El Dr Titus menciona:

• Evidencias literarias externas al nuevo testamento sobre la existencia de Jesús.
• La casa de Ananías
• La casa de Caifás.
• El Sanedrín de Jerusalem donde fueron juzgados Jesús, S.Esteban y los apóstoles.
• Monedas y monumentos de Herodes el Grande y de Herodes Antipas.
• El pretorio donde Jesús fue juzgado y condenado.
• Las piscinas de Siloé y Betesdá.
• El santo sepulcro donde Jesús fue enterrado y donde resucitó al tercer día.
• Los hallazgos en Belén.
• Nazareth.
• Cafarnaum donde se identificó la sinagoga donde Jesús enseñó y la casa de S.Pedro y S.Andrés que fue una de las primeras iglesias.
• Una placa de piedra donde Pilato dedicaba una obra al emperador Tiberio.
• Otra placa donde se anuncia el censo durante el gobierno de Siria por Quirino y que cita S.Lucas en relación al regreso de la sagrada familia a Belén, lo que a su vez permitió el cumplimiento de la profecía sobre el lugar donde nacería el Mesías.
• Una placa que contiene un edicto imperial, posiblemente del emperador Claudio, conocida como el Decreto de Nazaret (pues allí fue adquirido por un coleccionista en el s. XIX, hoy está en el museo del Louvre) . El decreto podría ser una reacción al hecho del supuesto robo del cuerpo de Jesús por parte de sus discípulos, especie alegada por los guardias de su sepulcro en connivencia con los fariseos para explicar la desaparición del cuerpo. El texto de este edicto diría:

Edicto del César:Es mi decisión [en referencia a] sepulturas y tumbas, las haya hecho quien quiera que sea según las observancias religiosas de los padres, hijos o miembros de la familia, que permanezcan intactas para siempre. Pero si alguno denuncia legalmente que otro ha destruido, o de alguna manera ha sacado a los que han sido sepultados, o ha movido con mala intención a los que han sido sepultados a otros lugares, comentiendo un crimen contra ellos, o ha movido piedras que sellaban sepulcros, contra tal persona, yo ordeno que se cree un tribunal judicial, tal y como [se hace] en referencia a los dioses en observancias humanas de religiones, más aún será obligatorio tratar con honor a los que han sido sepultados. No debéis permitir a nadie que mueva [a aquellos que han sido sepultados] en absoluto. Pero si [alguien lo hace], yo deseo que el [violador] sufra la pena capital bajo el título de rompedor de tumbas.

Claudio fue quien expulsó de Roma a los judíos y cristianos que tenían discusiones en la vía pública sobre la resurrección de Jesús.

Sure, science can prove the truth.

This may help: Book Respectfully and Unfortunately, The Improbability of, and Da...

Dear Colleagues

Here is another interestant document about 10 recent archaelogical evidences for the Bible and Jesus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_68KfQFICg&t=2189s

There is none.

As far as I know, there is no evidence of Jesus. The New Testament was written quite a while after he supposedly lived. The community he was supposed to have lived in was literate, but we have no records from when he was supposed to have been alive.

Dear Julian. There are many evidences about Jesus, many more that about any other contemporany person. The New Testament was written by personal witness and disciples of Him (St. Peter, St. James the son of Alpheo, St John, St Jude, St. Mattew) or by disciples of His disciples like St Luke, or St. Mark. St Paul, was at first a farise persecutor of the Christian comunity and later he became a great disciple and Apostle. There are evidences from other people like Flavio Josefo, Plinio the Joung, Tacito, Clement of Rome and many other parents of the Church so as her detractors. There are several archaelogical evidences from Jesus, his life and the facts mentioned in the New Testament.

Guillermo Enrique Ramos There are many credible mentions of his followers by his followers and by detractors. Things written a hundred a hundred years after he was supposed to have lived don't count as eyewitness accounts. I've read the Old and New Testaments, all the Apocrypha that I could lay hands on. I'm quite fond of Paul and Thecla. None of that seems credible to me. What I would count as an eyewitness is some average person writing about they saw a man walking on water when they went to buy fish today, how strange is that? I strongly think if he'd been seen doing such miracles, the Romans would have thought he was related to the Emperor and hustled him off to Rome. We do get graffiti of Christian thoughts and experiences ... decades, and centuries later. We might as well count fan fiction of Peter Parker as proof of his existence. That doesn't work for me.

Dear Julian.

I accord with your definition of eyewitness. I suggest that you see the youtube videos shared above to note that there are many reasons to belive in the historical and fact value of the Gospel narratives.

For example, in one of the Qumram caves (Cave 7), they found an amphora that was full of Greek papyri from the 1st century AD, the amphora was marked with the title "Rome". That cave was one of the caves that the Qumram Essenes community used as a library. That community was destroyed by the Roman army in 68 AD, as they prepared to besiege Jerusalem. Before its destruction the owners of the library sealed the caves. They were providentially found in 1945 AD. One of the papyri in that amphora was identified as a fragment of the Gospel of Mark (Papyrus 7Q5). In the same cave they found fragments of two of Paul's epistles. If a copy of Mark's gospel was found in a sealed cave in AD 68, the original could have been written in the first decade after the Crucification, Resurrection and Ascension of Christ, which the Gospel describes.

Guillermo Enrique Ramos I'll look for those videos. The other thing that makes the New Testament not credible for me is that it's clearly written with a purpose. There are people who wrote in the first century to talk to relatives, complain about a bill or product, ask for things, or just to keep a historical record. The people who wrote the New Testament wrote for the purpose of convincing others about a new religion. The Letters of Paul were very much about how the mechanics of said church should work. These are not impartial witnesses who saw and described a thing. Pliny the Younger wrote about Vesuvius, he wrote about what he saw, but not with the motive of convincing people it was happening because giants were mad.

I understand that the writers of the New Testament probably believed deeply in the motive they were writing to support. I'm sure there were hundreds or thousands of other writings that did not survive to reach us. Their wish for us to take their words as factual evidence doesn't make their words factual evidence. Donald Trump would like us to believe he's never done an unethical thing in his life! He never touched that woman! His words are not enough to make factual evidence.

Guillermo Enrique Ramos I'm watching one of the videos now. I should like to mention that I saw an exhibition of the Dead Sea Scrolls a few years ago when it came through Seattle. They are magnificent and inspiring documents. I still think about them and the culture, thoughts, and people that made them. I can't read Hebrew. I'll have a swing at Latin, Japanese, French, Spanish, and I'd like to get a good grasp of Sanskrit. The Dead Sea Scrolls just burned an impression in my mind that will never leave me. I totally believe the people who wrote them believed in their value and truth. That doesn't make them true.

There was a girl in my life recently and until last week, I would have sworn she loved me, at least a little. My belief that she loved me did not mean that she loved me. It's sad how that works out that way sometimes.

Dear Julian

As you told about Qumram, I think that you can appreciate what means to have a papyrii from s I AD that belongs to the Gospel of Mark and its implication as evidence of the Gospels as historical documents. I love to my wife very much, we have been married for 43 years till now. I hope that you can heal your relationship with your girl soon, that may be good for both of you, but this are not within the scope of these topic.

Guillermo Enrique Ramos Hi :) From how you write, the point of view you present, I totally see you and your wife having a lovely and long life together. What we believe about evidence, what we believe without evidence is within the scope of this discussion.

I don't think anyone disputes that the Gospel of Mark is a historical document. What's in dispute is that the document provides physical evidence for a man named Jesus. I don't find Mark's words credible. I also don't believe everything that Chretien De Troys wrote. I don't believe in an historical Lancelot. I don't believe that the Odyssey was an historical account, though it is an historical document.

Something can be very old, lovely poetry, but still not factual. The Dead Sea Scrolls speak to their own existence, but not to the existence of Jesus.

There is a temple to Shiva that is thought to be from the Fifth Century, not as old as the Dead Sea Scrolls, but still respectable. That speaks to there being followers of Shiva in the 5th Century, but not to a historical Shiva.

Gods are extraordinary beings. Evidence of one needs to be more than evidence of their followers.

Dear Julian

4 days ago you said: "As far as I know, there is no evidence of Jesus. The New Testament was written quite a while after he supposedly lived. The community he was supposed to have lived in was literate, but we have no records from when he was supposed to have been alive."

My mention to 7Q5 (written arround 40 AD) is to show that Mark and the rest of the gospel were written by ocular eyewitness or by their disciples. This is a physical evidence about the existence and facts about Jesus. It was not written quite a while after when He lived. You may not believe credible Mark's words but he wrote them. By the while, Mark, Matthew, Luke, Peter, Paul, and the rest of the apostles (with the exeption of John that was tortured but survived), gave their lives to defend the historicity of their gospel message. That was not the case with Homero, Chretien de Troys, or many other writers of antiquity. May be any people that gives their live by what they think that is true, but there are no people that gaves their lives for what they knew to be a lye.

Guillermo Enrique Ramos I was just thinking about this conversation! So I would want to see a relative writing to a relative or employee to an employer... just normal people saying, "I saw a thing." The Gospel of Mark was written to convince people of something. It's propaganda.

People believe in untrue things all the time. People are willing to die for things that are true to them, but verifiably untrue. I know a man who is currently committed. He committed and admitted to committing some grievous crimes. He has recently converted to Christianity and he felt that if he went to the police, confessed, but explained to them that Jesus had forgiven him and he was now filled with light, that they'd agree he was innocent, let him tell this all to a judge, the judge would find him innocent and all would be well. He's now indefinitely committed to a mental health facility. Does he completely believe what he believes? Oh absolutely. He absolutely believes what he's saying.

That doesn't make it true. I believe Mark believed what he wrote. I'll even accept Mark's writings as proof of Mark's existence.

One thing that occured to me recently, when people take the Eucharist, if we were to swab their mouths, in the process of them them having it, for DNA, do you think we'd come up with grape and wheat or human DNA?

Also! Do you have an opinion on the Donatist Crisis?

Julián

Thank you for your interest in this topic. We can accord that Mark was disciple of St Peter and St Paul, and that he wrote about what Peter taught in Rome and other places, and that Peter was a declared eyewitness. They were martyrs in s I AD, for preaching what the Gospel explained. You said that Mark may have been deluded about what he wrote, it might be, but we have many corroborations about how a litle group of 12 apostles and a few centuries of Jesus disciples became a large multitud in the Roman empire and beyong. There are for example an edict of Claudio expulsing to the jews (christian or not) because of the riots provoqued on discusions about someone called Chresto. This only can be explained by extraordinary circunstances, like the multiple miracles that were profetized by Jesus because of the Gospel preachig of His disciples.

About the Eucharist. We know that when the ordained priest pronounces the words of consecration, the bread and wine become the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, completely changing the substance, but retaining all the accidents of the bread and wine. Therefore any measurement will find apparently normal bread and wine.

However, throughout the centuries, until today, there have been countless Eucharistic miracles, by which the consecrated host and the consecrated wine acquired the appearance of human flesh and blood, of the AB blood group that is very common among the Hebrews. Search for example about the Eucharistic miracles of Lanciano, Orvieto, Buenos Aires, etc.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_know_about_these_four_incredible_eucharistic_miracles_that_defy_scientific_explanations?

My mother was paranoid schizophrenic. She saw miracles a lot. She went through various religious phases. People see miracles that they are willing to be imprisoned for all the time, just like my friend that I mentioned. That doesn't make it real. I bring up personal experience because I think our personal experiences have a lot to do with what we will and won't accept as real.

I don't want to convince you to abandon your faith or anyone else. Faith is a powerful healing thing and people should keep it if they have it. Faith also helps people be part of communities, to feel accepted and welcomed into a community. That is not less true in the first and second centuries as it is now.

As I understand it, Vespasian caused the Diaspora because the Jews wouldn't stop rebelling. They were getting good at it. The Bar Kokhba revolt. Riots about Christo could have been just as much about Bar Kokhba as Jesus. As I understand it, Jewish people are still waiting for their messiah.

We don't have writing that wasn't written by someone invested in the Church. We don't have any physical artifact that only relates to Jesus. There are many things like the Shroud of Turin, but it's documented history only starts in 1354. I imagine if there were hard evidence, faith would be much less valuable. Ephesians 2:8-9.

That people believe something is not evidence for it to be real.

Dear Julian

Regarding the Shroud of Turin as evidence of Jesus, life, death and resurrection, I recommend visiting the work of the "Centro Español de Sindonología (CES)" (www.linteum.com). There you can find many interesting scientific evidences that the Shroud of Turin would be the lost Byzantine relic known as Mandylon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_of_Edessa) that could be documented from the 4th century AD (Eusebius of Caesarea) and earlier. Current studies on the pollen of the Holy Shroud confirm the itinerary proposed by this tradition. There are art history and scientific studies on representations of Christ in churches and coins of the Byzantine Empire, based on the Mandylon, which agree very well with the image on the Shroud. There is also another relic from Oviedo (Sudarium of Oviedo, Spain) that was mentioned in the Gospels and that agrees perfectly, from a forensic point of view, with the same details of the Shroud. At the CES you can learn too about the famous Holy Grail that was kept hidden in Aragon during the years of the dangerous Muslim presence in the region.

Dear Julian, I agree that the well documented history of the Shroud of Turin exists only after the mid 1300's, however there appear to be scattered references to if in the existent New Testament, 1 John 5:8 possibly being the most direct if we allow for awareness of Plato's Allegory of the Cave to be relevant. And Vespasian's actions, as well as Nero's, add credence to the possibility. If we consider Corbulo's actions in eastern Anatolia to influence Ephesians 6:10-20, as would be plausible if Paul is citing current events, just as he does when referencing various games and prizes in other letters, then we have clear reason to conceal the existence of the Shroud from Vespasian and other Romans, over and above the Roman tendency to collect such unusual items. Then with Constantine's "purchase" of the church in 325and Helen's subsequent trips to collect Christian artifacts, the need to conceal the Shroud grows even greater. There are various hints from archeology that people did gain awareness of the Shroud at various times in the 1st millennium, but also reasons from medieval politics to conceal aspects of its history.

Overall, the Shroud of Turin provides solid evidence of the account of Jesus, as well as intentional distortions of history on the part of historic Christianity and Judaism.

William Mayor That all sounds quite plausible and respectable. I think I'll add this topic to my possible research topics for class this week. Thank you very much.

Justin, there is a lot more than I expressed in that short answer, in fact I am under contract for a book on the subject. I hope to be finished writing mid-summer.

William Mayor Well, that is very exciting. I'd love to read an ARC if you are allowed to send those out.