Circumstantial evidence does not validate the historicity of Jesus nor other Christian claims

Once again Christians in their desperate search for evidence to validate their belief claims, have come up with what they think is the actual date of the crucifixion of Christ! According to the article that this post is a response to, they claim that geologists were able to find evidence of an earthquake in the Dead Sea region which is  about 13 miles from Jerusalem. Geologist Jefferson Williams etal. through the information gathered and other textual sources has estimated that the crucifixion occurred on Friday, April 3, in the year 33 CE.

But what does this article really prove? Absolutely nothing! Before I begin let me state my position on the matter of an historical Christ. I personally do not believe that there is sufficient extra-biblical evidence to validate the claims made about Christ in the gospels. I am convinced to my own satisfaction that Jesus Christ is a mythical figure that was created by the authors of the bible basing themselves heavily on the Old Testament prophecies of a coming messiah. Now getting back to the subject of the article; what they have actually managed to prove was that there was an earthquake at or around the time they have speculated.

Trying to correlate the Jesus narratives as told in the gospels to the earthquake is not science but rather wishful thinking. Christians allegedly believe in their religion of choice by faith; at least that is what most of them claim. But the second someone comes up with something that they believe validates their beliefs they all jump for joy and start making ridiculous claims and assumptions. Any biblical scholar worth his salt will state that there is no credible evidence outside of the New Testament that can validate the claims of the existence of an historical Christ.

The article did mention one theory very briefly regarding the possibility of the earthquake mentioned at the crucifixion of Christ as having been "borrowed" by the gospel authors and even of it being of some type of allegorical significance. I agree with this view partially, but I personally think that this is a simple matter of the gospel writers trying to give their tale historical validity, by writing actual historical events into the myth. Putting their story in an historical context can add to the credibility of that story and can be used as a marker for historians to try and trace the origin of certain elements of that myth.

Many attempts to validate the gospel fictions have ended up being proven as frauds or a wild goose chase at best. The search for Noah's ark, the shroud of Turin, the James ossuary just to name a few have had a lot of exposure and when they made headlines caused quite a media stir. In the end all of the above mentioned items have been proven to be of a fraudulent nature and once again have served only as a bad reminder of how easily people especially believers are so easily misled. Their desperate longing for evidence has been the driving force behind forgers and their means of making a living off of the gullibility of the masses.

For those interested in the above mentioned article you can read it here.