Jesus (1 Viewer)

[jamny]

Why does it upset people that some choose to believe in Jesus?The timing of this thread and some posts that read like attacks really makes me

Yeah, I apologize. I probably shouldn't have started the discussion when I did but during these holidays I always look more into my belief or lack thereof. It is only meant as a sincere attempt to gain some kind of understanding. I consider myself a hopeful agnostic and I do make an effort to try and figure out where I stand on religion.

 

[NCCommish]

Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews was written around 94 AD. It's not like we don't have writings from those times, Herodotus dates back to 5th century BC. Who were some of the known scholors/writers from the time of Christ?

Th problem is Jesus wasn't written about by very many people. And even less survived. In fact if we are to believe the impact the Bible ascribes to him then we have to wonder where are all the writings? He should be every where in multiple texts by multiple authors. But he isn't. Now personally I believe that there was an apocalyptic preacher named Jesus. I believe he was one of the several dozen such preachers known to exist at that time. They all allegedly performed miracles. I believe that Jesus had the most savvy followers of the time. His story was changed to fit into more acceptable conventions to the Romans and Greeks. They inflated his story and wrote ads for him. Those are what gospels are after all. I don't believe he rose from the dead or was born of a virgin. Any more than I believe Zeus had sex with Alcmene and placed the babe at Hera's breast so it would be partially immortal and become known to us as Hercules.

 

[Guest]

Why does it upset people that some choose to believe in Jesus?The timing of this thread and some posts that read like attacks really makes me

This might not be the Jesus thread for you.And who here looks upset?

to whom? jesus's dad?? no real documentation that he exists either... seems to be an absentee slum lord suffering from paranoia, schizophrenia and poor self-esteem at best...

 

[Guest]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Right. Or left some art, scientific writings, or JESUS WAS HERE graffiti maybe...something to let people down the road know that he had their backs.

Well he is the main character in the most widely read book for nearly 2000 years straight.

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

Why are you so upset?

 

[Ilov80s]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Right. Or left some art, scientific writings, or JESUS WAS HERE graffiti maybe...something to let people down the road know that he had their backs.

Well he is the main character in the most widely read book for nearly 2000 years straight.

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

Right, it would have been helpful if he created something to promote his ideas...something that people could share and pass on, something that last not just centuries, but millenia. Something that could cross racial, ethnic and geographical boundaries.

 

[jon_mx]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

 

[NCCommish]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

 

[jon_mx]

Right, it would have been helpful if he created something to promote his ideas...something that people could share and pass on, something that last not just centuries, but millenia. Something that could cross racial, ethnic and geographical boundaries.

It has. And you have twists things really badly to turn anything in the Bible into being racists. It is about as race neutral as possible, although people have over the ages twisted it into things that are not there.

 

[jon_mx]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

He causes a stir among the Jewish leaders. It was not something Romans cared one bit about.

 

[Chadstroma]

Who believes there was never even a preacher named Jesus during the time described?

I think even most atheists would concede there was a historical Jesus

What counts as a historical Jesus?Anyone named Yeshua who lived between 100 BC and 100 AD? There were lots and lots of historical Jesuses.

Or anyone who died and rose again three days later to be seated at the right and of the creator of the universe? I don't think any atheists would concede that such a person existed.

Or something in between? What does it take?

I think the point is that the person known as Jesus Christ, of which the Christian religion is focused on, was indeed a very real person. There is only a very small minority of individuals who say that there was never such a person. Now, the nature of that person and what He did and said etc is where everyone mostly disagrees. From just some Jewish guy who had a fanatical following to being the Son of God- and all in between.

And a very large majority are basing their opinion on what evidence again?

Wikipedia has a run down of the sources used as evidence for the historical Jesus. Perhaps one of the most compelling pieces of evidence is the existence of the Church. If you deny that Christ existed then you have to explain the Apostles. Did they exist? Did nearly all of them really die martyrs deaths? In the case of John, what do you do with the contemporary/near contemporary sources such as Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp writing about the Apostles (roughly in the 90's AD)?

It is a tough position to hold to say that He did not exist. It is impossible to prove that He did not while there is evidence that He did. Whether you reject that evidence or not is up to you. You may say that it is not enough evidence but again you then have a whole set of new questions to answer. That is why most individuals who do not hold Orthodox Christian views on the person of Christ attack things other than his existence such as whether the resurrection is historical fact (think Crossan here) or the sources (think Gospel of Q here) and so forth.

 

[Ilov80s]

Right, it would have been helpful if he created something to promote his ideas...something that people could share and pass on, something that last not just centuries, but millenia. Something that could cross racial, ethnic and geographical boundaries.

It has. And you have twists things really badly to turn anything in the Bible into being racists. It is about as race neutral as possible, although people have over the ages twisted it into things that are not there.

sarcasmyour head

 

[NCCommish]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

He causes a stir among the Jewish leaders. It was not something Romans cared one bit about.

I think you underestimate just how involved the Romans were in the area at the time. Supposedly the arrest of Jesus for treason destabilized Judea. Huge crowds, riots, etc. But the Romans don't record any of that? Again unlikely.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

Jewish historians point to the historical Jesus. Unfortunately, at least in the case of Josephus, it appears that additions were made to his historical account that tried to answer divinity claims. However, it cannot be denied his non-edited accounts described the human Jesus. There are numerous sources - the easiest synopsis is just look up historical Jesus on Wikipedia and they cite numerous claims and counterclaims from Jewish, pagan and Roman sources concerning the historical figure of Jesus. Again, these do not in any way address the divine aspects of his nature - they just point to the existence of the historical figure.

Having looked at wiki, it remains true that I've never seen anything to allow for a definitive claim. I see no concrete evidence.

That's fine, people use different standards for what they consider evidence. I simply directed you there to get an overview of extra-biblical claims for the historical Jesus. That question is one that dogged me for a long time. How did I know that there was even a person upon which the Bible and many Christian belief systems were built on. I guess my standards were just lower because I eventually came to the conclusion that the person existed. As for the claims to divinity, that is another story and resides solely on religious texts and tradition passed down by others. Yes, one could have that a ha moment of personal experience - but in reality that is not what the OP was asking for.

 

[Ilov80s]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

Well the impact was somewhat like a snowball going down hill. I don't think any Roman at the time would have expected the empire to follow Jesus' teachings, yet alone it becoming the dominant force in all of Europe 1000 years later. In addition, we do have contemporary historical accounts of Jesus from Josephus and Tacitus.

 

[Chadstroma]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

The Empire was not affected until well after His death. Opposing Him really was only some Jews who held power. Once they managed to have the Prefect execute Him, in their mind the problem is over and done with. They have no reason to write 'against' Him. The Empire, in Rome, would never have known of Him if not for the growth of the Church. Judea was a minor province and Jesus, at the time, would have been one of an ocean full of 'trouble makers'. His influence would have been known until years later- why would you expect one of His enemies at the time to write about Him?

 

[Apple Jack]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Right. Or left some art, scientific writings, or JESUS WAS HERE graffiti maybe...something to let people down the road know that he had their backs.

Well he is the main character in the most widely read book for nearly 2000 years straight.

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

Right, it would have been helpful if he created something to promote his ideas...something that people could share and pass on, something that last not just centuries, but millenia. Something that could cross racial, ethnic and geographical boundaries.

I'm sensing sarcasm, but I don't know to what you are referring, because Jesus didn't "create" the Bible.

 

[Ilov80s]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Right. Or left some art, scientific writings, or JESUS WAS HERE graffiti maybe...something to let people down the road know that he had their backs.

Well he is the main character in the most widely read book for nearly 2000 years straight.

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

Right, it would have been helpful if he created something to promote his ideas...something that people could share and pass on, something that last not just centuries, but millenia. Something that could cross racial, ethnic and geographical boundaries.

I'm sensing sarcasm, but I don't know to what you are referring, because Jesus didn't "create" the Bible.

Christianity

 

[IvanKaramazov]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

 

[Kumerica]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Right. Or left some art, scientific writings, or JESUS WAS HERE graffiti maybe...something to let people down the road know that he had their backs.

Well he is the main character in the most widely read book for nearly 2000 years straight.

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

Right, it would have been helpful if he created something to promote his ideas...something that people could share and pass on, something that last not just centuries, but millenia. Something that could cross racial, ethnic and geographical boundaries.

I'm sensing sarcasm, but I don't know to what you are referring, because Jesus didn't "create" the Bible.

Christianity

Jesus: "Don't put your Christianity on me--you started that. You just took what I was telling you and did it wrong."

 

[loose circuits]

Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews was written around 94 AD. It's not like we don't have writings from those times, Herodotus dates back to 5th century BC. Who were some of the known scholors/writers from the time of Christ?

Th problem is Jesus wasn't written about by very many people. And even less survived. In fact if we are to believe the impact the Bible ascribes to him then we have to wonder where are all the writings? He should be every where in multiple texts by multiple authors. But he isn't. Now personally I believe that there was an apocalyptic preacher named Jesus. I believe he was one of the several dozen such preachers known to exist at that time. They all allegedly performed miracles. I believe that Jesus had the most savvy followers of the time. His story was changed to fit into more acceptable conventions to the Romans and Greeks. They inflated his story and wrote ads for him. Those are what gospels are after all. I don't believe he rose from the dead or was born of a virgin. Any more than I believe Zeus had sex with Alcmene and placed the babe at Hera's breast so it would be partially immortal and become known to us as Hercules.

i think you have to understand the day & age a little more. Even many of the Jewish Manuscript were simply passed down from word-of-mouth. Sometimes, the classroom in Antiquity was simply the teacher reading a manuscript and the students copying it down because this was before the day of the printing press.There were 5000 different manuscripts of the New Testament written in Greek that have been discovered in different places. All saying the same thing. In that day and age it was almost impossible to reproduce something like that, and I am sure an argument could be made that no other manuscript from Antiquity survived in that manner. Many of the teachings were passed down by quotations of the church fathers in the 1st 4 centuries and many scholars say that their teachings completely match the Greek manuscripts. How does that happen?Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius all referred to Jesus in their teachings. These guys weren't Christians but they are proof he existed at the least as a historical figure.Why, if you were going to make up a story about someone escaping from a tomb in that day and age would you have one of the witnesses be Mary Magdalene who is a female with a sketchy past? Females were thought of as inferior not unlike the Middle East of today. How and why did James, who was Jesus' half brother, go from unbeliever to believer after Jesus was dead? If Jesus didn't reveal himself to him after he had passed. How did Paul go from faithful Jew to Christian? Both of them faced severe persecution for their beliefs, yet continued in their missions. How did the apostles go from questioning Jesus during and after his execution to leading the Church through it's new existence? How does some made up stories expand so rapidly if there is no basis? How does Jesus fulfill like 40 different prophecies that were lead out in the New Testament. There are just too many variables here to say that he never (or doesn't) exist...the odds of all this surviving and becoming what it is today if it was just some made up fairy tale is like 1 in a trillion

 

[wikkidpissah]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message.

it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

 

[Apple Jack]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

I like it.

 

[timschochet]

Jesus' existence doesn't give me any trouble. I believe it.

Jesus' position as the son of God doesn't give me any trouble. I don't believe it, but I can understand it.

Jesus AS God and as the Son of God at the same time- that continues to make my head reel no matter how many times ernest Christians attempt to explain it to me, probably because they don't really understand it themselves. If Jesus is God why is He talking to Himself, begging His Dad (who is also supposed to be Him) to do this or do that, to remove His burdon or forgive these people, etc.?

 

[Ilov80s]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

That pretty much sums it up. Jesus was a great man and too many of those carrying his banner are not worthy.

 

[Chadstroma]

Jesus' existence doesn't give me any trouble. I believe it.Jesus' position as the son of God doesn't give me any trouble. I don't believe it, but I can understand it.Jesus AS God and as the Son of God at the same time- that continues to make my head reel no matter how many times ernest Christians attempt to explain it to me, probably because they don't really understand it themselves. If Jesus is God why is He talking to Himself, begging His Dad (who is also supposed to be Him) to do this or do that, to remove His burdon or forgive these people, etc.?

What should give you more head reeling is being fully Son of God and Son of Man at the same time.

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

Dr Gobbler there was at least one Jew named Jesus. The man the Christianity is based around was Jewish.

I don't believe it, that dude was Mexican.

 

[matuski]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

I'd say books and followers is a pretty poor showing for a god... but that is just me.

 

[loose circuits]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

That pretty much sums it up. Jesus was a great man and too many of those carrying his banner are not worthy.

the whole concept of Christianity is based on the fact that none of us our worthy

 

[wikkidpissah]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

That pretty much sums it up. Jesus was a great man and too many of those carrying his banner are not worthy.

the whole concept of Christianity is based on the fact that none of us our worthy

it used to be & i liked it then. now its "i'm more worthy than you cuz i'm on the winning team"

 

[loose circuits]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

That pretty much sums it up. Jesus was a great man and too many of those carrying his banner are not worthy.

the whole concept of Christianity is based on the fact that none of us our worthy

it used to be & i liked it then. now its "i'm more worthy than you cuz i'm on the winning team"

Jesus never would have judged someone like that. Not sure where you spend your time, but the Christians I know (or have experience with) don't act that way.

 

[wikkidpissah]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

That pretty much sums it up. Jesus was a great man and too many of those carrying his banner are not worthy.

the whole concept of Christianity is based on the fact that none of us our worthy

it used to be & i liked it then. now its "i'm more worthy than you cuz i'm on the winning team"

Jesus never would have judged someone like. Not sure where you spend your time, but the Christians I know or have experience with don't act that way

someone scholarly help me with my precious friend here. when i read the the "red words" i see little but judgement.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is where it gets interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desposyni

 

[Dexter]

Many people shared the name. Christ's given name, commonly Romanized as Yeshua, was quite common in first-century Galilee. (Jesus comes from the transliteration of Yeshua into Greek and then English.) Archaeologists have unearthed the tombs of 71 Yeshuas from the period of Jesus' death. The name also appears 30 times in the Old Testament in reference to four separate characters—including a descendent of Aaron who helped to distribute offerings of grain (2 Chronicles 31:15) and a man who accompanied former captives of Nebuchadnezzar back to Jerusalem (Ezra 2:2).

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/12/happy_birthday_dear_yeshua_happy_birthday_to_you.html

So I'm going to say yes. At some point there was a preacher and his name was Jesus or Yeshua or Horus or whatever people changed the bible to.

 

[jomar]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

Actually, no I don't. But carry on with whatever crazy #### you believe because some people wrote books about it many, many years after. I take it you believe is Islam as well? People wrote books about Muhammad too. Therefore, it must be true.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

Actually, no I don't. But carry on with whatever crazy #### you believe because some people wrote books about it many, many years after. I take it you believe is Islam as well? People wrote books about Muhammad too. Therefore, it must be true.

I don't believe in Islam, no, but I am extremely confident that Muhammed existed.That's sort of beside the point, though. If you want to argue that Jesus didn't exist or that Christianity is false, the argument you don't want to use is "If Jesus really rose from the dead, people would have written about it." That's a slow one over the middle.

 

[shader]

There was most definitely a historical person we refer to as Jesus. I believe he was the son of God, but I can easily see where many people think that the stories told about him were hyperbole, or just pumped up PR trying to get people on board with the whole Christianity thing. The man on which these stories were built undoubtedly existed.

What evidence do you base this on?I'm in the camp that a man named jesus probably existed, but I've never seen anything that one could reasonably use as a basis to make the bolded statements.

Eyewitness writings. Pretty much the same reasons we know about anyone that lived 2,000 years ago.

 

[shader]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

Actually, no I don't. But carry on with whatever crazy #### you believe because some people wrote books about it many, many years after. I take it you believe is Islam as well? People wrote books about Muhammad too. Therefore, it must be true.

Muhammad was also a real, historical person.

 

[jomar]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

Actually, no I don't. But carry on with whatever crazy #### you believe because some people wrote books about it many, many years after. I take it you believe is Islam as well? People wrote books about Muhammad too. Therefore, it must be true.

I don't believe in Islam, no, but I am extremely confident that Muhammed existed.That's sort of beside the point, though. If you want to argue that Jesus didn't exist or that Christianity is false, the argument you don't want to use is "If Jesus really rose from the dead, people would have written about it." That's a slow one over the middle.

Perhaps then you can point to where I argued that Jesus didn't exist?Arguing Christianity is false is an exercise in futility. I like to deal with things that can be proved true rather than argue about ridiculous ideas people have that can't be proved false.

 

[jomar]

I really don't care whether or not Jesus existed. If he did, that doesn't mean he's the son of God so does it really matter?

 

[Dexter]

I colored eggs to honor the zombie Jesus so he will not eat my brains for another.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

Well the impact was somewhat like a snowball going down hill. I don't think any Roman at the time would have expected the empire to follow Jesus' teachings, yet alone it becoming the dominant force in all of Europe 1000 years later. In addition, we do have contemporary historical accounts of Jesus from Josephus and Tacitus.

Jesus' teaching fade away like all of his contemporary want-a-be messiahs if not for Saul. Jesus' followers all grasped and believed his message so well that they ran and hid after his execution. Why was it necessary for Jesus to reappear for the followers that spent much of three years by his side to believe? Isn't it funny that the heirs of those that actually could have witnessed Jesus are not the Christians of the past two thousand years but instead the gentiles in neighboring communities where Jesus is not recorded to have appeared on the Roman highways spread the virus like message that consumed western Europe?

 

[matuski]

There was most definitely a historical person we refer to as Jesus. I believe he was the son of God, but I can easily see where many people think that the stories told about him were hyperbole, or just pumped up PR trying to get people on board with the whole Christianity thing. The man on which these stories were built undoubtedly existed.

What evidence do you base this on?I'm in the camp that a man named jesus probably existed, but I've never seen anything that one could reasonably use as a basis to make the bolded statements.

Eyewitness writings. Pretty much the same reasons we know about anyone that lived 2,000 years ago.

Could you show us a few of these writings?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I think the existence of so many texts written by different people over a range of time indicates that someone existed. I am not sure what more you expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago and for most of his life was just an unknown child of a carpenter. Not too many video cameras back then.

I expect someone who allegedly had so much impact on the empire to be written about by contemporary scribes of that empire. They recorded the minutiae of the everyday empire business but not someone who caused a stir like this? Unlikely.

The Empire was not affected until well after His death. Opposing Him really was only some Jews who held power. Once they managed to have the Prefect execute Him, in their mind the problem is over and done with. They have no reason to write 'against' Him. The Empire, in Rome, would never have known of Him if not for the growth of the Church. Judea was a minor province and Jesus, at the time, would have been one of an ocean full of 'trouble makers'. His influence would have been known until years later- why would you expect one of His enemies at the time to write about Him?

Why was Pilot even in Jerusalem and not comfortably enjoying his waterfront home? The notion that Jesus was executed with the highest form of Roman punishment meant to be gruesome "don't ever go there" deterrent because he upset some Jewish leaders seems pretty laughable. The Romans were spread thin defending their vast empire had thus had zero tolerance for trouble makers like Jesus. If he did as the bible says then Jesus was guilty of more than enough to catch the attention of Roman authorities and more than enough to be hung along side of the two other rebels that day.

 

[jon_mx]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

Actually, no I don't. But carry on with whatever crazy #### you believe because some people wrote books about it many, many years after. I take it you believe is Islam as well? People wrote books about Muhammad too. Therefore, it must be true.

Muhammad was also a real, historical person.

Sure...but Muhammad's message was the suck.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

You'd think a guy who raised people from the dead, and who himself reappeared after dying, would've received a little more press at the time.

Agreed. People would have written a bunch of books about him, he would have attracted a lot of followers, and probably a religion or something would spring up based on his teachings.Edit: I see other people already jumped all over this one. jomar obviously wishes he had given this one a little more though before hitting "post."

Which one of those books was written within a decade or even three of Jesus' execution? Other than possibly Luke, which ones even claim to be historical?

 

[jon_mx]

i have a long record of insisting that religion is impeding our progress as a species, but even i cant deny how exeptional were the words attributed to Christ. so contrary to what would have been expected from a "messiah" were they that i cant believe the ethic was developed, then the Christ created with a biography to match the message. it is my deep sense that Jesus was a revolutionary of the first order, had to call himself a messiah to compete with the Jewish mania of the first "end times" and that we'll long regret what is lost in his message by misuse from the people who run his Fan Clubs.

That pretty much sums it up. Jesus was a great man and too many of those carrying his banner are not worthy.

Nobody is worthy, and basing your faith on the behavior of people and what people say is a losing proposition.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

The message of the bible is "Love thy neighbor". Everything else is to support this idea. When we are brave enough to embrace this idea good things happen. Sadly most (me) are too cowardly to ever give much more than token support to this great gift.

 

[jon_mx]

The Bible reads like bad fiction. I'm talking about something he wrote to be passed through the ages. Like, listen, I know it sounds ridiculous, but seriously, I'm son the God.

The message of the bible is "Love thy neighbor". Everything else is to support this idea. When we are brave enough to embrace this idea good things happen. Sadly most (me) are too cowardly to ever give much more than token support to this great gift.

I would say the message is one of faith, love, and grace.

 

[Otis]

We know King Tut was a real historical person because we found a body.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

We know King Tut was a real historical person because we found a body.

Those that were crucified were usually left out to rot and for the animals to feed.