[Cowperson]

I am trying to make you concede that there is certainly a good possibility that he might have.

Why would I? I've seen nothing that would indicate he did.

It's not fundamental to my existence whether he did or didn't exist, just as I don't really care if Homer or Krishna was real.

In fact, if Jesus did exist then I would probably find it quite keen and I might even join your team.

However, from what I've seen, or more likely, what I haven't seen, I wouldn't even categorize it as a "good possibility."

As to your points:

1) As in the example of Homer. Oral tradition not written tradition was the way stories, history and lesson were taught. Why? Not many people could read. So more than likely the History of Christ was transmitted orally...until someone had the great idea to write some of them down. This leads to mistakes, embellishments, etc.

2) How many Jewish documents survived the sacking of Jerusalem and of the Temple of Solomon and the expulsion of the Jews from Israel???? Do you think the head Rabbi grabbed the documents relating to a radical when the Romans marched in? This is hardly a move to the next neighbourhood.

3) Why would the Romans write voluminously about a backwater province like Israel?



"Some apologists attempt to dig themselves out of this problem by claiming that there lived no capable historians during that period, or due to the lack of education of the people with a writing capacity, or even sillier, the scarcity of paper gave reason why no one recorded their "savior." But the area in and surrounding Jerusalem served, in fact, as the center of education and record keeping for the Jewish people. The Romans, of course, also kept many records. Moreover, the gospels mention scribes many times, not only as followers of Jesus but the scribes connected with the high priests. And as for historians, there lived plenty at the time who had the capacity and capability to record, not only insignificant gossip, but significant events, especially from a religious sect who drew so much popular attention through an allegedly famous (or infamous) Jesus.

Take, for example, the works of Philo Judaeus (born 20 B.C.E. and died 50 C.E.) He lived as the greatest Jewish-Hellenistic philosopher and historian of the time and lived in the area of Jerusalem during the alleged life of Jesus. He wrote detailed accounts of the Jewish events that occurred in the surrounding area. Yet not once, in all of his volumes of writings, do we read a single account of a Jesus "the Christ." Nor do we find any mention of Jesus in Seneca's (4? B.C.E. - 65 C.E.) writings, nor from the historian Pliny the Elder (23? - 79 C.E.).

If, indeed, such a well known Jesus existed, as the gospels allege, does any reader here think it reasonable that, at the very least, the fame of Jesus would not have reached the ears of one of these men?

Amazingly, we have not one Jewish, Greek, or Roman writer, even those who lived in the Middle East, much less anywhere else on the earth, who ever mention him during his supposed life time. This appears quite extraordinary, and you will find few Christian apologists who dare mention this embarrassing fact.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

Cowperson