Any Evidence For A Historical Jesus?

[JollyForr]

Is there any evidence that exists outside of the Bible, which could possibly hint at some historical figure called Jesus being real? Of course, that wouldn't prove the claims the Bible makes, but it suggests that perhaps he was a real person and the tales were inspired by this real figure.
I just pity him if he was real, and didn't know how disfigured his sane and possibly secular claims became.

[Minimalist]

No.

Like most fictional characters he exists within the pages of one book.

[Voltair]

I am not very well versed on this subject but there is a biblical criticism forum on freeratio that often has discussions/arguments about the issue. I would recommend going there if you want to see some in depth discussions on it. My position is one of uncertainty but I think it is possible that the Jesus figure was based on some person.

[DeistPaladin]

Couple concerns I have over the topic of the "historical Jesus":

1. What do you mean by "historical Jesus"? Jesus without the miracles and divinity? You don't have much of anything left. It's kind of like saying "historical Superman but without all the super powers".

2. The Gospels themselves have never offered a coherent story that can be reconciled internally, with each of the four accounts or with history. There's no need to look for any evidence to confirm the story if the story itself is incoherent.

3. Christian apologists will say there's no 1st century extra-Biblical accounts of Jesus because he was an obscure rabbi that only preached to the poor. Yet the Gospel accounts say that his ministry was both successful and controversial. Like with many other aspects of apologetics, they tie themselves into knots trying to have things both ways.

4. If you're going to debate the historical Jesus, be prepared for what I call "scholars say shuffle". You will waste an incredible amount of time and energy trying to nail them down while they try to portray you as some kind of conspiracy crackpot. Looking back at my own debates on the subject, it's not worth it. Stick with a critical review of the Bible. That's time better spent.

[Minimalist]

But what he asked was "is there any evidence" for it.

"Hercules" could be based on a real person, too. So what?

[Mister Agenda]

It wouldn't be unusual for an historical person to only be mentioned in one book. The vast majority of people who really existed never got recorded in any records at all. So I wouldn't be surprised if the Biblical Jesus is a heavily-mytholgized version of a real apocalyptic preacher. I also wouldn't be surprised if he's an amalgam of multiple teachers or a parable that got out of hand.

I put the historicity of Jesus at about 51% (large margin of error, of course), but my reasons for favoring a real Yeshua that the stories are based on are textual and internal to the Bible. Some passages seem to strain at explaining events in a way consistent with Jesus being divine: his baptism by John for instance, his mother being unmarried when she became pregnant, his mingling with sinners, and the many ways in which his life was inconsistent with messianic prophecies.

I don't know of any extra-Biblical records most historians regard as completely authentic that do more than support the existence of Christianity, although many amateur apologists seem to mix up someone noting the existence of Christians with noting the existence of Christ.

[DeistPaladin]

But what he asked was "is there any evidence" for it.

And my first concern was "evidence for what exactly?" It seems to me that "historical Jesus" is an undefined term. My second concern was "proving what story?" If the Christians can't tell a coherent story, looking for the real person the story is based on is moot. 3 and 4 were about the problems that you encounter when you start looking for evidence for some undefined core behind the incoherent story.

[Anomalocaris]

"Hercules" could be based on a real person, too. So what?

Hercules must have been based on a much cooler historic person than Jesus.

[JollyForr]

But what he asked was "is there any evidence" for it.

And my first concern was "evidence for what exactly?" It seems to me that "historical Jesus" is an undefined term. My second concern was "proving what story?" If the Christians can't tell a coherent story, looking for the real person the story is based on is moot. 3 and 4 were about the problems that you encounter when you start looking for evidence for some undefined core behind the incoherent story.

I know the story itself is incoherent and false, but I'm saying whether or not any texts, or any other kind of evidence, mentions Jesus - outside of the Bible obviously. By evidence I don't mean evidence in favor of divinely inspired miracles, but just possible accounts of a person names Jesus, who once lived, which then could have inspired myths and tales revolving around this person who possibly once strolled upon the Earth.
I don't think there is any, but I could be wrong.

[Minimalist]

but I'm saying whether or not any texts, or any other kind of evidence, mentions Jesus - outside of the Bible obviously.

And the answer remains "no." Though, technically there are other bullshit gospels/stories about jesus which were too stupid or doctrinally unsound for even xtians to accept. These are not "in" the bible but clearly that is because they did not get enough votes from the committee which decided what got in and what was shit-canned.