Evidence of Christianity for u/ExpressionOfTheSoul.

I assert that compelling, falsifiable evidence shows that Jesus claimed to have attributes identifying him as the Christian creator god (i.e., to have access to all the powers of the cosmos). Material (except (h)) is taken from Bill Craig with much personal counterpoint.

(a) He claimed to be the Christ (a translation of Messiah or Anointed). Josephus says simply he was the Christ, and Tacitus says Christians are named after him, both early testimonies while eyewitnesses of Jesus were alive, besides overwhelming NT assertions of the accepted title. Josephus adds that many others claimed to take the Messianic mantle, namely Judas of Galilee, Theudas, Simon of Peraea, and Athronges. Rabbi Gamaliel (famous in the Talmud, a Sanhedrin member who was also Paul's teacher) confirmed the parallel between Theudas, Judas of Galilee, and Jesus in his oral testimony to the Sanhedrin, preserved in the secondary source Acts 5:34-40 (supported by Josephus); so it is a historical fit for Jesus to have made the claim. John the Baptist, also mentioned by Josephus, was asked if he was the Christ and denied the claim. Examples of Jesus specifically making the claim are at Peter's confession (Matt. 16:18, Mark 8:27-30) and at John the Baptist's doubt (Matt. 11:2-6, Luke 7:19-23) where Jesus quotes Is. 61:1 specifically about the expected Messiah. It was also known that Daniel 9 indicated the 30s AD as the time when Messiah would be expected, as shown by Talmudic commentary on this passage as having failed for those who saw no Messiah before the temple fell. Jesus never downplayed or demurred from any prior claim made about the Messiah, and, when asked specifically about them in the Olivet Discourse (three gospels), he indicated that some Messianic events were near and some not necessarily so. Since he affirmed the historical context of this title, he was claiming all extraordinary attributes of Messiah as well. These include that the Messiah "will strike the earth with the word of his mouth forever" and will be "free from sin" (Psalms of Solomon 17:32-37); and that he existed with God "prior to the creation of the world and for eternity" (Enoch 48:6, 11, later echoed by John 1:1-5). So this compelling, falsifiable evidence shows that Jesus claimed to be Messiah knowing that it involved claims of preincarnate existence. It is not an extraordinary fact that he claimed this, but it would be extraordinary for his claim to be accurate and for preincarnate existence to be a true historically testable proposition.

(b) He claimed to be the Son of God. Josephus questioned whether it would be lawful to call Jesus a man, and Tacitus (hostile witness) says guardedly that Jesus caused a "most mischievous superstition" that arose again after his death. More specifically, Jesus compared himself to the son of God in the parable of the vineyard (Mark 12:1-9, Gospel of Thomas 65, with Semitisms indicating its authentic derivation from Is. 5:1-7). He said none knew the Father but the Son (Matt. 11:27, Luke 10:22), which suggests authenticity due to its multiple witness, its linguistically shown Aramaic origin, and its embarrassment to the later doctrine of knowing the Father being encouraged (Phil. 3:8-11). He spoke of the Son not knowing the day that the Father knows of (Mark 13:32, Matt. 24:36), which also has the criteria of multiple witness and embarrassment to later doctrine. Even liberal historians recognize that Jesus deliberately caused stirs in Jerusalem before his death, and one of these was his direct claim "I am the Son of God" (John 10:36) which was charged against him by multiple witnesses for his trial (Matt. 27:43). In this case Jesus quotes Asaph (Ps. 82) for the definition of "son of God" as specifically meaning what was understood as an angelic nature, i.e., again claiming preincarnate existence. Further the NT passages cited indicate that Jesus was making greater claims via this title, namely unique knowledge of the cosmic will and unique proximity to the cosmic Father. 4 Ezra 7:28-29 cites both titles: "My son the Messiah shall be revealed ... and those who remain shall rejoice four hundred years [the last four centuries BC]. And after these years my son the Messiah shall die"; this definition and identity of the two titles is also supported by the DSS, and the circulation of these books in Jesus's day indicates his awareness of the claims involved.

(c) He claimed to be the Son of Man. Jesus used this title in over 80 instances in the NT, even though it is not used in prior OT thought (except Daniel 7:13-14) or later Christian thought (except Acts 7:56). This supports the claim having been made, based on the criteria of independence and dissimilarity. However, the claim is consistent with then-circulating Essene sources about "the Son of Man", 1 Enoch 46:5, 48:3-6, 62:7, 69:29, and 4 Ezra 13 (including God's son at verse 37). The claim involves the power to judge (Matt. 10:32-33, Luke 12:8-12), including a claim of mastery over the afterlife, about which more shortly. The claim "Son of Man" is also present in the trial testimony, of which Matt. 26:64, Mark 14:60-64, Luke 22:69 are secondary sources, which confirm all three titles so far. Many of the NT instances, including these, refer to the appearance in Daniel's vision directly, such as coming on the clouds of heaven and receiving the dominion and glory of God. Again this speaks to a self-concept of cosmic preexistence. The potential fact of such preexistence itself is based on other evidence that I'm holding for later, but the fact that Jesus claimed preexistence is mundane and well-attested.

(d) He claimed to be the king in God's kingdom. Mara refers to Jesus as a wise king who was executed by the Jewish people, and Tacitus, Josephus, and the Talmud all indicate that he was judged guilty of a capital crime, i.e., claiming kingship independent from Tiberius Caesar's. Pilate wrote, "This is Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" as his charge, and all four gospels abridge this inscription differently; there is even an anticipation of whether the inscription conflated whether Jesus was king or merely claimed to be, which indicates that the four gospels are reliable secondary sources of the written inscription. It was common for the executed to be displayed with signs of their crimes; thieves could be hung with moneybags as their symbol, and Jesus was given a crown of thorns and an inscription for the very purpose of creating a visual spectacle symbolizing his judged criminality as a royal pretender. Further, God's kingdom is attested by most historians as the most certain element in all of Jesus's teaching. His role in it as king of kings is illustrated by Matt. 19:28, Luke 22:28-30, which also meets the criterion of embarrassment because people would later ask if Judas was intended to have one of the 12 thrones (or whether Jesus anticipated Matthias). Here Jesus's claim of kingship extends beyond his death and so he is claiming an afterlife for himself and his disciples. As previously indicated, the scientific study of afterlife is largely focused on the general class of resuscitation events known as near-death experiences, which number in the tens of millions and about which I have much to say. Thus the claim to kingship has significant focus on yet-unknown physical possibilities; but the fact that Jesus claimed kingship is itself not an extraordinary fact and is indeed testified by almost all historians.

(e) He claimed to be the unique teacher (Rabbi) of Israel. The Talmud indicates that Jesus's generation was the first to include rabbis, and comparing usages linguistically suggests that Jesus may have been the first of all to adopt the title, which then became faddish among the Jews (meaning "my exalted one"). The generations prior had been called "zugoth" instead, sages yoked to each other, up until the final pair of Hillel and Shammai, whom Jesus would have met in the temple when he was 12 or so. Until 70, only a few rabbis were attested, but through 500 there were about two thousand rabbis named in the Talmud. So evidence indicates that there was a consciousness of giving new meaning to the exaltation of the teacher. In particular, Jesus's emphasis on "I say unto you" was a unique demonstration of teaching ability, stated dozens of times with either "You have heard it said, but," or "Truth, truth". Both the class of prior sages and the rabbis of the Gemara would insist on naming earlier teachers for their teachings rather than taking authority personally, so this meets the authenticity criterion of dissimilarity. The effect of his unique teaching style was astonishment at its difference from other teachers (Matt. 7:28, Mark 1:22, Luke 4:32, etc.), further supporting this general fact. But when pressed on difficulties in the Torah, Jesus affirmed it and then placed his own teaching (expanding on overlooked contrasting Torah data) as equal to the direct word of the Lord to Moses (Matt. 5:31-32, Mark 10:2-12). All historians agree that Jesus has a body of disciples to receive and perpetuate his teaching: the Talmud numbers them five, but uses some of the same names as the NT; Josephus explicitly calls him teacher of truth; Mara the Stoic calls him as wise as Socrates and Pythagoras and the giver of a new law (Torah); and Tacitus explains that his teaching was so effective that its "superstition" was continued by his disciples after his death, until a great body of Christians was present in Rome by 64 AD. Thus the claim of unique teacher is widely recognized as a real claim made, and includes at least an authority equal to the giver of the Torah and a component that testified of superstition (inexplicability).

(f) Jesus claimed to be the unique forgiver of sins against God. Here Craig writes, "Several of Jesus' parables [e.g. prodigal son and lost sheep, Matt. 18:10-14, Luke 15:1-32], which are acknowledged on all hands to have been uttered by the historical Jesus, show that He assumed the prerogative to forgive sins." Jesus once staged a demonstration (an apparent healing of a paralytic) for the express purpose of claiming authority to forgive sins against God (Matt. 9:2-8, Mark 2:1-12, Luke 5:17-26 ). The testimony of the religious leaders expressed in these passages is further supported by the circulation of the negative title against him "friend of sinners" (Matt. 11:19, Luke 7:34), indicating his claim was understood as he intended it. Even the proximate cause of his betrayal was Judas's disgust with Jesus's acceptance of a sinner (Mark 14:5, John 12:5). This claim might be regarded as not supernatural at all, in that the ability to forgive sins might well refer solely to the power to judge rightly and cause remediation on earth of injustices, personally and through his followers; but it involves at least a total attunement to the external objective standard of universal morality, not just an approximative lower tribunal.

(g) He claimed to work wonders (inexplicable events). While modern illusionists claim the same, the sheer number and variety of testimonies and their impromptu, wild settings has indicated to virtually all scholars that his reputation as a wonder-worker was unique and rapidly established in his lifetime. Jesus's statement that he casts out demons by the power of God (Matt. 12:28, Luke 11:20) is recognized by NT scholars as authentic and an illustration of his self-concept as a healer above the powers of the physicians and pharmacists of the day. It claims divine authority over phenomena understood as demonic, i.e., it claims access to physical laws of restoration of mental order that have been largely, but not completely, unparalleled in the powers of other healers in history. In his claim of Messiahship (Matt. 11:2-6, Luke 7:19-23) is specific reference to healing power, including raising the dead, about which several NT anecdotes circulate giving this power to him and his followers; again, the question of whether this happened is investigated under NDE study, while the question of whether this was claimed is easily settled by the supermajority testimony of historians that it was indeed claimed. John Meier, of the quest for the historical Jesus, affirms that the "miraculous" healing claim "has as much historical corroboration as almost any other statement we can make about the Jesus of history." The claim was repeatedly tied to Jesus's power as God's king, his unique authority as the exalted rabbi, and his moral healing power as forgiver of sins.

(h) He claimed 3-day turnaround as a personal sign (John 2:13-25, original; Matt. 12:40, unique; Luke 13:32, memetic; triply taught, Matt. 16:21, 17:23, 20:19, Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:34, Luke 9:22, 18:33, 24 passim). Contemporary trial record, Matt. 26:61, and hostile testimony, Matt. 27:40, 63-64, Mark 14:58, 15:29, John 2:20, reflect then-extant documents. Cf. Hosea 6:2, etc. Historians agree 1 Cor. 15:3-4 and Acts 10:39-40 reflect creed formed by c. 38 AD. Josephus specifically echoes 3 days, and even Celsus c. 150 ridicules, "You will not, I suppose, say of him, that, after failing to gain over those who were in this world, he went to Hades to gain over those who were there", showing developed 3-day harrowing doctrine. Jesus's tying himself to a supernatural 3-day sign, before historical fulfillment was attributed to him, indicated divine self-concept.

Individual historians differ on which of the above facts are most sufficiently attested, but their preponderance is sufficient to indicate to the vast majority that Jesus had a self-concept that transcended currently known physical law. Either he was wrong, or he was aware of greater knowable physical laws that we have not yet fully discerned.

Accordingly, there is compelling, falsifiable evidence for the fact that the historical Jesus taught that he had unique powers that allegedly demonstrated then-unknown natural laws, such as possibilities of preexistence, approach to omniscience, afterlife, cosmic unity, and unparalleled healings of disease and death. It is not necessary to evaluate whether any supernatural events occurred in order to establish the facts that inexplicable powers were claimed as a central part of Jesus's teaching. In fact, the body of historians that recognizes these facts about what Jesus claimed include all the skeptics and liberals who doubt his divinity or the supernatural. Either these claims of cosmic attunement were false, or they represented then-unknown natural laws that modern science has yet to fully quantify. Whether the claims were true must be tested by the method of inference upon unrepeatable events and the criterion of the evidence needing to be as extraordinary as the claim, which is a separate study. But the fact that Jesus made a broad body of similar claims about his powers in the years 30-33 AD has been established by the evidence.