Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 2 years ago

Thoughts when someone says there is more historical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ than Julius Caesar?

10 Answers

  • 2 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Then they're either knowingly lying, or they are gullible enough to believe lies told to them by religious predators who were. Jesus appears nowhere in any contemporaneous histories--the earliest references to him are by historians not born until after his supposed crucifixion. He left no writings, though an omniscient God would have foreseen that the one authoritative and comprehensive Gospel of Jesus Christ, written by the Son of God himself, was sorely needed.


    Meanwhile, Caesar is referenced in myriad historical works. He was an author--I have a copy of Caesar's "History of the Third Gallic War" (I think) somewhere on my bookshelf, in the dual Latin/English edition. We know what Caesar looked like, because busts were made of him while he was alive. Again, for emphasis: unlike Jesus, we know exactly what Julius Caesar looked like.


    But there's nothing remotely like any of that for Jesus. A child whose birth was (supposedly) of such great importance that God (supposedly) set a special star in the sky over Bethlehem to mark the event and guide worshipers from afar, wise men bearing precious gifts with which to honor and worship the Christ child. The Son of God, bearing the single most important message ever delivered to humankind, and yet not one shred of credible evidence appears anywhere in the chronological records. A child who, after receiving this adulation as a newborn, instead of being mobbed by admirers all his life, virtually disappears altogether from the historic record until thirty years later, other than a few questionable entries in a single Gospel written decades after the fact.


    Sorry, I'm just not that gullible. I'm sorry whoever told you that is. To your credit, you know how due diligence works, and though to ask about it. Good on you.



  • Nous
    Lv 7
    2 years ago


    Julius Caesar is well recorded as having really existed with lots of contemporary records!!!!!!!!!!

    The bible is what is called "Faction” A fictional story set in a factual time and place. Thus the time, place and real historical characters are all correct but the fictional characters and stories are not!

    There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record - that is right - not one! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are well recorded!

    There is not a single contemporary record from any source and even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!

    He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record?

    Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!

    Pilate is recorded in the Roman record as a somewhat lack luster man but no mention of a Jesus, a trial or crucifixion that would surely have been used to make him look brighter!

    At best he was an amalgam of those others but almost certainly never existed!

    Not one word of it is contemporary with the period and was not written until several hundred years after the period the story is set in!! How did the apostles write their books more than a hundred years after they would have been dead?

    Christianity is an invention of the Italians and that is why it came from the Holy ROMAN Catholic church!

    Please realize that those claims for the Old historians are worthless since they were not even born until long after everyone in the stories would have been so long dead!

    Josephus AD 37 – AD 100

    Tacitus AD 56 – AD 120

    Suetonius - 69 – 130 AD

    Pliny the Younger, 61 AD – 112 AD

    Justin Martyr (Saint Justin) AD103–165 AD

    Lucian - AD 120 -180 AD but he was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it.

    Pamphilius AD 240-309 AD

    Eusebius AD 263 – 339 AD

    Photius AD 877 – 886 AD

    Thallus - But there are no actual record of him except a fragment of writing which mentions the sack of Troy [109 BC] Showing that he was clearly not alive in biblical times.

    Some even try to use Seneca. 4 BCE – 65 CE but as a Stoic Philosopher he opposed religion yet made not a single mention of a Jesus or Christianity!

    Even funnier is trying to claim Celsus AD ? – 177 AD Who said that Jesus was a Jew who’se mother was a poor Jewish girl whose husband, who was a carpenter, drove her away because of her adultery with a Roman soldier named Panthera. She gave birth to an illegitimate child named Jesus. In Egypt, Jesus became learned in sorcery and upon his return presented himself as a god.

  • David
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    Why didn’t history mention Jesus?

    Please name one historical figure from the same period (+- 100 years) that we have written documentation from during the person’s lifetime.. Just one!

    Saturating all of Scripture, there is a gospel theme that showcases the suffering, Resurrection, and glory of the promised Savior, Jesus Christ. He is the central object of our faith and the fulfillment of all that the faithful who have preceded us down through the ages had believed in.

    Of course, the atheist wants to destroy, subjugate and cast doubt on any mention of Jesus.

    The pagan Roman historian Tacitus makes mention of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ at the hand of Pontius Pilate in Book XV, Chapter 44 of his Annals: "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 Judaea, 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."

    There's about as much evidence of Jesus existing as there is for Buddha or Muhammad. Even if, for the sake of argument, the person Jesus did not actually exist, there is very good reason to believe someone matching his description did. The religion did not simply spawn in a vacuum; they all drew their beliefs from someone. And that silly claim that Paul somehow founded Christianity is ridiculous considering he constantly strove against the judaizers, who insisted that Christian converts must conform to Mosaic Law--this indicates there were already Christians around before Paul entered the picture.

    Josephus, Pliny the Younger and other historians write of him, but their source is probably biblical writings.

    Nero and other Roman rulers bitterly persecuted and martyred early Christians. (Tacitus, Suetonius)

    Early Christians denied polytheism, lived dedicated lives according to Christ’s teaching, and worshiped Christ. (Pliny, Lucian)

    Surely it would be a strange message to tell thousands of people in Jerusalem that just a few weeks earlier they had crucified of an imaginary figure and that this was a major event that people had witnessed.

    The Pavement

    The place where Jesus was tried before Pilate.

    Once considered a myth because there was no record of it in Jewish or secular maps or history.

    It was finally found. When Titus destroyed Jerusalem, he built barracks there. When these were abandoned and had crumbled, other buildings were built on top. Archaeologists had dug down to the barracks, but no further until recently. When they did go underneath, they found the pavement.

    It is clear to historians and scholars that the Gilgamesh Epic lacks detail and consistency to be a valid historical document, and is rather regarded mostly as myth.

    The Bible on the other hand is the most verified and corroborated document of ancient history in the world as to accuracy, authenticity, and with the genealogies, an accurate timeline.

    While a study of the Sumerian list is a fascinating journey in discovering the way Sumerians looked upon their ancestry and how their numeric and commercial systems worked, the quality of the biblical text is distinctly superior in both completeness, information, and spiritual and moral quality. The biblical text does not reflect a borrowing from an inferior text. If anything, the very mention of this kings list that matches so closely to the biblical account is a confirmation of biblical authenticity, including Noah's grandson, Cush.

    And we've only begun to confirm the Bible in the last century.

    Modern archaeology has challenged the world of education to admit that the Bible is factual. Solid, documented evidence outside the Bible record confirms events and persons that were at one time considered to be suspect or plain false.

    Now we have the Rosetta Stone, and the coveted tablets found at Elba. Elba dates back to before 2000 BC and was a thriving cultural center. Its records contain references to Sodom and Gomorrah.

    The Tablets confirm the accuracy, authenticity and authority of the Bible, as has EVERY other archeological dig in history. That's a pretty good track record, 100%, but you're not paying attention.

  • 2 years ago

    They are idiots.

    If they actually have thought about this and say this is true - then they are liars and idiots. If they are parroting what some other liar has said, then they are just a gullible idiot for repeating something without doing the slightest study to verify what they are saying.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    There are writings about Caesar, and monuments, but then again, he ruled the known western world, while the Christ was a commoner, who ruled only the hearts and minds of men.

  • User
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    It's sufficiently vague

    that it could be true

    but that it is definitely of little value (academically speaking).

    I mean

    if I have 10x more evidence for leprechauns than you have for - say - the spiny anteater

    that doesn't mean that evidence is sufficient to prove the existence of leprechauns

    or (similarly) that leprechauns are more likely to exist than is the spiny anteater.

    More is not necessarily better

    or more valid

    or more reputable

    or more trustworthy

    etc. etc.

  • There are Churches Raised to Him all over western civilization. There are more statues, more paintings I mean exactly what do you consider evidence

    written stuff

    Yeah we got that too...lots of it

  • As someone who communes with God through His Spirit on a daily basis, I am not concerned about getting more evidence.

  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    They are big Atheist LIERS!

    For every single sentence of history in the Bible records have been found confirming! Anywhere from three to over 250 Records found to confirm each sentence! Even communist China has admitted to finding records of "Adam & Eve" and "Noah's Ark"! Read the news. More and more Christians in China!

  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    You know, ironically, we know very little of what Caesar actually looked like. The busts and statues of him were not created during his lifetime by people who knew him. We don’t even know if any contemporary busts of Caesar that exist today.

    We have a stylized version of Caesar based on contemporary descriptions.

    Source(s): (Just trying to show there are spots missing on some oh history’s most famous people).
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.