I think there is a Jesus here for everyone, all depending on how one interprets The Bible. Interpreting religious texts is not a science but some have claimed to have found the truth while others are still wondering what the heck Paul was on about.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did Jesus actually exist as a historical figure?
- Thread starter leibowde84
- Start date
leibowde84
Veteran Member
I think Paul was just a power-grabber who wanted a reason for people to listen to him. He never even met Jesus.
People love reruns.
roger1440
I do stuff
It reminds me a little of the Y2K. The greatest catastrophe known to mankind that never happened. At the time I was thinking of getting a T shirt that said, "I survived the Y2K".
leibowde84
Veteran Member
If I haven't seen it ... it's new to me!
JM2C
CHRISTIAN
Yes! Please follow this link. It’s only about 60 pages.
How certain are we that Jesus was historical? | ReligiousForums.com
ruselwilliams
New Member
ruselwilliams
New Member
The real problem is most Christians are to lazy or just so bigoted they refuse to even consider such a topic full stop! To them it is blasphemy, totally opposed to how they were brought up or indoctrinated. I know I use to be one.
Yet I wrote the Bible out at the age of 12.
A scientific approach trains a man to clearly consider a comprehensive view of all the available facts, without prejudice or passion.Science though lacks imagination, it wants no glamour thrown around it's discovery, just raw facts. Yet those apparent facts available to me after 10 years of research would suggest there is no historical Jesus or even a need for such a matter theophany, beside the fact such a name never existed in the English language until the last 400 years when a "J" was introduced into the alphabet. Jesus is a latinization of the word Jesse, the fulfilment of the psychic potential of Joshua of the O.T. Some will notice in the A.V.Bible, Joshua of the O.T. is translated as Jesus in the N.T.
Of course it's editor Sir Francis Bacon was a master of occult meanings.
As Niel Bohr said regarding the nature of Quantum Physics, if a person was totally familiar with the subject, they would be more than surprised but rather deeply shocked. The same with the Bible, we are looking at it through the limitation of our own senses and prejudices, once you see through this cloud of obscurations, the" Letter of the Word" crumbles away like the walls of Jericho under the seventh march, exposing the new world of reality "The Spirit of the Word."
I suggest if you want to know the evidence of an historical Jesus, do not look to me for an answer. Can a hungry belly be filled with descriptions of food? This I have found, that truth is a reality and cannot be had from finite words.You must eat for yourself, another cannot. All the names of the Gospels I suggest have esoteric meanings, that need a certain state of consciousness to cognize. This is not for the lazy who want to be spoon fed doctrine.I cannot give you this, only the Spirit of truth in your own consciousness can, if you have prepared a virginal place free of the clutter of the thoughts of the religious man.
Christ is that uterine state of virginal consciousness/spirit, the original theophany being oracular, according to the prophetic Scriptures[O.T.] So you have to discover that within, it has to be your own immaculate, uncontaminated conception of the Logos, the original "I" of all of us.
Christ must first be born in the manger of the heart. Even reason's words are but labels. For perception comes before words. The eye sees first, then words are assembled for it's perception.
But like with a menu, no matter how apettizing the words may suggest, you alone must eat and digest to gain anything. Truth I have found comes as a wordless perception, just as a beautiful flower is perceived in an instant, until words come to take away the glory of that first epithany, leaving it as an empty husk for memory to recall out of it's graveyard. To confine Christ to the graveyard of history, maybe reason. But reason is always subject to contradiction, truth is not. That is why Paul said "We can do nothing against the truth, only for it."
Paul also stated "even if we have known Christ according to the flesh[tell me who here has?], henceforth we know Him no longer." That is why Paul never spoke of meeting an historical Jesus, only knew Him according to the Scriptures.Not once did Paul say he met Jesus, even though living in the same time zone and place.
The quest for an historical Jesus,is also a quest for the ideal of every man. This led me to the discovery that I too had no historical existence, except from the graveyard of memory.My own existence is conceptual The story of Jesus being the story of every man, who must crucify the old man/ego, before the spirit of truth can reveal the real nature of things and man's own inner states of consciousness of which Christ is the highest. Our life flows like the ebb of the tide of the Ocean,abounding with waves of knowledge, driven by the currents in diverse directions, some theism, some athiestic, some agnostic, some materialistic. But what is below the surface is the real substance, and being out of sight is eternal. The things that are seen being finite, have a surface existence that so hypnotises us.
The real error man has made in the past, has been drawing a line of demarcation between men and their brothers, as religion has. To say I am a christian to my fellow brother a muslim is to create division and division leads to violence I suggest.We then are also cutting ourselves off from the natural order, for nature never births us with such labels.The idea then of an historical Jesus can only be birthed I suggest out of memory's graveyard, their nomenclatures masculine and that too conceptual, worse than a corpse these concepts for they have never had the breath of life in them. Jesus cannot be birthed in the quickened moment of the Now, unless we can see the face of Jesus on our Muslim brother.
Yet I wrote the Bible out at the age of 12.
A scientific approach trains a man to clearly consider a comprehensive view of all the available facts, without prejudice or passion.Science though lacks imagination, it wants no glamour thrown around it's discovery, just raw facts. Yet those apparent facts available to me after 10 years of research would suggest there is no historical Jesus or even a need for such a matter theophany, beside the fact such a name never existed in the English language until the last 400 years when a "J" was introduced into the alphabet. Jesus is a latinization of the word Jesse, the fulfilment of the psychic potential of Joshua of the O.T. Some will notice in the A.V.Bible, Joshua of the O.T. is translated as Jesus in the N.T.
Of course it's editor Sir Francis Bacon was a master of occult meanings.
As Niel Bohr said regarding the nature of Quantum Physics, if a person was totally familiar with the subject, they would be more than surprised but rather deeply shocked. The same with the Bible, we are looking at it through the limitation of our own senses and prejudices, once you see through this cloud of obscurations, the" Letter of the Word" crumbles away like the walls of Jericho under the seventh march, exposing the new world of reality "The Spirit of the Word."
I suggest if you want to know the evidence of an historical Jesus, do not look to me for an answer. Can a hungry belly be filled with descriptions of food? This I have found, that truth is a reality and cannot be had from finite words.You must eat for yourself, another cannot. All the names of the Gospels I suggest have esoteric meanings, that need a certain state of consciousness to cognize. This is not for the lazy who want to be spoon fed doctrine.I cannot give you this, only the Spirit of truth in your own consciousness can, if you have prepared a virginal place free of the clutter of the thoughts of the religious man.
Christ is that uterine state of virginal consciousness/spirit, the original theophany being oracular, according to the prophetic Scriptures[O.T.] So you have to discover that within, it has to be your own immaculate, uncontaminated conception of the Logos, the original "I" of all of us.
Christ must first be born in the manger of the heart. Even reason's words are but labels. For perception comes before words. The eye sees first, then words are assembled for it's perception.
But like with a menu, no matter how apettizing the words may suggest, you alone must eat and digest to gain anything. Truth I have found comes as a wordless perception, just as a beautiful flower is perceived in an instant, until words come to take away the glory of that first epithany, leaving it as an empty husk for memory to recall out of it's graveyard. To confine Christ to the graveyard of history, maybe reason. But reason is always subject to contradiction, truth is not. That is why Paul said "We can do nothing against the truth, only for it."
Paul also stated "even if we have known Christ according to the flesh[tell me who here has?], henceforth we know Him no longer." That is why Paul never spoke of meeting an historical Jesus, only knew Him according to the Scriptures.Not once did Paul say he met Jesus, even though living in the same time zone and place.
The quest for an historical Jesus,is also a quest for the ideal of every man. This led me to the discovery that I too had no historical existence, except from the graveyard of memory.My own existence is conceptual The story of Jesus being the story of every man, who must crucify the old man/ego, before the spirit of truth can reveal the real nature of things and man's own inner states of consciousness of which Christ is the highest. Our life flows like the ebb of the tide of the Ocean,abounding with waves of knowledge, driven by the currents in diverse directions, some theism, some athiestic, some agnostic, some materialistic. But what is below the surface is the real substance, and being out of sight is eternal. The things that are seen being finite, have a surface existence that so hypnotises us.
The real error man has made in the past, has been drawing a line of demarcation between men and their brothers, as religion has. To say I am a christian to my fellow brother a muslim is to create division and division leads to violence I suggest.We then are also cutting ourselves off from the natural order, for nature never births us with such labels.The idea then of an historical Jesus can only be birthed I suggest out of memory's graveyard, their nomenclatures masculine and that too conceptual, worse than a corpse these concepts for they have never had the breath of life in them. Jesus cannot be birthed in the quickened moment of the Now, unless we can see the face of Jesus on our Muslim brother.
outhouse
Atheistically
No that is factually incorrect.
We are searching far past methodology like yours that uses allegory and metaphor, that make no direct inquiry to a possible historical core behind the theology and mythology.
Im sorry but this kind of statement is ridiculous in a thread that has something to do with reality of past events.
outhouse
Atheistically
Off topic sir.
And not in any way historical to the people.
No we are not here dealing with Christ of faith.
Were actually looking past the theology and mythology looking for a historical core if you were actually paying attention and not proselytizing,
outhouse
Atheistically
Who's proselytizing here? For all we know the Christ of faith is what we are dealing with. If for whatever reason you care to look to The Bible for an historical core you will no doubt find it, and with the full blessings of Wikipedia. Your devotion is well noted.No we are not here dealing with Christ of faith.
Were actually looking past the theology and mythology looking for a historical core if you were actually paying attention and not proselytizing,
outhouse
Atheistically
repeating academia is not proselytizing
It is addressing the current state of study.
Now we all know you have a personal problem with the state of education and knowledge on the topic. You would be the one who cannot let it go, and never provides any credible source while bashing academia.
Reading religious texts is not a science therefore proclaiming to know the real Jesus and accusing others of having a problem for not sharing in your beliefs is proselytizing of the worst order.
outhouse
Atheistically
repeating academia is not proselytizing
It is addressing the current state of study.
Now we all know you have a personal problem with the state of education and knowledge on the topic. You would be the one who cannot let it go, and never provides any credible source while bashing academia
outhouse
Atheistically
Nobody that wrote about Jesus actually met the guy.
outhouse
Atheistically
And not one person ever claimed he did not exist, who lived when the books and traditions were being written about him. Not even his enemies, nor the movements enemies.
When you create a mythical character, you place him 500 ish years in the past. Similar to Noah, Abraham and Moses.
You don't place him a within living memory, AND place him on stage of the largest rock concert in front of half a million people and claim he was the star of the show.
And then still don't have a single person claim he was not there headlining the show.