I never said that Jesus existing is evidence for him being the son of god.

So, the conclusion for this thread is that there is absolutely no evidence outside of the gospels for Jesus being alive and that Jesus' name was never written down until after his death.

I see you visted wiki for this one. At least it was not until the 19th century that printing press technology became advanced enough to supply the population and so that newspapers were available for the everyday person. This is the period that the newspaper I read today came from.

I do not want to alllow my thread to derail into one about a definition, from now onwards the discussion shall be specially focused on documents written during Jesus' lifetime and the gospels.

what he said is perfectly fine. Logically how can you take the virgin birth to be true?

To create a male, you need an x-chromosome and a y-chromosome. The only possible way to get a y-chromosome is from a sperm.

I'm a child of God and to a child of God God's blessed word is always good enough.

If God is worth his salt, he'll want nothing to do with you.

You didn't answer my question.

You're being ******ed. Stay in your atheist reductionist mindset. It lets you reject God feel reassured while you disobey him then you think when you die you'll stand before God and plead ignorance.

God knows all about the "atheist mindset" so good luck with that.

If he made us he doesn't have to even have a chromosome. His power is so great he SPOKE the world into being. You don't think he can speak his Son into being?

A Y-chromosome is required to make a male. It contains exactly half of the genetic data. How is it ******ed to ask where Jesus got his?

Actually, it contains very little genetic data, just the SRY and a bit of junk.

Because we believe it was the Holy Spirit and you can't be that ignorant not to know that can you?

I was just thinking of mass production of books that can be accurately dated reasonably close to the date of actual production. But whatever.

So you *are* including the gospels?

This is a good example of how one can set unusual standards and reach unusual conclusions. This reminds me of how the Jesus Seminar worked.

How does it feel that you've successfully proven something that runs contrary to any legitimate scholar who studies the Middle East in the era around the time of Jesus?

This is an area that I actually did quite a bit of studying in myself. A great synopsis of their lives and deaths is "Fox's Book of Martyrs". It's not an early writing but a great source of detailed information from which to branch off in your searches.
As far as early non-Biblical sources there are actually quite a number of writings concerning the apostles. A great start is Eusebius. He was writing about events that took place after Christ's death and resurrection, namely events corroborating what was recorded in the book of Acts. He specifically gives detailed historical accounts of several of the apostles' deaths. He lived from 260-340 AD. Now, this may seem like long after the time period in question but in actual fact this is a far earlier piece of written evidence than what we accept for most other secular historical events.
Although Eusebius is considered the most thorough and well-known historian of his time, there are of course even earlier writings which record these events as well. Most of these writers were first hand witnesses themselves of the events in these apostles' lives and deaths, and some of them went on to be martyred for their beliefs. One of these was written by Papias (A.D. 60-135). He was the bishop of Hierapolis, in what is now Turkey. He was also a close disciple of John. St. Clement of Rome (A.D. ?-101) was a disciple of Peter and Paul and served as pope between A.D. 91-101. Another writer was Iranaeus (A.D. 120-202) the bishop of Lyon (in what is now France).
Other reliable writings belong to Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 153-217). He was an eminent Greek theologian and hymnist. Others were Hippolytus (A.D. 170-236), an author of a number of theological works; Tertullian (A.D. 145-221), a Latin-speaking African theologian, Origen (A.D. 185-254), an Egyptian teacher and theologian and St. Jerome (342-420), an Italian scholar and translator.
And, you also have to keep in mind that during this period there wasn't much time for writing down and recording much of what was going on. These men did the best they could, along with the apostles' themselves, but you must remember that during this period entire populations were running for their lives to escape persecution and the suppression from the government of this information. It was an extremely bloody time in history with thousands upon thousands of believers who followed Christ being tortured and killed - the apostles' weren't the only ones by far. In fact, if you ever look into a tiny place in Turkey called Cappadocia, you will see the amazing remnants of underground cities and tunnels where these early Christians had to hide out from all this going on around them. Archaeological digs have excavated hundreds of these types of sites all over those areas that contained underground gathering places for the apostles and early followers to meet in secret. So, between running for their lives, assisting other brethren who were fighting for their own lives or imprisoned, and traveling around the known world spreading this Gospel, they had very, very little time to write down what was happening. Not to mention the fact that any written documents found would absolutely ensure their very deaths, and cripple their efforts to spread the Gospel by word of mouth to other parts of the continent. It just doesn't make sense to spend hours writing about something that you would have to hide in a cave possibly never to be found. It wouldn't have been an effective way to spread the message anyway. By the time the smoke cleared a bit, and things were adequately suppressed, anything written for posterity was usually written in such a way as not to draw too much attention.
I hope I haven't droned on for too long here, I just really want to be able to help you as much as I can in your search. I also thought you might find it interesting that just recently (June 2008), archaeologists unearthed what they believe to be the earliest church they have ever discovered. It lies under the St. Georgeous church (which was built in 230 AD) in the Northern Jordanian city of Rihab. There is a partial inscription on the ceiling that says "...the 70 beloved by God and the divine..." It's underground, like many of the others, so it probably was a secret hideout as well. When they dated it, it actually showed that it was used by Christ's immediate and closest disciples shortly after His death and resurrection! (dated 33-70 AD) I have been trying to attach the link, but to be honest I am very computer illiterate. sorry. But if you google anything containing something like "early church site found" you will see it.
Like I said to you before, God wants you to seek for these answers and He definitely doesn't want you to have blind faith. He wants you to be able to satisfy the questions of your intellect. He just doesn't want you to do it at the expense of faith. Faith is just a fancy word that means "trust". He wants you to just trust Him and what He says in His word. He knows you will need more than that, but He wants you to start with that simple trust FIRST. Which is why Christ always said that we must become like little children to enter the kingdom of God. He was talking about this simple trust that only children seem to have anymore. He won't keep you in that state, though, believe me. But you definitely have to start in that state. Imagine how hurt you would be if someone you loved didn't trust your word. And they needed mountains of "proof" before they would believe you? You would be hurt because you would think "Wow, haven't I proved that my word is good? Don't you trust my character that I wouldn't lie to you?" Trust Him first, then pray that He will reveal more to you in His perfect time.
I hope I haven't put you to sleep, if you have any other questions or just want to talk feel free to get a hold of me. May God continue to to bless you and draw you to Him, as I believe He is already doing.

Spaces between paragraphs are lovely.

Cool, now logic and reason = ******ed.

You're a hoot, Splendour.

obv jesus existed. its not possible to make up a historical figure this big. obv his disciples weren't lying, they obv knew he wasn't lying either b/c most of them were willing to be eaten alive by lions or tortured by romans for what they believed in.

it makes a lot of sense.

If you believe the Bible. But what if you don't?

b/c the disciples that got tortured or killed by Romans for their eyewitness beliefs weren't recorded in the Bible, but by historians.

What historians?

Muslim terrorists die for their beliefs all the time. Does that make their beliefs 'obv' true as well?

see the post w/ the pic of twin towers...

Dumb question. The thread is about did jesus exist.

So Muslims die for teaching taught by Muhammad. Do you think Muhammad did exist? Would be the correct question.

Yes, i think everyone would agree that some guy named muhammad existed.

It was a blatantly stupid question with a blatantly obvious answer to point out the blatant stupidity of the post I was responding to which you seem to have overlooked.

No, you are 100 percent wrong and the only thing you pointed out is you clearly need to read the OP... or go post in your own thread if you want to ramble on with stupid nonsense.

Clear enough yet?