Instigator / Pro
14
1500
rating
3
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#5630
Does the evidence suggest that Jesus Christ existed?
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 2 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...
CatholicApologetics
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
4
1500
rating
2
debates
25.0%
won
Description
The premise of this debate is to uncover whether it is more probable that Jesus Christ existed than that He did not exist. This debate focuses solely on whether He existed. It is not about whether He is God or any other figure.
This debate is not intended to crown a 'Winner' and a 'Loser' but rather, the scope and purpose of this debate is to expand our domain of knowledge on the topic. The true winner is the one who absorbs and understands the knowledge that both parties will bestow. In this debate, I will not attempt to 'prove' anything, but I will only provide evidence to support my claim.
I will be assuming the Pro position, declaring that I believe Jesus Christ did exist. If there are any questions or if anybody would like to change any of the rules, I'm open for discussion in the comments. Good luck!
Rules:
1. On the fourth round, no new arguments can be made.
2. If failure to comply with rule 1, the debate is automatically lost
Round 1
INTRODUCTION.
Welcome! I would first and foremost like to express deep gratitude to Sophia for having accepted this debate. I look forward to an intelligent and honest debate with you!
I would also like to remind everyone of the purpose of this debate. The true winner is the one who learns something new from our discussion. Even if the slightest bit of information is learned, the intended purpose is fulfilled.
PREREQUISITE.
I will not address whether Jesus, assuming he was a real person, was crucified. In fact, this is a question I am considering taking up in my next debate. Today, I will focus solely on the legitimacy of Jesus' existence. Some evidence may overlap with information on the resurrection, but we will disregard those sections.
Consider how we know that figures like Napoleon Bonaparte, Genghis Khan, or Abraham Lincoln existed. A significant part of the historical evidence supporting that these prominent figures were real are the result of eyewitness testimonies or personal accounts. Likewise, I will be supporting the existence of Jesus in this way.
MAIN BODY #1
It is incontrovertible that a man named Jesus existed in the first century. There are over thirty ancient and independent records that mention Jesus' life. During Jesus' lifetime, the Roman emperor was Tiberius Claudius Nero, a figure we would expect to have extensive records about, especially being the emperor. His son is infamous for burning down the capital city, sleeping with his mother, and murdering many of his close relatives. Surprisingly, historical records mention Tiberius in ten different accounts, while Jesus is referenced in over thirty.
By comparing the number of records of each figure, it becomes clear that the evidence is in overwhelming favor of Jesus Christ, supporting the claim that he is not a work of fiction. In addition, the accounts of Jesus were not living in the same geographical area, so they were unable to compare testimonies, collude, and become fraudulent. They were independent of one another and scattered throughout the Mediterranean.
MAIN BODY #2
Going into specific sources will help demonstrate the overwhelming support. The Gospels, written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are primary sources documenting Jesus' life. These four individuals were Jesus' disciples, who lived alongside him and documented his actions and teachings. They wrote down what they claimed to have seen, and their writings later became known as Gospels. The Gospels are detailed accounts of the life of Jesus Christ. We have over thirty records that mention him and four personal, detailed accounts of his life on Earth.
The disciples of Jesus Christ faced brutal and horrific deaths. For example, Mark faced martyrdom. He was arrested while celebrating mass and was dragged through the streets of the city with a rope tied around his neck until he died. John faced attempted martyrdom when he was boiled in a huge basin of boiling oil during a wave of persecution in Rome. All the disciples had to do to save their lives was to recant their testimony of Jesus Christ. Their resolve to die rather than deny their claims is a powerful testimony in itself. Basic psychology tells us that people do not die for what they know to be a lie. However, the disciples willingly chose death rather than claim Jesus never existed.
This is not an argument for the crucifixion or resurrection, but an argument that the disciples claimed to have lived with Jesus. Even facing death, they did not withdraw their claims, especially by saying "he was never real."
MAIN BODY #3
The Gospels are a main source for the case of Jesus Christ. However, there are many non-Christian sources that mention the person of Christ.
To understand the historical context, let's look at Tacitus, a Roman historian, who reported on the fire that Emperor Nero (Tiberius' son) started. Specifically, he was reporting on Emperor Nero's attempt to shift blame onto the Christians for the fire. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote:
Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... 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....
By carefully dissecting the contents of this reference, we learn that Tacitus is referencing to Jesus and the early Christians. Tacitus reports that Christians derived their name from a historical person called Christ (or Christus in Latin). He is said to have "suffered the extreme penalty," alluding to the Roman method of execution known as crucifixion. This is said to have occurred during the reign of Tiberius and by the sentence of Pontius Pilatus. This confirms much of what the Gospels tell us about the death of Jesus.
For those still skeptical, perhaps the most remarkable reference to Jesus outside the Bible can be found in the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian.
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he ... wrought surprising feats.... He was the Christ. When Pilate ...condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him.
The source material explicitly mentions Jesus. Josephus also mentions that Jesus was "the Christ."
CONCLUSION.
In summary, the evidence points to Jesus being a real historical figure. The numerous records that mention him, the eyewitness testimonies from his disciples, and the non-Christian sources allude to one logical deduction: The evidence suggests that Jesus Christ existed. Thanks again to Sofia for having accepted this debate. I look forward to your counter. I wish you the best.
I will leave a link to the deaths of Jesus' disciples for those who are interested.
Unlike other historical figures from the same era, such as Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, Jesus did not leave behind any physical evidence, writings, or artifacts attributed directly to him.
Round 2
COMMENTS.
I appreciate your swift response. However, you neglected to answer most points. What have you say about the non-Christian accounts of Tacitus and Josephus? It is clear from your lack of response that you do not have a concrete counter. What about how the disciples of Jesus willingly accepted a torturous death when they could have opted out simply by saying Jesus was not real?
I will now refute the counter-argument you've raised.
REBUTTALS.
Unlike other historical figures from the same era, such as Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, Jesus did not leave behind any physical evidence, writings, or artifacts attributed directly to him.
Physical evidence, writings, or artifacts are not required for someone to have lived. Most people did not leave anything behind. However, that does not make them any less real or significant in historical context.
For example, consider the following scenario: A child was born of a slave, as was very typical in the Roman Empire. Because the child was born into slavery, She was completely illiterate and had no possessions. A few years later, the child was overworked and died. She left no physical evidence, writings, or artifacts attributed directly to her.
However, that does not mean she never lived. The lack of direct evidence does not equate to non-existence. In the same way, In the case of Jesus, while there are no direct physical artifacts or writings from him, his existence is supported by various indirect sources, such as the writings of early Christian authors, references by historians like Josephus and Tacitus, and the spread of Christianity shortly after his purported life.
Forfeited
Round 3
Nothing to say.
Forfeited
Round 4
Nothing to say. I would like to thank Sophia for accepting this debate even if there were forfeitures.
Forfeited
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Thank you for participating in this debate. Though there was not much conversation, I am still grateful for the opportunity. Thank you.
I'd be interested in debating you on a religion-related topic, Pro. Not this one, as I agree it's more likely than not that Jesus existed.
I am actually participating in another debate about the probability of a God existing. Don't hesitate to check it out if you're interested. If you'd like I'm also open for a more private discussion in messages.
When it comes to debating about Jesus, I would rather debate about if God of the Bible exists, even tho I think that those debates are kinda already covered to a great extent by past debates.
I would very much struggle to think of arguments that are not problem of evil or problem of free will right now.
Would you be more willing to accept the challenge if the wording were rephrased to "Is it more probable that Jesus existed than that He did not exist?"
Its impossible to prove a negative, and any evidence which even slightly hints to the existence of Jesus in ancient past wins the debate for Pro.
Anybody down for the challenge?