is there any physical proof,or any documentation of Jesus's life he was alive?
413141
nope but i bet the jesus lot tell you other wise and do loads of cutting n pasting to this answer if im right i deserve the 10 points !!!x
872081
Back in the 1400's Leonardo DiVinci proved that gravity is a consent force on all objects by dropping two different weight balls off of a tower.  Once proven, there was no need for each new generation to go back and try to rediscover his proof.  They can go back and re-read his proof, and maybe recreate his experiment.  It was proven.\n\nBy coming as He did in fulfillment of prophecy, Jesus provided all the proof anyone should ever need of his identity.  Go re-read Psalms 22 sometime.  We have manuscripts shown that this Psalm was in existence at least 250 to 400 years before the birth of Jesus.  )Most scholars place it 1000 years before the birth of Jesus, but because of the perishable nature of the ancient manuscripts, we have no known surviving copies from that far back.)\n\nCompare Psalms 22 to the events recorded on the cross when Jesus died.  His words are recorded.  The fact that they would crucify him by piercing his hands and feet - before the Romans introduced crucifixion around 50BC.  The fact that soilders would gamble for his garments, or pierce his side with a spear.  (If He was a fake, He could control His own actions and words - but how did He get His enemies to do those things?).  All should be proof of the believablity of the Bible.\n\nRe-read Matthew, and his listing of over 90 prophecies that Jesus fulfilled in his lifetime.  Again, many of the things like the place of his birth or his family line, were things He could not have controlled.  It had to be the hand of God.\n\nSo how many times does he have to prove it?  Its all recorded there for anyone who want to take the time to study it out.  Just like the records of DiVinci's experiment.\n\nPeople today are still duplicating DiVinci's experiment with the same results.  They can prove it to themselves if they do not trust his records.  The same is true for Christianity today.  Anyone who wants can decide to make a committment of their life to Christ, and they will be changed by it.  Happened to me, and happens everyday to thousands worldwide.  What more proof do you need?
969131
That's something that interests and intrigues me too. Unfortunately didn't have enough time and patience to go through it.\nBut, as you said that its something you would like to research yourself I hope maybe links listed bellow in the Source could help you to start from somewhere.\nOne more thing, I have also heard that the headboard that was placed above Jesus on the cross was recently examined by forensic scientists, and that the writing on it has been studied by historians and cryptologists. So, maybe you can do some search regarding it.\n\nAs well there is a book (you can find it on amazon.ca) "The Case for Christ - A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus", written by Lee Strobel. I didn't reed it but the review about it sounds interesting to me, and maybe from it you can find some additional information (source) where you can start or continue deeper digging for some more relevant answers.\n\nHowever, hoping that I helped you even just a bit, I wish you good luck in this exciting research!
85015
Jesus was neither black nor white. He came from the Middle East and was Jewish, so chances are he had an olive colored skin complexion.\n\nHowever, if you read the accounts in the Gospels carefully, there is no mention at all of any of his physical characteristics... interesting, huh?
84164
The only proof I know of is that Jesus was resurrected. I would say that's as close to afterlife as you can get. So read the bible and there you may find your answer. :)
41382
No, by definition.\n\nNo, there is a lot of historical evidence that he existed, regardless wether you believe he is the son of god.\n\nYes, There is overwhelming evidence that both the old and new testaments were engineered by the catholic church and everyone else that touched it.
600670
I don't know how to answer your question because I have never doubted the existence of Jesus - physically or spiritually.  But I do know my opinion on the Bible being a work of fiction... Think about it this way for a second : Why would the writers of the Bible put so much work into it if it were a work of fiction?  Why would men die for their belief in Jesus if he weren't 'real'?
416705
ACCORDING to reliable history, a man named Jesus was born over 2,000 years ago in Bethlehem, a small town in the land of Judea. Herod the Great was king in Jerusalem then, and Caesar Augustus was emperor in Rome. (Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:1-7) Roman historians of the first two centuries generally avoided mentioning Jesus, since Roman rulers at that time were trying to suppress Christianity.\n\nOn the other hand, The Historians’ History of the World observes: “The historical result of [Jesus’] activities was more momentous, even from a strictly secular standpoint, than the deeds of any other character of history. A new era, recognised by the chief civilisations of the world, dates from [Jesus’] birth.”\n\nTime magazine reported that more books have been written about Jesus than any other person in history. Many of these books focus on the question of Jesus’ identity, that is, who he really is. There has perhaps been more controversy about this matter than about any other subject in human history.\n\nEarly Questions About Identity\nWhen Mary was told that she would have a child and that she was to name him Jesus, she asked: “How is this to be, since I am having no intercourse with a man?” God’s angel Gabriel replied: “Power of the Most High will overshadow you. For that reason also what is born will be called holy, God’s Son.”—Luke 1:30-35.\n\nLater, Jesus performed miracles that caused his apostles to marvel. When a mighty windstorm threatened to sink their boat on the Sea of Galilee, Jesus calmed the waters with the rebuke “Hush! Be quiet!” In astonishment, his apostles exclaimed: “Who really is this?”—Mark 4:35-41; Matthew 8:23-27.\n\nQuestions about Jesus’ real identity became common among people of his day, so Jesus asked his apostles who people were saying he was. “Some say John the Baptist,” they replied, “others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets”—all of whom were then dead. Afterward Jesus asked: “‘You, though, who do you say I am?’ In answer Simon Peter said: ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’” Even the demons—wicked angels—said of Jesus: “You are the Son of God.”—Matthew 16:13-16; Luke 4:41.\n\nWho Jesus Said He Was\nAlthough Jesus rarely spoke of himself as God’s Son, he did acknowledge that he was. (Mark 14:61, 62; John 3:18; 5:25, 26; 11:4) Almost invariably, however, he said that he was “the Son of man.” By identifying himself this way, he highlighted his human birth—the fact that he was truly a man. Thus he also revealed himself to be that “son of man” whom Daniel had seen in vision appearing before Almighty God—“the Ancient of Days.”—Matthew 20:28; Daniel 7:13.\n\nRather than proclaim himself to be God’s Son, Jesus allowed others to reach that conclusion. And even people besides his apostles did so, including John the Baptist and Jesus’ friend Martha. (John 1:29-34; 11:27) These believed that Jesus was the promised Messiah. They learned that he had lived in heaven as a mighty spirit person and that his life had been miraculously transferred by God to the womb of the virgin Mary.—Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:20-23.\n\nSimilar to the First Man, Adam\nIn many respects, Jesus was similar to the first man, Adam. For example, both were perfect men who did not have a human father. (Genesis 2:7, 15) So the Bible calls Jesus “the last Adam”—a perfect man who could serve as “a corresponding ransom.” Jesus’ life corresponded to that of “the first man Adam,” whom God created as a perfect human.—1 Corinthians 15:45; 1 Timothy 2:5, 6.\n\nNo One Better Known\nThe account of Jesus’ life was recorded by four of his contemporaries—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—two of whom were intimate associates. Their books, named after them, are commonly called the Gospels, parts of which can be read in over two thousand languages. These small books are usually incorporated with others that make up the Bi
155009
I am so glad you are still seeking the one true Son of God.\nThe historical Jesus was born in a carpenters home. He learned the tricks of the trade from his earthly father. He was a Jew so I am sure He was different than what you have seen in pictures and movies. He probably had short hair with the long hair hanging like sideburns as the Jewish custom. I believe he was strong since carpenter work was hard work. I believe he was short and dark complected as were most men of the time.\nTalk about a lovable character, He took a beating, and torture, and even death, because He loved us so much.
349509
#2 first.  There are contradictions in the two genealogies.  Thus it would be a mistake to take them as an accurate historical record.  Think of them instead in terms of what the Gospel writer is trying to accomplish.  Both are trying to show Jesus' place in the history of salvation, moreso than in chronological history.\n#1 this one requires faith.  It is well known that the Resurrection accounts are not consistent in the usual sense of time and space.  Depending on how we read them there may have been 40 days between the Resurrection and the Ascension, or both may have happened on the same day.  Well, which one is it?  The answer is BOTH!  Jesus is risen in a glorified, physical body.  In some ways he is subject to the normal laws of the physical world.  He can be touched.  He eats.  He walks.  In other ways he is not subject to normal laws.  He passes through locked doors.  He disappears before the eyes of the two men at Emmaeus.  Most striking, he seems to be present in the upper room with the apostles at the same time (or at least very close to it) as he is with the disciples in Emmaeus, 8 miles away.  The Risen Christ is not subjec to time and space.  He can be in two places at once.  Think about it in modern terms.  We say that Christ is with us.  Wherever two or three are gathered in his name.  That means that he is all over the world, simultaneously.  There are twos and threes all over the world gathered in his name and he is with all of them.  At the same time we say that he is seated at the right hand of the Father.  He is in heaven and on earth at the same time and all over the earth at the same time.
322707
Go here and get the full thing, including how it was authenticated.  Sounds real to me.\nhttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0406_060406_gospel.html
851252
Pretty much the best way to prove that Jesus was either the Son of God or not is to look to the resurrection (it does more than save people).  People have a hard time trying to prove that Jesus wasn't resurrected.  The biggest problems for those who criticize the resurrection are:\n1)  the authorities (Jewish and Roman) who tried to keep the faith from spreading, and\n2)  the martyrs.\nThere are others, but these are the major ones.
288049
#1   I really hope you didn't just say that the bible is historical evidence (maybe it was just misread on my part) \nweather or not jesus was here on this planet is not the real question. there very well could have been a man fitting his description that lived on this planet. The real question is weather or not he is a divine being or not. If there was evidence of his exsistance your best shot would be through roman literature from jesus's contemporary period. not afterward, that would be tainted.
884958
The ancient historical record provides examples of writers, philosophers and historians who lived during or not long after the time Jesus is believed to have lived and who testify to the fact that he was a real person. We will look at what some of these people have said.\n\nCornelius Tacitus\nTacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustus’ death in A.D.14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Nero’s death and finish with Domitian’s death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Nero’s decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesus’ surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christus’ or Christ’s death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record.\n\nLucian of Samosata\nLucian was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesus’ name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus.\n\nSuetonius\nSuetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrian’s government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ]. \n\nPliny the Younger\nPliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god.\n\nThallus and Phlegon\nBoth were ancient historians and both confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified. This parallels what the Bible said happened when Jesus died. \n\nMara Bar-Serapion\nSome time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.
871957
to those that quoted Tacitus his accuracy on the subject is quite suspect considering that he was not even born until 20 years after the supposed death of Jesus. \n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Jesus\n\n\nalso the description of Jesus by Josephus has been proven to been corrupted by Christian scribes especially when compared to copies kept in Muslim lands.
647529
The only possible way to prove it was used on any particular person would be to have the DNA of that person and match it to DNA on the cloth. If that happened, it would prove it was not used on Jesus, or that Jesus was not resurrected and zoomed off to heaven.\n\nAs it stands, there is no objectively verifiable evidence proving Jesus (as depicted in the bible) even existed, much less was buried in a piece of cloth.\n\nThe Turin shroud is totally irrelevant except as a way for the Catholic church to get free publicity.
1001905
There is, of course, no conclusive, CSI-type evidence that proves Christ's resurrection.  But consider the following:\n\nThose who felt threatened by Christ's resurrection (Jewish leadership, Roman authorities) were unable to produce a body to disprove the resurrection of Christ.\n\nThe fact that women are the first to find the empty tomb actually lends some credibility to the story.  A concocted story from first-century Judaea would not have placed women (who were not considererd reliable witnesses and who did not even have the right to testify in court) in such a prominent position in the story, because it would have made the story less believeable among contemporaries.\n\nMany people who knew Christ during his lifetime and who had witnessed his death sure didn't act like their rabbi was dead and gone.  On the contrary, Jesus's disciples behaved as though they KNEW that he was not dead - they risked their lives preaching the Good News.  Why would they all have done that if they knew it was a lie?  What's the point of dying for something you know to be untrue?\n\nDoes any of this prove that Jesus was resurrected?  No - and that proof will never be available.  The resurrection was, is, and always will be a matter of faith.  These are just a few thoughts to consider as you make your reasoned faith-judgment.