Did Christ really exist ?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Yes in 5BC they got the idea for a messiah.

5BC?

The concept of a world savior was popular in the Persian religion. Around 5BC after the Persians defeated the Babylonians ...

No.

After the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BCE, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon besieged Jerusalem, resulting in tribute being paid by King Jehoiakim.[1] Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute in Nebuchadnezzar's fourth year, which led to another siege in Nebuchadnezzar's seventh year, culminating with the death of Jehoiakim and the exile to Babylonia of King Jeconiah, his court and many others; Jeconiah's successor Zedekiah and others were exiled in Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year; a later deportation occurred in Nebuchadnezzar's 23rd year. The dates, numbers of deportations, and numbers of deportees given in the biblical accounts vary.[2] These deportations are dated to 597 BCE for the first, with others dated at 587/586 BCE, and 582/581 BCE respectively.[3]

After the fall of Babylon to the Persian king Cyrus the Great in 539 BCE, exiled Judeans were permitted to return to Judah.[4][5] According to the biblical book of Ezra, construction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem began around 537 BCE. All these events are considered significant in Jewish history and culture, and had a far-reaching impact on the development of Judaism. [ source ]

537 BC is neither 5BC nor, even, 5th Century BCE. Perhaps were you actually interested in the history you would have known that.

 

[Starlight]

Yes of course he did exist. Most historians believe so also.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

While historians debate over weather a man named Jesus was a teacher at the time and was later mythicized into a demigod, no historian believes in the gospel version of Jesus.

And so it is useful to distinguish between historicity and divinity.

A useful place to start might be to ask which scenario should be deemed more likely, that the Jerusalem Church was real or that is was a fabrication of Paul and Luke.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

We let Skywalker derail this thread. I repent of playing the game. Let's get back to history and dump the theological BS.

^ This.

 

[Skywalker]

Depends on which belief? It's a fact that these concepts:

"Historical features of Zoroastrianism, such as messianism, judgment after death, heaven and hell, and free will may have influenced other religious and philosophical systems, including Second Temple Judaism, Gnosticism, Greek philosophy,[7] Christianity, Islam,[8] the Baháʼí Faith, and Buddhism.[9]"

were not part of Judaism until the Persian invasion. The Persian rulers invited all the exiled Jewish religious leaders to return to their city center and establish their religion. Over the next few centuries Jewish scribes and prophets started getting ideas that they too were going to get a messiah and Gods agent Satan was also in a epic war with God and the world was going to end in fire and destruction.
Obviously some concepts already existed. Redemption is a theme running through all religions so that was obviously there since the beginning. It's probably part of the Canaanite religion as well.

The Zoroastrians copied the Christians.

 

[paarsurrey]

Correct ─ in each case the claim is made by the author.

However, in Mark, Jesus himself denies that he's of the line of David.
Or it is another of a long list of inconsistencies which influence our interpretation of the documents.
Since it bears on the credibility of the documents, it's part of the evidence and needs to be weighed accordingly.
Correct. But how is that relevant?
I don't claim to speak for skepticism as such. I simply approve of skepticism as part of reasoned enquiry, and set out to employ it accordingly.

Is there a set Skepticism methodology or Skepticism Method for this reasoned enquiry that is not available to others and that they employ against others except itself and holding it to be above board, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

The gospel writer Matthew calls Jesus the son of David, and historians in those times had to be accurate in what they wrote.

Magenta refers.
Does it mean the gospel writers wrote things against the view of Jesus, please? Were they authorized to do so from Jesus, or they had their own selfish aim or motives, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

The gospel writer Matthew calls Jesus the son of David, and historians in those times had to be accurate in what they wrote.

Magenta refers.
Why the historian of that time has to be more accurate than the present historians who had since devised a sophisticated Historical Method to be more accurate than the ancient historians, please?
Or one is biased in favor of the ancient historians for one's inner reasons. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Skywalker]

Magenta refers.
Why the historian of that time has to be more accurate than the present historians who had since devised a sophisticated Historical Method to be more accurate than the ancient historians, please?
Or one is biased in favor of the ancient historians for one's inner reasons. Right, please?

Regards

Historians in those days were executed if they didn't write the right history.

 

[Skywalker]

I have heard Professor Francesca Stavrakopoulou talk about other evidence, this is over 10 years old.

Archeology of the Hebrew Bible
William Dever, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, has investigated the archeology of the ancient Near East for more than 30 years


"
One of the astonishing things is your discovery of Yahweh's connection to Asherah. Tell us about that.
In 1968, I discovered an inscription in a cemetery west of Hebron, in the hill country, at the site of Khirbet el-Qôm, a Hebrew inscription of the 8th century B.C.E. It gives the name of the deceased, and it says "blessed may he be by Yahweh"—that's good biblical Hebrew—but it says "by Yahweh and his Asherah."

Asherah is the name of the old Canaanite Mother Goddess, the consort of El, the principal deity of the Canaanite pantheon. So why is a Hebrew inscription mentioning Yahweh in connection with the Canaanite Mother Goddess? Well, in popular religion they were a pair.
The Israelite prophets and reformers denounce the Mother Goddess and all the other gods and goddesses of Canaan. But I think Asherah was widely venerated in ancient Israel. If you look at Second Kings 23, which describes the reforms of King Josiah in the late 7th century, he talks about purging the Temple of all the cult paraphernalia of Asherah. So the so-called folk religion even penetrated the Temple in Jerusalem.

Is there other evidence linking Asherah to Yahweh?
In the 1970s, Israeli archeologists digging in Kuntillet Ajrud in the Sinai found a little desert fort of the same period, and lo and behold, we have "Yahweh and Asherah" all over the place in the Hebrew inscriptions.

In the book of Kings and the book of Judges Asherash worship is spoken of negatively.

 

[Skywalker]

Magenta refers.
Does it mean the gospel writers wrote things against the view of Jesus, please? Were they authorized to do so from Jesus, or they had their own selfish aim or motives, please? Right, please?

Regards

What did the apostles gain from writing the gospel? They didnt recant when they were being persecuted.

 

[Skywalker]

Every religion says their God is perfect, how is that even a point?
"In Suppliants, of Aeschylus, Zeus is described as: "king of kings, of the happy most happy, of the perfect most perfect power, blessed Zeus"
Sup. 522. "

"Savior gods" was the actual type of gods that Jesus was modeled after? They all go through some struggle, often defeat death and save baptized members of the group by getting them into the afterlife and granting personal salvation?

Dying-and-Rising Gods: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier
Not in ancient Asia. Or anywhere else. Only the West, from Mesopotamia to North Africa and Europe. There was a very common and popular mytheme that had arisen in the Hellenistic period—from at least the death of Alexander the Great in the 300s B.C. through the Roman period, until at least Constantine in the 300s A.D. Nearly every culture created and popularized one: the Egyptians had one, the Thracians had one, the Syrians had one, the Persians had one, and so on. The Jews were actually late to the party in building one of their own, in the form of Jesus Christ. It just didn’t become popular among the Jews, and thus ended up a Gentile religion. But if any erudite religious scholar in 1 B.C. had been asked “If the Jews invented one of these gods, what would it look like?” they would have described the entire Christian religion to a T. Before it even existed. That can’t be a coincidence.

People who believe in Zeus and Horus don't believe that he came to save us and to teach us how to live. What do they have to do with Jesus?

 

[1213]

...His biography is the first and only substantial one for Jesus, the others being re-editings and re-writes of it....

Why should I believe that?

 

[paarsurrey]

Historians in those days were executed if they didn't write the right history.

And one's authentic source.
Who decided that the history written was right, and under what authority, please?

Regards

 

[blü 2]

Is there a set Skepticism methodology or Skepticism Method for this reasoned enquiry that is not available to others and that they employ against others except itself and holding it to be above board, please?

Truth is a quality of statements, and a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately reflects reality, the world external to the self. Skepticism is the habit of checking the truth of statements, including one's own.

What problem do you have with that?

 

[blü 2]

Why should I believe that?

You shouldn't. You should build your own understanding by checking out the facts for yourself, not just taking other people's word for it. The important thing is to do that impartially, not merely accepting what supports your present opinion or rejecting what goes against it, but weighing both to see which is correct.

That will allow you to present a reasoned and well-based argument for your own view when you disagree.

 

[Skywalker]

And one's authentic source.
Who decided that the history written was right, and under what authority, please?

Regards

People writing history were scrutinized. People who wrote unfavorably about leaders were punished.

 

[YoursTrue]

It suggests all the shared stories are religious syncretism. Each new culture takes basic myths and creates their own version. Similar but with their own spin. Christianity is a Jewish version of the Hellenistic religions that were popular in the area.

Or the previous look-alike religions could have quite a different turn to them. Have a nice day.

 

[YoursTrue]

People writing history were scrutinized. People who wrote unfavorably about leaders were punished.

Very good. The keeping of the scriptures and the writing of them over centuries with detailed accounts could come only from God.

 

[paarsurrey]

People writing history were scrutinized. People who wrote unfavorably about leaders were punished.

One means it is one assumption, please?

Regards