.

JUVENAL

Decimus Junius Juvenalis wrote sixteen satires in Rome in early 2nd century. Lucian the Roman satirist DID ridicule Christians (as gullible, easily lead fools) in mid 2nd century. By the later time of Lucian, Christianity obviously was known to the wider Roman community. Whereas Juvenal wrote at a time when Christianity had only just started to rate a few tiny mentions (Pliny the Younger, Tacitus.)

MARTIAL

Marcus Valerius Martialus wrote satires in Rome in late 1st century. Martial wrote a large body of poems about all sorts of things. He mentions many people, places, stories and issues - major and minor, within and without Rome, such as :

* Stoic suffering of discomfort and death,

* virgin's blood,

* Roman funerary practices,

* the way accused men look in court,

* Roman soldiers mocking their leaders,

* anointing the body with oil,

* Molorchus the good shepherd,

* Tutilius a minor rhetorician, Nestor the wise,

* the (ugly) Temple of Jupiter,

This shows Martial mentions or alludes to many and varied people and issues. He could easily have mentioned Jesus (or the Gospel events).

PETRONIUS

Petronius Arbiter wrote a large novel (a bawdy drama) the "Satyricon" c.60CE. Petronius mentions all sorts of people and events in this large work, including :

** a CRUCIFIXION !

** a scene where guards are posted to stop a corpse being stolen,

** a tomb scene of someone mistaking a person for a supernatural vision,

* gods such as Bacchus and Ceres,

* writers such as Sophocles and Euripides and Epicurus,

* books such as the Iliad,

* Romans such as Cato and Pompey,

* people such as Hannibal, and the Governor of Ephesus,

* female charioteers, slaves, merchants, Arabs, lawyers

* baths, shipwrecks, meals...

This large work, cover MANY topics, including a CRUCIFIXION, and it was written just as Peter and Paul had come to Rome, allegedly. It could easily have mentioned Jesus.

PAUSANIAS

Pausanias wrote the massive Guide to Greece in mid 2nd century. Pausanias' work is vast and the index covers over 70 pages of small print, I estimate a couple of THOUSAND names are mentioned. He mentions a large number of minor figues from within and without Greece. He even mentions a Jewish prophetess - a figure so minor she is essentially unknown: "Then later than Demo there was a prophetic woman reared among the Jews beyond Palestine; her name was Sabbe." Phokis, Book X, 12, [5]. Pausanias also mentions the Jewish rebellion under Hadrian.

EPICTETUS

Epictetus is known for several books of Stoic religious and philosophic discourses in the early 2nd century. One of his disciples was Arrian, and thanks to him much of Epictetus' works are extant. Epictetus DID apparently mention "the Galileans", which could be a reference to :

* the early Christians,

or

* the revolt under Judas the Galilean in early 1st century.

Either way, this shows quite clearly that Epictetus could refer to a figure such as Jesus.

AELIUS ARISTIDES

Aelius Aristides the Greek Orator spoke and wrote a History of Rome and other subjects - he seems to refer to the Christians as "impious men from Palestine" (Orations 46.2). If he could mention people from Palestine, he could easily have mentioned Jesus.

FRONTO

Marcus Cornelius Fronto of Rome wrote several letters in mid 2nd century. According to Minucius Felix, he scandalised rites practiced by Roman Christians - so he could easily have mentioned Jesus.

PERSIUS

Aulus Persius Flaccus wrote six fairly long satires in Rome in the mid 1st century, of a rather philosophic nature. The argument that no Roman satirist could be expected to mention Jesus, is proven wrong by the case of a Roman satirist who DID mention Jesus (but only as echoes of later Christian beliefs.) Persius wrote a reasonably large body of work that mentions many people and issues.

DIO CHRYSOSTOM

Dio Chrysostom (Cocceianus Dio) wrote many works and gave many speeches in various Roman and Greek centres in late 1st century, of which 80 survive e.g. the Euboicus. Dio wrote a large number of works in the late 1st century - he certainly could have mentioned Jesus, if he knew of him.

LUCIUS APULEIUS

Lucius Apuleius wrote the Metamorphoses (the Golden *bottom* or Transformations of Lucius) and many other spiritual, historical, and philosophic works - several survive.

MARCUS AURELIUS

Marcus Aelius Aurelius Antoninus wrote the Stoic Meditations in mid 2nd century - he (apparently) refers once to the Christians in XI, 3.

MUSONIUS RUFUS

C. Musonius Rufus wrote on Stoic philosophy in Rome in mid 1st century.

HIEROCLES

Hierocles of Alexandria wrote on Stoic philosophy in late 1st century.

MAXIMUS of TYRE

Cassius Maximus Tyrius, a Greek NeoPlatonic philosopher, wrote many works in mid 2nd century.

ARRIAN

Arrian wrote a History of Alexander c.120CE. The subject is not related, but Arrian wrote a very large work which mentioned HUNDREDS of people, some not from Alexander's time.

APPIAN

Appian wrote a large Roman History (from the Gracchi to Caesar) in mid 2nd century. It's not particularly likely that this specific writer would mention Jesus. But, he wrote a LARGE work which mentions HUNDREDS of people. Appian does mention some issues of HIS day (mid 2nd century), e.g. a decision by Hadrian.

THEON of SMYRNA

Theon of Smyrna wrote on astronomy/philosophy in early 2nd century. Theon wrote about philosophy. If Jesus and his teachings were known, it is entirely plausible for to mention them. Theon also wrote about astronomy. If he had heard about the Star of Bethlehem or the Darkness (as an event, or from the Gospels) he could easily have mentioned it.

Apologists frequently cite Phlegon and Thallus, astronomers who mentioned eclipses (but NOT Jesus or the Gospel events, that is merely later Christian wishful thinking) as evidence for Jesus. An astronomer could easily be expected to mention those incidents, especially when apologists claim other astronomers of the period did exactly that. The silence of early astronomers about the Star of Bethlehem or the crucifixion darkness argues these "events" were unknown until later.

QUINTILIAN

Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, wrote the "Education of an Orator" in Rome in late 1st century. One of the things Jesus was allegedly noted for was his PUBLIC SPEECHES - e.g. the Sermon on the Mount, which supposedly drew and influenced large crowds. If Quintilian had heard of Jesus or the Gospels events, he could have mentioned the allegedly famous speeches of Jesus.

LUCIUS ANNAEUS FLORUS

Lucius Annaeus Florus wrote an Epitome of Roman History. Although not directly on subject, Florus wrote a large work which mentions many names. He could have mentioned Jesus if he had known of him.

LUCAN

Marcus Annaeus Lucanus wrote the Pharsalia (Civil War) in Rome in mid 1st century. In his large poem, the Pharsalia, he mentions some events from later times, and he covers many different issues and people in passing. He:

* mentions an event from 56CE,

* refers to places as far afield as Sicily and Kent,

* refered to Stoic religious beliefs about the end of the world,

* refers to many books and myths and persons and events not part of the main story.

STATIUS

Publius Papinius Statius wrote numerous minor and epic poems (e.g. Ode to Sleep and the Thebaid) in Rome in late 1st century. Statius wrote many works on several subjects, he could have mentioned Jesus.

HERO of ALEXANDRIA

Hero(n) of Alexandria wrote many technical works, including astronomy. If he had known of the Gospel stories about Jesus, he could have mentioned them.

GEMINUS

Geminus wrote on mathematics astronomy in Greece. If he had known of the Gospel stories about Jesus, he could have mentioned them.

ALBINUS

Albinus taught on (neo-)Platonism in early 2nd century, a little survives.

ARISTOCLES

Aristocles of Messene wrote On Philosophy, early 2nd century.

APOLLODORUS

Apollodorus compiled a large Mythology in mid 2nd century.

HEPHAESTION

Hephaestion of Alexandria wrote many works in mid 2nd century.

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS

Sextus Empiricus wrote Outlines of Scepticism in mid 2nd century.

 

WRITERS CLAIMED TO MENTION JESUS

JOSEPHUS

Much has been said about Josephus, but not here.

TACITUS

Cornelius Tacitus wrote a celebrated passage about Jesus roughly 80 years or so after the alleged events - but he seems to be reporting Christian beliefs of his later times, not using earlier documents: he uses the incorrect title 'procurator' - the term used in Tacitus' time, not Pilate's; he fails to name the executed man (Roman records could not possibly have called him 'Christ '); and he accepts the recent advent of the Christians, when Rome was known to allow only ancient cults and religions.

NUMENIUS

In the 3rd century, Origen claimed Numenius "quotes also a narrative regarding Jesus--without, however, mentioning His name". Numenius does not mention Jesus, just a story that was later attributed to him.

SUETONIUS

Gaius SUETONIUS Tranquillus wrote a histories/biographies of Roman Caesars c.120CE. He mentions a "Chrestus" (a common slave name meaning "Useful") who caused disturbance in Rome in 49CE.

PHLEGON

Phlegon wrote during the 140s - his works are lost. Later, Origen, Eusebius, and Julianus Africanus (as quoted by much later George Syncellus) refer to him, but quote differently his reference to an eclipse. There is no evidence Phlegon said anything about Gospel events - just evidence for later Christians believing his statements about an eclipse (there WAS an eclipse in this period) was really about the Gospel darkness.

THALLUS

Thallus perhaps wrote in early 2nd century or somewhat earlier (his works are lost, there is no evidence he wrote in the 1st century, in fact there is some evidence he wrote around 109 BCE, and some authors refer to him for events before the Trojan War!) - 9th century George Syncellus quotes the 3rd century Julianus Africanus, speaking of the darkness at the crucifixion: "Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse". There is no evidence Thallus made specific reference to Jesus or the Gospel events, as there was an eclipse in 29, the subject in question. Furthermore the supposed reference to Thallus in Eusebius is likely a mis-reading.

Not proof of anything, of course, but strong circumstantial evidence against... Edited August 24, 2010 by Bikerman (see edit history)

[WENG 0]

Yes Jesus did exist.He is God became human nature,or putting a human nature and to die for all sinners.Jesus did exist before the world was He is already did exist.cOLSSIANS1:17,18.And he is before all things,and by him John1:l1,14.

[Bikerman 2]

Yes Jesus did exist.He is God became human nature,or putting a human nature and to die for all sinners.Jesus did exist before the world was He is already did exist.cOLSSIANS1:17,18.And he is before all things,and by him John1:l1,14.

You believe the bible is a historical document - I don't. You have faith, I don't. I am open to the possibility that Jesus either didn't exist at all, or was simply a 1st century Jewish radical, you aren't.
There is no real meeting point between faith and rationality - I doubt there is anything I could say that would change your mind...