Why isn't there historical proof for Jesus/Isa?

[kayleigh]

:salam2:

We all know that the life of Muhammad (saw) is well documented, and even non-Muslims know full well that he did in fact exist as a person, though perhaps not as a prophet. Why isn't there such documentation of Jesus existing at the time?

There were several well known historians living in the area at the estimated time of Jesus' existence (or Isa, whatever), but there is no reliable historical record of anyone by that name preaching or doing all the "prophet-y" things he did. all there is is the Bible, which is corrupt and untrue, and our holy book, which doesn't count because it was written hundreds of years later. There's one excerpt from a famous historian used by Christians to support his existence, which has been proven for hundreds of years to be a forgery. Then there's three famous historians that are used, but they each only mentioned someone by the name of "Christ" (in various languages) once or twice, which is a title, not a name.

So, just out of curiosity, is there an explanation for that? Do Muslims believe all historical documents - not just the Bible - was forged or corrupted? If so, that doesn't make sense in this case, and it seems pretty far-fetched.

ps - I'm not doubting, I'm just curious

 

[khalillulah]

:salam2:
the quran give an account of the mission of issa (as), his prophetic mission and all the mojor events that took place during his lifetime.
as to his personal life and his day to day activities, that is not mentioned and anyway that is not really important.

to find more about detailed life of prophet issa a.s you can check hadiths of the prophet saw (THE BOOK OF PROHETS).

massalam.

 

[BintMuhammad]

Wa alaikumussalaam,

Yup, the Qur'aan is enough proof with the help of the tafsir to better understand it.

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum sister kayleigh,


You wrote the following:

There were several well known historians living in the area at the estimated time of Jesus' existence (or Isa, whatever), but there is no reliable historical record of anyone by that name preaching or doing all the "prophet-y" things he did. all there is is the Bible, which is corrupt and untrue, and our holy book, which doesn't count because it was written hundreds of years later.

I disagree with your phrase, ".....and our holy book, which doesn't count because it was written hundreds of years later."


Once an incident is mentioned in the Qur'an, then we Muslims are absolutely sure it occurred, and it doesn't matter to us that the Qur'an was revealed to prophet Muhammad [peace be upon him] around six hundred years after Jesus Christ [peace be upon him] was raised up out of this world.


However, if you meant to say that the Qur'an does not count for non Muslims, then I see your point. Non Muslims should be invited to read the Qur'an with an open mind, and once they see it as the true word of God Almighty, then they will have no problem in accepting all that is revealed in it concerning Jesus Christ [peace be upon him]. I believe that this is what you meant [i.e., about the non Muslims' view of Qur'anic verses about Jesus -peace be upon him] since you wrote "ps - I'm not doubting, I'm just curious" at the end of your post.



As to whether Muslims believe all historical documents to be forged [and not just the Bible], I think it's wrong to generalize. We have a criterion by which to judge whether a historical report is true or false; the Qur'an and the authentic sayings of our Messenger [peace be upon him].


In the following link, you'll find an article written by Abdur Raheem Green [a British convert to Islam who was formerly a Roman Catholic]. Mr. Green now works in the London Central Mosque [also known as the Regent's Park Mosque]. Although the article speaks about how a Muslim approaches information mentioned in the Bible, it could also be applied to other documents as well [in my opinion...and you'll have to double check this opinion of mine with a scholar]. The article is titled "Quran as Furqan over the Bible":

http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/2006/03/quran_as_furqan.html


As to any historians who lived at the time of Jesus [peace be upon him] and reported his existence using his name "Jesus", I'd have to admit that I really don't know a lot about this topic.


Regards,

Bluegazer

Wassalamu Alaikum

 

[uskupi]

assalam alaikum...the most prominent philosopher in the time of Isa a.s was FILON and he does not records much about Isa a.s.As it is known Isa a.s did not orderd his hawarijun (apostels) to wright down what he is saying and if some one has wrighten something that have may be destroyed 70 years after Isa a.s by Titus.But there is one book "The Gospel Of Barnabas" wich is more authentical than the others 4. In that book Isa alaihi wa salam clearly admonishes Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam,he confirmes that Ismail Alaihi wa Salam was the one who was to be sacrificed not Ishak a.s as they think to day,that the blessing of god will be taken from banu israil and geven to people of Makkah and Madinnah and many other things wich Noble Quran tells us

 

[BrotherZak]

:salam2:

We all know that the life of Muhammad (saw) is well documented, and even non-Muslims know full well that he did in fact exist as a person, though perhaps not as a prophet. Why isn't there such documentation of Jesus existing at the time?

There were several well known historians living in the area at the estimated time of Jesus' existence (or Isa, whatever), but there is no reliable historical record of anyone by that name preaching or doing all the "prophet-y" things he did. all there is is the Bible, which is corrupt and untrue, and our holy book, which doesn't count because it was written hundreds of years later. There's one excerpt from a famous historian used by Christians to support his existence, which has been proven for hundreds of years to be a forgery. Then there's three famous historians that are used, but they each only mentioned someone by the name of "Christ" (in various languages) once or twice, which is a title, not a name.

So, just out of curiosity, is there an explanation for that? Do Muslims believe all historical documents - not just the Bible - was forged or corrupted? If so, that doesn't make sense in this case, and it seems pretty far-fetched.

ps - I'm not doubting, I'm just curious

Myriads of biblical text talk about a man named "yeshush" or Jesus including the major gospels and not excluding the 15+ gospels, such as those of peter, gospel of nazerence, the gnostic writing. The man certainly existed and he survived the first 200+ years through oral tradiition and was later on written down in gospels. Its certainly also understandable that its easier to document a person's life 600 years later after the advent of jesus(pbuh). In addition jesus with all due respect was not as successful as mohammed and most certianly did not change the very nature of an entire populous. He was in fact rejected by his own people. In terms of su
pport from secular writing i suggest you look into these ancient historians who made reference to jesus life: some of them include:

Eusebius of Caesarea - A third century theologian who used the library in Caesarea for much of his research.

Flavius Josephus - A first century Jewish historian who documented the Roman empire.

Justin Martyr - A Gentile who lived in Palestine and later became a Christian. This theologian used Greek philosophy to explain Christian doctrine.

Resources for Philo of Alexandria - A Jewish philosopher and historian who lived in the first century.

Tacitus - A first century Roman historian, who chronicled the lives of several emperors.

Tertullian - An African theologian who wrote extensively in Latin. He was first to use the word trinitas to describe the Godhead.

 

[kayleigh]

:salam2:
the quran give an account of the mission of issa (as), his prophetic mission and all the mojor events that took place during his lifetime.
as to his personal life and his day to day activities, that is not mentioned and anyway that is not really important.

to find more about detailed life of prophet issa a.s you can check hadiths of the prophet saw (THE BOOK OF PROHETS).

massalam.

I'm not talking about day-to-day events, just proof of existence. If you're trying to prove something when it comes to religion, religious documents are off limits. They're as good as a fairy tale without other outside sources to corroborate it.

Like I said, I'm not doubting religion, I'm just curious.

Flavius Josephus - A first century Jewish historian who documented the Roman empire.

His most significant and often cited work that is used to prove the existence of Jesus is what I was referring to when I said it was proven to be a forgery for hundreds of years.

Like I said, some of those other historians only mention a "christ".

and yes - Bluegazer - mostly I want to know because the one thing most non-Muslims ask (atheists) is if I can prove anyone besides Muhammad existed. and you can't.

thanks for all the replies, though

 

[BrotherZak]

I'm not talking about day-to-day events, just proof of existence. If you're trying to prove something when it comes to religion, religious documents are off limits. They're as good as a fairy tale without other outside sources to corroborate it.

Like I said, I'm not doubting religion, I'm just curious.

a religious text from an historical perspective essentially is just another ducument, but with a different message yet an historical document nonetheless. It was written by scribes and followed the same process as any other historical document such as plato's republic or homer's illiads. The problem with using a religious document is its implicitly biased and using it will defeat the purpose. Will a biblical historian try to use the bible in a secular forum investigating the validity of Jesus's existence? Certainly not, but it sure doesn't make it invalid.

"e classical historian Michael Grant writes:

To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary. [53] "

 

[Bawar]

I take my words back

 

[BrotherZak]

salam sister kayleigh if you want another specific account of Jesus life i'm going to quote you Lucian, a second century Romano-Syrian satirist:

Lucian, a second century Romano-Syrian satirist, who wrote in Greek, wrote:

The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account… You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.[63]

Celsus, though a late second-century critic of Christianity, accused Jesus of being a bastard child and a sorcerer; yet he never questions Jesus' historicity even though he hated Christianity and Jesus.[64] He is quoted as saying that Jesus was a "mere man" ---wikipedia

 

[BrotherZak]

the main reason why i believe jesus is not mentioned in historical writing such as Mohammed was Jesus was not successful and essentially was not sent to the gentiles. He was there to confirm the law and spread the message to the tribes and himself said the paraclyte will arrive or the comforter shall come...again he never was accepted by people and the few that accepted him did not record his writing much later. We cannot also deny the power of oral tradition.

Kayleigh you athiest friends i believe are very lazy in judging the truth. Tell them to check out wikiepdia lol and read the majority of biblical and secular historians do not support the jesus myth theory and actually refer to it as absurd.

salam

 

[Bluegazer]

Assalamu Alaikum sister kayleigh,


You wrote:

and yes - Bluegazer - mostly I want to know because the one thing most non-Muslims ask (atheists) is if I can prove anyone besides Muhammad existed. and you can't.

So, that means that -with atheists- we Muslims have an advantage over Jews and Christians because there's no question -in these atheists' minds- the Muhammad [peace be upon him] did exist.


I never thought of it this way.


To tell you the truth, I wouldn't try to prove the existence of Jesus or Moses or Abraham or any other prophet [peace be upon them all] to atheists. I'd just invite them to Islam by asking them to read the Qur'an and a few good books about Islam.


If Allah guides them to accept Islam, then that will entail their belief in the existence and the message of all the Prophets, including Jesus [peace be upon him].


Check out the book "Sacred Freedom: Western Liberalist Ideologies in the Light of Islam" by Haneef Oliver. It contains 100 pages, and the first chapter deals with atheism. The rest deals with concepts such as democracy, humanism and secularism. Please click on the following two links:

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=74045&postcount=1
http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showpost.php?p=74468&postcount=3


Regards,

Bluegazer

Wassalamu Alaikum