Did Jesus truly exist?

[u/Otherwise_Bath_4820]

From what historical documentation tells us, the answer is yes.

The sources outside of Christianity are: Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius and Marco Valerio Marziale (Martial).
Brother of Jesus, James the Just, former skeptical, converted after seing Jesus risen from the dead. Sources: Josephus, Hegesippus, and Eusebius of Caesarea.
Paul of Tarsus, former persecutor of Christians, converted after seeing Jesus risen from the dead. Sources: his evangelic missions, his letters, Council of Jerusalem. Both died for him, amongst many other eyewitnesses, in an historical era where Christians were persecuted from the Romans and lying about the rise from the dead of Jesus would not give any benefit, but on the contrary, ensure you certain death.
Testimonies of Christian persecutions: Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius, Dio Cassius.

What is your opinion about this? Please only verifiable and fact-supported answers, in order to have a meaningful debate.

Thank you!

EDIT: Since this post has gotten so much resonance, I decided to add the passages and citations and some personal considerations:

Paolo of Tarsus, his letters:

Galatians 1:11-12 (ESV):
"For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ."

1 Corinthians 9:1 (ESV):
"Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?"

1 Corinthians 15:8 (ESV):
"Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me."

Acts 9:4-5 (ESV):
"And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?' And he said, 'Who are you, Lord?' And he said, 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.'"

About his death, 2 accounts:

1. Eusebius of Caesarea (Ecclesiastical History, Book II, Chapter 25):

"Paul, who had preceded Peter in every city, preached the word of God in an extraordinary manner, was martyred in Rome under Nero. He, who had Roman citizenship, suffered decapitation, and his death is attested by the Church."

2. Clement of Rome (1 Clement, Chapter 5):

"Paul, the righteous one, was put to death and took the way of martyrdom, reaching eternal glory."

About the death of James the Just:

1. Flavius Josephus - "Antiquities of the Jews" (Book 20, Chapter 9, Section 1) (not verifiable):

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

But the younger Ananus, who, as we said, had great authority among the Jews, thought he could have a favorable opportunity to give an account of this matter. And he assembled the Sanhedrin of the judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but the tribe of Christians has not been extinct even until now.

1. Eusebius of Caesarea - "Ecclesiastical History" (Book 2, Chapter 23):

Now James, the brother of the Lord, who was surnamed the Just, was the first to be made bishop of Jerusalem. He was so holy and just that he was called the Just by all, and was known to be of such a character that he would not even take food in the same way as others, but he continued in a condition of constant asceticism, refraining from all indulgence in worldly pleasures. And the people of the Jewish faith were so envious of him, that they conspired to throw him down from the pinnacle of the temple, and so he died by stoning, but some say that he was thrown down, and others that he was stoned by the people.

And after his death, the leadership of the church passed on to another. His martyrdom was an important event, and it was recounted as a testimony of the faith.

Ecclesiastical History 2.19 (Eusebius, translation):

"James, the brother of the Lord, took the leadership of the Church with the approval of the apostles. His life was one of asceticism and righteousness, so much so that even the Jews greatly respected him. He was called 'the Just' because of his devotion and moral life."

Ecclesiastical History 2.20 (Eusebius, translation):

"James, who was of the lineage of David, was considered the only one worthy, by his purity of life and righteousness, to govern the Church of Jerusalem. His martyrdom is testified by many writers. After his death, the leadership position was assumed by another, but his memory remained indelible."

Ecclesiastical History (2.23.5), (Eusebius, translation), quoting Egesippus:

"Egesippus, recounting the things that were done by James, writes that after Titus (the Roman emperor) had destroyed Jerusalem and the Jews had been dispersed throughout the world, the descendants of Jesus, who belonged to the house of David, were examined. In fact, because a rumor had spread that the descendants of Jesus still existed, the Jews themselves had brought them before the Roman judge. When the descendants were interrogated, they were asked: 'Who among you is of the lineage of David?'"

3. Tacitus' Annals 15.44:

"Nero fastened the guilt of the fire (of Rome) on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians. 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 Pilate; and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of setting fire to the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of wild beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired."

About the persecution of Christians:

The passage from Pliny the Younger in his letter to Trajan where he mentions Christians is found in Letter 10.96, written around 112 A.D. In this letter, Pliny, who was governor of Bithynia (a Roman province in present-day Turkey), writes to Trajan seeking advice on how to deal with Christians, who were being persecuted because of their faith. The letter provides important information about Christians and their religious practices, as well as how they were treated by Roman authorities.

Pliny the Younger's Letter 10.96 to Trajan (translation):

"It is said that some individuals belong to this superstition (Christianity) and have been condemned for not offering sacrifices to the gods, but instead chanting hymns to Christ as if he were a god. Also, they meet regularly in secret, which makes us suspicious of the legitimacy of these practices. It is not a matter of personal concern to me, but there is ample evidence supporting the presence of a rapidly expanding Christian community."

Life of Claudius, 25.4 (Suetonius):

"Since the Jews at Rome, on the instigation of Chrestus, were causing continuous disturbances, he expelled them from the city."

Dio Cassius, Roman History 68.32 (Translation):

"At this time, the Christians, who were accused of being a wicked sect, were persecuted very harshly. Their faith, which rejected the cults of the gods and Roman traditions, was seen as a threat to public order. Many Christians were condemned to death and subjected to torture, including some who were of noble origins."

Dio Cassius, Roman History 72.25 (Translation):

"During the reign of Marcus Aurelius, the Christians were persecuted in a particularly violent manner. Because they refused to participate in public rituals and worship the Roman gods, many were arrested, tortured, and killed. Their faith was seen as a threat to peace and public order."

Marco Valerio Marziale, even if he didn’t mention Jesus directly, in his Epigrams XI, 56, refers to a religious/moral community which doesn’t follow the roman traditional rituals of the Roman Empire. Since it’s not clearly specified, it sure could be open to interpretation on whether it’s Christians or another community, but the timeline and the customs of Christians in his context and era are consistent and very likely would point to them, and it includes also both a praise and a criticism:

“Illa pudicitiae non est aliena ministra:
teste deo, sed te non tamen illa probat.” = “This purity of yours is not foreign to modesty: but you are still not approved of the god."”

There is another author, the historian Mara bar Serapion, who mentions Jesus in his letter:

"What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a punishment for their crime.

What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment, their land was covered with sand.
What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that their kingdom was abolished.
God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion.
But Socrates is not dead because of Plato; neither is Pythagoras, because of the statue of Hera.
Nor is the wise king because of the new laws he laid down."

Important to mention is also the Talmud, which represents the main opponent faction of Christianity at the time, which in more than one passage, discredits the figure of Jesus as a sorcerer and sinner. In an intellectual honest mind, this represents a strong piece of evidence about the true existence of Jesus, who was viewed by Hebraism as a major threat to their worship and forced their rabbi authors to confront him.

Another historically verifiable martyr is Peter: although there are no contemporary Roman documents describing Peter's death, the convergence of testimonies from Clement of Rome, Origen, Tertullian, and Eusebius, along with the archaeological tradition of St. Peter's Basilica, provides a consistent and historically plausible account of his martyrdom in Rome during Nero's persecutions.

Note that all this historical evidences are consistent in referring to the timeline of Jesus’ life and death, and are mostly brought by non-Christians, since it's true that Eusebius and Hegesippus were Christian writers. I never mentioned the Gospels, but only cited the verifiable historical sources of information.

If in your opinion the historical sources I mentioned are not authentic or present some sort of fallacies, please argue and explain clearly why by citing evidences and sources which have – objectively - at least the same level of reliability. It’s not good enough just saying: “they are dubious, moot and non-credible” and just linking a wiki-page. A very common point which many of you try to make is: there are no first-hand accounts. Fine. Paul of Tarsus was a first-hand account, but it’s not essential to have this kind of accounts if the solid historical evidence is consistent and coming from different non-affiliated sources. What I mean to say, it’s not enough to disprove the existence of Jesus and his actions.

Also take in account that at the time most of the common people were illiterate and the oral tradition was the main method to pass knowledge between generations, as already someone in the comments stated. I’d also like to cite from the comments that it’s true that the term “historical miracles” is contradictory: at Jesus’ time, even the concept of “resurrection” was something nearly impossible to imagine and very far from the reality of people. They surely didn’t have access to all the fiction movies we have today. So why are suddenly this consistent claims coming from different, non-affiliated people of something so far from reality which surely wouldn’t benefit them? How can people, not disciples, who first doubted strongly or even were against Christianity develop such strong beliefs that they are willing to die for them? That’s for you to explain, if you don’t believe the supernatural.

The claim: “there has never been a proven supernatural event in the history of this planet” is intellectually dishonest, since if an event is considered supernatural, it consequently becomes impossible to frame it with the available resources of that time. If then in a later time it becomes possible to frame, it won’t be supernatural anymore.

[u/Novaova]

My mom once told me about her best friend Margaret at Purdue won the NCAA title in freestyle, and set a record that stood for ten years.

But it later turned out that the best friend Margaret at Purdue was actually just an avid intermural athlete.

But it later turned out that the best friend Margaret at Purdue was just active.

But it later turned out that Mom and Margaret went to JeffCo Juco Nursing school.

Then it turned out Margaret was this guy named Mike.

Does Margaret truly exist?