Sunday, June 02, 2013

H.G. Wells on the Historicity of Jesus

"I am an historian, I am not a believer, but I must confess as a historian that this penniless preacher from Nazareth is irrevocably the very center of history. Jesus Christ is easily the most dominant figure in all history."

—H.G. Wells

11 comments :

Joshua said...

What's the source of this quote? A brief search online showed it was heavily quoted, but none of the people quoting it listed a source. :(

Thanks!

Brian Auten said...

I had the same problem. If someone can find the source I'll be glad.

Anonymous said...

It was just a statement wells made, it wasn't from a book or anything, I think he was talking about 'A Short History of the World'

Anonymous said...

Of course as an atheist Wells left out the most significant aspect of Jesus the so called "penniless preacher"He was also the Son Of God.

Anonymous said...

Too bad there's no historical evidence for Jesus....It could of been great...

MaryLou said...

RE: historical evidence for Jesus:

http://garyhabermas.com/

http://risenjesus.com/

http://pleaseconvinceme.com/2012/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

For books, I suggest Richard Bauckham's Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, Craig Blomberg's The Historical Reliability of the Scriptures, John Dickson's The Christ Files and Gary Habermas' The Historical Jesus.

In his book, Dickson notes that the majority of mainline historians, that is, scholars who have no interest in proving that Jesus did or did not exist because of a personal bias, agree that Christ was a real historical person. He notes that, if you look at the history departments of universities around the world, you will find Jesus is part of the curriculum. I, myself, stumbled across this write-up re: a course at Stanford which is, of course, a secular university:

"Over the last four decades, historical scholarship on Jesus and his times, whether conducted by Jews, Christians or non-believers, has arrived at a strong consensus about what this undeniably historical figure (born ca. 4 BCE, died ca. 30 CE) said and did, and how he presented himself and his message to his Jewish audience . . . . This is a course about history, not about faith or theology.”

Therefore, it is not the case that there is no historical evidence for Jesus.

Neal Korfhage said...

@ Anonymous about there being no evidence for Jesus of Nazareth.

Sounds like you might also be interested the Alincolnism page on Facebook. Join the resistance against the irrationality that is Lincolnism. There isn't a shred of evidence for him either.

https://www.facebook.com/alincolnism

R Lidster said...

Yeah, sorry Anonymous. I'm not a believer by any stretch of the imagination, but the evidence is pretty strong that the man we now call Jesus of Nazareth lived and died at about the time that MaryLou cites. Accepting that he existed doesn't entail accepting that he was God incarnate, but not accepting that he existed is akin to the same kind of willful blindness of which skeptics often accuse Christians. Let's avoid that hypocrisy.

Joshua Perry said...

Lister, your honest opinion is appreciated. I think C.S. Lewis's trilemma is suitable here. He is either Lord, Liar,or Lunatic. If he did rise from the dead after paying man's sin debt on Calvary, he is Lord.

Chad said...

Hello Anonymous One,

"Too bad there's no historical evidence for Jesus..."

I would love to know how you concluded that.

Respectfully

PrecioustoHim said...

Nowhere is there a better example of the proof of the existence of Jesus Christ , His life, crucifixion and resurrection then in Luke 24
http://biblehub.com/nlt/luke/24.htm

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.

Blog Archive

Amz