At the time of the pax romana in rome was there a character named jesus?

Question

At the time of the pax romana in rome was there a character named jesus?

Answer 1

Plenty of people with the name Joshua (Hebrew for Jesus, if I am correct) lived in that period. It was a common name.

A miracle worker who can raise the dead, cure the sick and walk on water would create quite a bit of interest. Especially if this gent was resurrected three days after his death. That's quite unique. Nobody else has ever done it, before or after. None ever wrote even a short note to friends about these events.

Neither did any of the cured or resurrected people showed up on his trial to testify for him. In fact, after the miraculous healing or resurrection you never hear anything about them at all.

The only evidence we have is what the bible tells us. All the gospels were written by other people than the evangelists as claimed, and at least a full generation later. The last written gospel dates from almost a century after Jesus' death. That is pretty weak evidence.

Outside the bible we have very, very few sources that tell anything about Jesus. Tacitus didn't. He wrote about a group of people who followed Crestos (or Christos (spelling)). Josephus didn't write either about Jesus, the lines in his work are a later pious forgery.

Comparing Jesus with Socrates is not really valid: Socrates never claimed to be a god, never performed any miracle. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.  

Answer 2

There IS NOT PROOF that a character named Jesus ever lived.. so if you believe it... Ok and if you don't believe it OK... but THERE IS NO PROOF.

Answer 3

Yes, since the Pax Romana was from about 30 bc to 200 ad., Jesus's ministry was during this time, from 30-33 ad

Answer 4

Manthebraces commented that there is no "proof" that Jesus existed, and I think that is worth reflecting on for a moment.  Historians study the past by recovering and reading the documents which survive from the past.  So, historical "proof" boils down to whether there are documents, more-or-less from the time, which reflect a particular person or event.  In the case of Jesus, there are documents which reference him.  The gospels and various letters reference him.  There are also "gospels" not included in the Biblican cannon which  refer to him as well.  So I think we'd have to say that there is historical evidence of his actual existence.  The proof of Jesus' existence seems comparable to that of Socrates.  We know of Socrates from the writings of Plato and a few other sources, but that's about it.  So, for reasons which have nothing to do with religion, I disagree with Manthebraces.  

I agree with Naz that Jesus would have lived during the 1st century; therefore, he lived during the pax romana.

Additional Comment: Josflachs, I think you're confusing belief in the existence of Jesus with belief in his divinity.  The vast majority of historians believe he was a historical figure.  Whether he was devine is, obviously, a very different matter.  The fact that Socrates never claimed to be devine hardly undermines my point that he is known to exist through the writings of a few devotees, and nevertheless we are confident of his existence.  The same is true regarding Jesus.