Did Jesus actually exist as a historical figure?

[outhouse]

Some people believe that Jesus was a historical person, some people do not believe that Jesus was a historical person

The only problem with your proposition is that the some are educated, and 99% of all historians and scholars.

Almost no one believes he did not exist.


So it seems that your vague statement was a bit misleading to say the least. The some people who do not think he was a real man, is the vast minority that includes biased uneducated atheist.

 

[steeltoes]

Ermm.......major logic fail there mate. We have no contemporary witness accounts of Thor, Santa or sheeesh - any ancient figure not existing. There are no such things as records of non births. Sure - there were no reports of stuff not happening.

That's OK, that sort of logic fail keeps the "vast minority [sic]" of the "biased uneducated atheist" entertained.

 

[bsdl]

Jesus was a man who did live and was crucified. The rest of the story is myth, fable, folklore and beyond all reason

 

[Unification]

I feel that Jesus must die so as we can grow in spirit, clinging to the story of Jesus will never allow us to mature in spirit, Jesus himself had to die to become the living Christ, we also need to die, that is to our carnal self, so as to become our true self, the Christ.

Agree. We live now, in present times. It's about the message, not the messenger.
I'm not sure which is sillier, teaching myths in endless amounts of biased and differing ways, or trying to prove a myth that's already a myth, false or true, running in circles in the past via the same biased and differing amounts of historical documents or "academia."
If Jesus existed as a literal human, it does not matter, he says so himself.

 

[oldbadger]

And you 'reckon' this based on what exactly?

I 'reckon' this ........ not exactly, but probably...... because of the basic reports in G-Mark.

It was useful enough to be largely copied by at least two other gospels, so why shouldn't I like it?

For me it is the best compilation of cultural hearsay that there was, and I pay attention to it.

Without it, there is very little indeed.

QUESTIONS:- G-Mark reports that there was a riot not long before Yeshua's examination by Pilate. Would you take any interest in that?
Might you feel that the riot was more serious than J's demonstration?
If you were the Prefect, responsible for good returns to Rome, which would have troubled you more?
Would you be more worried about Barabbas than a demonstrator?
Would the Jewish peasantry be more excited by a full rebel than a demonstrator and debater?
Do you believe that Pilate released a murderous rioter?

That'll do for now.

 

[oldbadger]

We will never come to a conclusion here, it is a battle of egos.

Hi.......
It is a battle for interest in minor details, with big inferences....

 

[Unification]

I know. So, why is the Gospel even considered as pretending to be historically accurate. At the very best, it's hearsay. Just listen to Serial and you will realize how unreliable even first-hand accounts are ... then think that these stories were written down a whole generation after the events took place by people who didn't witness them. Far-fetched is an understatement.

I 'reckon' this ........ not exactly, but probably...... because of the basic reports in G-Mark.

It was useful enough to be largely copied by at least two other gospels, so why shouldn't I like it?

For me it is the best compilation of cultural hearsay that there was, and I pay attention to it.

Without it, there is very little indeed.

QUESTIONS:- G-Mark reports that there was a riot not long before Yeshua's examination by Pilate. Would you take any interest in that?
Might you feel that the riot was more serious than J's demonstration?
If you were the Prefect, responsible for good returns to Rome, which would have troubled you more?
Would you be more worried about Barabbas than a demonstrator?
Would the Jewish peasantry be more excited by a full rebel than a demonstrator and debater?
Do you believe that Pilate released a murderous rioter?

That'll do for now.

When I read that, I see spiritual metaphoric. Barabbas representing the human (sinner). Pilate as the Father or "God." The human being examined/judged within.
Jesus being crucified at the place of the skull (in the head). (The devil/Ego/judas iscariot being defeated) Oneself and their ego always sit a top ones own throne and riots within the mind when trying to defeat it, before needing crucified. (The internal spiritual battle). God releasing, setting free the sinner... The human, salvation, divine marriage in ones head. The exodus of mental slavery to the promised land (Christ consciousness)
Yes, the human mind themselves loves being a rebel, they love their ego and self.
The two thieves on the cross are the western and eastern hemispheres of the brain with Jesus (awakening/higher conscious/pineal gland) as between them.

 

[Unification]

When I read that, I see spiritual metaphoric. Barabbas representing the human (sinner). Pilate as the Father or "God." The human being examined/judged within.
Jesus being crucified at the place of the skull (in the head). (The devil/Ego/judas iscariot being defeated) Oneself and their ego always sit a top ones own throne and riots within the mind when trying to defeat it, before needing crucified. (The internal spiritual battle). God releasing, setting free the sinner... The human, salvation, divine marriage in ones head. The exodus of mental slavery to the promised land (Christ consciousness)
Yes, the human mind themselves loves being a rebel, they love their ego and self.
The two thieves on the cross are the western and eastern hemispheres of the brain with Jesus (awakening/higher conscious/pineal gland) as between them.

Ask Moses(fictional character).... His personified ego named Pharoah didn't wanna give up or let go.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It was useful enough to be largely copied by at least two other gospels, so why shouldn't I like it?

I honestly do not care whether you like it. I wonder why you believe that it is factual. As for the rest, Shakespeare has been copied.

 

[ruselwilliams]

As for non sequitur's, sloppy or not is irrelevant. This argument has been going around endlessly, so to speak, because nobody has the facts, there is then no original premise to go sloppy on, nor any logical conclusion.

As long as that "I" is not connected with any objective form, now Jesus and me can both say this same "I"....which applies to all, male or female, black or white. This "I" does not discriminate. I can only insist I have no objective existence, as some may imagine "me" to be. Hence in my very absence and non action, all things are made for me. Yes I have an appearance which is conceptual, but that does not establish any eternal reality as such, being born and then dying. The accusative of "I" can only be "you", for "me" would be a non sequitur, self contradictory, because these objectives such as "you" or "me," is always the only subject "I", and such is the metaphysical truth, that "I" being nothing, is also everything...all objects or forms. That applies equally to Jesus if he existed or not, and all of us.
The real question is do "you" exist? If all of us have only a conceptual existence in mind? Do we not all come out of matter, is gold no longer "gold" when it become a ring or an artefact? So this "historical Jesus" is just as conceptual, as "you" or "me"...or agent "Smith" in the Matrix movie.

 

[McBell]

Did Jesus actually exist as a historical figure?
.

I do not know

 

[steeltoes]

I do not care.

 

[oldbadger]

I honestly do not care whether you like it.

Yes you do, or you wouldn't have wondered why......

I wonder why you believe that it is factual.

.....because, if this was to have been a PR exercise to produce a hero, many of the entries (which are an embarrassment to that end) would have been LEFT OUT!

As for the rest, Shakespeare has been copied.

Please give me a source which shows a written work where large chunks of Shakespeare have been plagiarised.
Do you think that Shakespeare's plays were all based upon total fiction?

 

[oldbadger]

I honestly do not care whether you like it. I wonder why you believe that it is factual. As for the rest, Shakespeare has been copied.

One more..........
Here is a list of some of Shakespeare's plays:
................plays based upon historic foundation :Henry IV. Henry V. Henry VI. Henry VIII. King John. Richard III. Richard II. Richard I. Julius Caesar.

Bearing in mind your post, above, would you say that it will fall within your 'Jayhawker top ten' for April 2015?

 

[psychoslice]

We will never come to a conclusion here, it is a battle of egos.

Yes it certainly can be a battle of ego's, but it is also a battle of what is true and what isn't true, that doesn't need the ego, it needs the right answer, that is if you want the right answer.

 

[outhouse]

Yes it certainly can be a battle of ego's, but it is also a battle of what is true and what isn't true, that doesn't need the ego, it needs the right answer, that is if you want the right answer.

That is a theological position.

Not a historical one.


You don't need a historical position, but the OP asked a historical one, not a theological one.

 

[steeltoes]

It appears that one man's mythology/theology is another man's history.

 

[Unification]

It would be best for anyone to replace, "Jesus said......" With, "the pure conscious(spirit) of the human mind said....."

Or "Jesus said....." With "wisdom, truth, knowledge, understanding in ones pure conscious/spirit mind said...."

And then knowing that Jesus (conscious/spirit) of every human resides with the conscious/spirits helpmate.... The subconscious/unconscious, ones own mind... The woman/soul. Then, that everything is done and has to be done "IN" and "THROUGH" Christ, meaning in pure conscious, as well as "IN" the physical body of matter (earth) the conscious and subconscious is trapped in composed of blood and flesh and a brain(heavens).

 

[Unification]

It would be best for anyone to replace, "Jesus said......" With, "the pure conscious(spirit) of the human mind said....."

Or "Jesus said....." With "wisdom, truth, knowledge, understanding in ones pure conscious/spirit mind said...."

And then knowing that Jesus (conscious/spirit) of every human resides with the conscious/spirits helpmate.... The subconscious/unconscious, ones own mind... The woman/soul. Then, that everything is done and has to be done "IN" and "THROUGH" Christ, meaning in pure conscious, as well as "IN" the physical body of matter (earth) the conscious and subconscious is trapped in composed of blood and flesh and a brain(heavens).

Ie: the adulterous woman that Jesus was talking to:

The adulterous subconscious mind of the human reasoning and talking with the pure conscious/spirit mind within themselves.

The sinful human mind missing the mark of truth and awareness (the woman) and Jesus writing on the ground two times.

The two tablets of stone are the western and eastern hemispheres of the brain. (Matter/earth/ground).

The consciousness of the Pharisees led them to be aware of their sins and shameful. Self awareness, revealed by ones conscious/spirit within the brain.

 

[Unification]

Ie: the adulterous woman that Jesus was talking to:

The adulterous subconscious mind of the human reasoning and talking with the pure conscious/spirit mind within themselves.

The sinful human mind missing the mark of truth and awareness (the woman) and Jesus writing on the ground two times.

The two tablets of stone are the western and eastern hemispheres of the brain. (Matter/earth/ground).

The consciousness of the Pharisees led them to be aware of their sins and shameful. Self awareness, revealed by ones conscious/spirit within the brain.

And the 12 disciples (personification for the 12 legions of angels (12 cranial nerves around the brain) were not present during the internal conversation of reasoning because the mind was separated from thought and still, allowing the pure conscious/spirit of the human to work.