Did Jesus REALLY exist?

Post Reply New Topic

Hmm maybe ..but maybe not..
It's not like the historical Jesus..is the only reported dude
crucified in history.. ya know..

And not surprising really that it happened to someone
else thinking out of the 'cultural box'..and all of that...

And yes..it often happened to more than one person at a time..
and YES there are reports of folks surviving it...
Even possibly Jesus..LITERALLY SURVIVING IT..
NOT crawling out of death alive out of a tomb after three
days or any of that mythological metaphor story stuff..:)

People who were crucified most often died of asphyxiation historically
speaking and that was a long drawn out process of suffering..
Perhaps up to three days on the cross..before actually dying..

And per those historical record stories..and all of that
in the bible..the new testament part..Jesus only stayed up there
a few hours..so yes..indeedy..he could have survived..
technically.. unless he died of bloody wounds and or stuff like that...

But again..once again..i'll link my handy dandy..little video for potential evidence..
as i do not want anyone to think..i am pulling this info..out my ass or
anything like that...;)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY0Ib3aPG6Y[/youtube]

And no.. this is a BBC documentary.. they do not publish 'fly by night' crap..

And YES .. it is narrated in part.. by one of the highest regarded religious scholars
in the world...

Enjoy..if ya get time and or wanna watch it.

Well. I seem to learn something new every day.

Why does anyone suppose that this matters in the slightest?

For a Christian, belief in a historical Jesus is entirely irrelevant to faith, and to compliance with the moral teachings of Christianity. In the presence of faith, salvation is not dependent upon whether or not the crucifiction and resurrection were historical fact or human fiction.

And if one is not a Christian, then a historical Jesus provides absolutely no additional weight to the relevance of any of the teachings attributed to him. "Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy," is a valuable sentiment regardless of who said it.

The notion that Jesus didn't really exist is not new fad - and it has never carried enough weight to convince the majority of scholars to support that notion.

True.. Universal Truths..do not change..depending on whoever said them...

or Even depending on whatever vessels or vehicles of human differing languages carry them..

or for that matter.. the differing religions..

that house the

essence of Truth...

again.. no matter
who expresses them..in whatever..vehicle or vessel..
that carries 'them'..the ESSENCE OF TRUTH....
REMAINs the same.

True..this is apparent..if one pursues all the scholarly literature..related to the historical Jesus...

and does not rely on 'arm chair enthusiasts'...

It's like theorizing that President Obama..is not a citizen..and all of that..
Tea Party stuff....

The professional resources..simply do not reflect 'it'...either one..of these conspiracy theories.....
People on the autism spectrum.. overall ..online..are certainly not immune to this..
I know that for sure now..but am quite surprised..to see the extent of it....

Well, you don't live in the USA.

Over here, we have LOTS of people who take quite seriously what they consider to be a literal interpretation of the Bible. More seriously than anything else, including science. For them, Jesus is about to return, just after we've had a huge war to protect Israel from the Moslems. Remember, too: it is our religious folks who are not only the most vehemently opposed to gay rights and abortion rights, but the most hypocritical about it, too.

It is starting to look like Christianity was the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the human race. The Koran and the Book or Mormon are obvious frauds. But, this one? "Believe in Jesus, and then you'll get to go to Heaven", becomes especially ridiculous if Jesus never really existed.

Moreover, the moral teachings, "turn the other cheek, just pay your taxes, and carry a Roman soldier's pack an extra mile for him", would seem to be consistent with simply wanting to keep the populace obedient and under control. An opiate for the masses. But, sure, the masses do need their opiates.

Well, that's not much of a rebuttal.

Some of the scholars may have a vested interest in supporting the notion that Jesus was a real, flesh-and-blood character. Particularly if they are employed by a church, or if their livelihood otherwise depends upon it.

Evidence please..

That's just speculation at best...
the scientific method..has no friends..or conspiracies...
most of the time..
the reason for it's design
as such..
the scientific method..that's common
sense 2.

These religious scholar folks deal with peer review..
not the congregation...

If a preacher..priest..deacon..
or atheist from the wrong planet
was doing the talking..
then you've half a 'reasonable' point..
i think..

but yah..common sense and
all of
that.

Last edited by aghogday on 04 Feb 2014, 12:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

True..that the bible and new testament is adulterated..with opinions to control the masses..with fear and subjugation..

But the essence of truth..like the power of the Kingdom of heaven is in the NOW..
and Ye are all gods..
and love is the way to bliss..
never changes..
as Universal Truths.

Many religions carry these seeds of 'gold'...
Life is always one of discernment..
for those with common sense...
One cannot reasonably throw the baby out with
a little dirty water...

Life is a river..

Not a friggin..mathematical formula..

Ain't nuthing perfect in life..

Take the flow
and enjoy..
IS what i always
suggest..
in the
NOW

It wasn't intended to be a rebuttal, just a statement.
But considering that Christianity had originally been considered an outlaw sect by both the Roman and Judean authorities, and that both had persecuted the early church, I find it hard to believe that the Romans had simply invented it to serve as an example of obedience. If anything, I think an argument can be made that those historians who deny Christ's existence are the ones who have an agenda.

Particularly if their church mates..made fun of them for being nerds..
in Sunday School...

Bias..it is among us..
ALL
But again..the peer review
and the scientific method..
gives the professionals..
the edge..
over Arm Chair
Theologists...Psychologists...
wanna be scientists..
or whateva....
i'll give some credence..
to the professionals
who make a living..
finding truth..
through peer reviewed..
channels....
whoever they
may
be.

Okay, I finally watched it. Very interesting. They've made the assumption that Jesus actually did exist. But, they seem to agree with everyone else that the Christian gospels missed the point.

What if one has not made up their mind?

I would also think (hope) it would be severely undermining to the faith of many Christians if Jesus never existed. All the divine claims he made would become useless, and it would make sense to revert to something like Judaism.

I'll go out on a limb, and say denying that Christ was a historic person (forget for the moment any claims of divinity for him) probably says more about the particular historian's own agenda than even about his theories themselves.

Okay. Watch this interview with Joseph Atwill

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g40Eck6gW7U[/youtube]

and tell us what you think his agenda are.