What I was getting at was the fact that while there is no reason why Jesus could have been female, there still remains the glaring fact that even stripped of clothing Jesus was referred to as male. Hence, there is strong argument to be made against it. It's a rather weak theory with nothing to back it up other than simple belief.

Yet most documents that existed in the Roman Empire were destroyed when said Empire fell.... they were burned and broken... not a whole lot survived.... I would be very surprised were you to provide proof.... original documents from the period written in Latin.... none have ever found any such documents... though we do have later documents providing stories and tales of his existence..... Jesus may not have even been his real name for all we know.... if perchance Jesus had been a female he/she would have most assuredly been raped before being hung on the cross... it was an everyday Roman practice.....

How is it debatable? What's debatable is his birth, not his death. We know Jesus existed. Not through the Bible. This was a big political thing back in it's day. The Romans didn't know or care, it was the Jews who had a problem and the Jewish providence was the first problem the Romans faced (before the European barbarians) It was basically the only place that didn't go along with their laws, and alot of the Jews wanted this man dead (this is even stated in the Bible, you can read this story there and it's also in two books I have, one a college history book, and another is a book on ancient literature) Because this was such a problem for them there are many documented letters sent between the Roman piollet and the Roman emporer of the time. They were sure what to do... this man hadn't commited a crime punishable by death by Roman stadards, but if they didn't do something the Jews were going to break out in war.. and that was somethig the expanding empire did not need.
Like I said, it's not a debate on wether or not JESUS exsisted.. or was male. We know that he lived on Earth. What we don't know is if he was a SON OF A GOD or not That, the matters concering his birth, the parts of his life not included in our modern Bible, and wether or not he rose from the grave are all we can really debate.

Actually, we don't know any of that, and I'd be very happy if you could prove otherwise. And while it is indeed a weak theory with little to back it up aside from personal belief, the same could be said of most of religion and a great deal of science- the only difference being the number of people who hold that personal belief.

You know, Dark Messiah, I don't want to argue with you, but you need to do your homework!
When there are professors who have a doctorate in history, not Christianity (nor are they a PART of Christianity) argeeing he existed then don't you think there could be a shred of truth in the fact that he actually lived? When men and women who disprove the Bible on a dialy basis admit, 'Yes, Jesus was a real human,' don't you begin to suspect that prehaps this man was real?
Just because this man was real does not mean that the entire Christian faith is founded on fact. Many scholars believe Mary was a lying bitch about Jesus' birth and that Luke and Matthew made up a bunch of crap as well. Most believe that all of the Gospels were fucked with a tweaked to make Jesus seem more like the "Savior", by both the authors and the translators.
Like I said the entire Christian faith is not proven simply because Jesus was alive and died. He had to have RISEN from the dead for their belief to be real.

JESUS CHRIST :
HISTORICAL PROOF

The Writings of Flavius Josephus
In Rome, in the year 93, the highly rated Roman historian Flavius Josephus published his extensive history of the Jews. In discussing the period in which the Jews of Judaea were governed by the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate, Josephus included this revealing account that shows that not only did Jesus of Nazareth live, but that He rose from the dead:

" About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. " - Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 (Based on the translation of Louis H. Feldman, The Loeb Classical Library.)
(Found at http://www.geocities.com/7life/Jesus.html)

(I can't find my book, so I'm looking online. I got this from the History Channel site and they do research. So far they have not disputed any know FACT that I have read. So I trust what they say)


Having antagonized many Jews with his teachings, Jesus of Nazareth is seized by Roman soldiers and handed over to the Sanhedrin, who condemn him for blasphemy, circa 33. (The exact year of the crucifixion is disputed.)

Roman procurator Pontius Pilate lets the mob decide Jesus' fate, circa 33. He is crucified, but his disciples maintain that he has been resurrected from the dead on what Christians consider to be the first Easter Sunday.

(This last part, if you noticed, is not treated as fact, but rather, a belief)

My third article of proof is one of my three books (I can't find the other one which is much better and I use it for alot of research)
But this is the information about the book:

The Norton Anthology: World Masterpieces Volume One
It's published by W.W. Norton and Company
The most recent copyright year is 1995....

This book is about ancient literature and begins with the Gilgamesh Epic. It contains 3 parts (each filled with literature from the middle east, europe, or asia) and prior to each part it has an introduction about what you are going to read.
It discusses Jesus's life in the context that he lived, and while some people believe he is the savior there is no proof supporting that fact.

http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html

This is a good one, but it is very long

http://www.concentric.net/~Mullerb/index.shtml
Oh look, more

Ok, I am not going to say anything more.

Nifty.