How large was Jesus following while alive?

[cablescavenger]

if jesus didnt exist

would that not mean that paul had to fabricate the whole movement?


while I agree biblical jesus did not exist, theres more then enough evidence left to leave a trail of crumbs to build a figure of a movement without using faith.

I don't know about Paul, that again would just be conjecture.

I think I agree with you on every point and the difference between us appears to be the point of acceptance.

If the evidence for Jesus is not concrete but you are asked to accept the weight of evidence following his life then that is a leap of faith, and you need to trust that the evidence you do have is enough to lead you to that conclusion.

Some will accept that the evidence suggests Jesus existed and others will not. I do not think of it as right or wrong, merely a line that people draw.

From my perspective I find if you hold evidence to be a minimum requirement, then at least you have a base upon which you can defend your point. I have no doubt that if Jesus did exist he was written about. If those writings exist, they exist in one of the most excavated places on earth, and will be found. Until then I reserve judgment.

 

[glanis]

so we all kinda agree that there is no real evidence to support he existed right, we have the bible and that doesnt count as its roughly 2000yrs old and has no first person accounts, but for some reason we are kinda going on as if he did exist.
so historical jesus didnt exist(as far as we know), and biblical jesus is well as far as we can tell is just a story.
so everything we say is just opinion, just theorys and really doesnt mean anything.
anyways just to throw some stuff out there and make up a story to fill in that 23yr gap.
jesus gets married at the age of 24, to a 16yr mary magdalene.
soon after they begin trying for a child but nothing happens. unfortuanatly jesus got hit in the testicles at the age of 14 thus he cant have kids, so after 4yrs (and after jesus lost his faith) mary cant take it and has an affair, by which gave her no fruit to bare and a label as a whore. Jesus cant handle what happened and goes into a spiral of depression and after 2 yrs jesus found god and with god he found forgiveness and thus with his new found love in god started his ministry.

see that more truth in it than the bible.
neway point being is there isnt a historical jesus then we are just guessing and if we are talking about the biblical jesus and that story is vague at best we are just throwing words into the authors mouth.

also if people say that there was just a high level of illiteracy back in the day and thats why there is no written evidence, then how is there the bible?
also how did the authors(talking about who wrote the new testament as a whole) hear about marys immaculate conception seems a bit funny hey with who was it? Gabrielle coming down from the sky, seems a bit kookoo think the people of the day would have thought so too.
also what about when he spent 40days in the desert with no food or water was tempted 3 times, i wouldnt think jesus the son of god would come out bragging about it, "yeah bro i like totally just spent 40 days in the desert man, far out it was tough i had no food or water man christ(thats me) i was even tempted by the devil 3 times and guess what i resisted him every time. pretty good hey"

 

[fallingblood]

Ill take Sprongs approach to Judas

When I used Spong in another thread, you simply dismissed him. Why is he fine now?

 

[fallingblood]

then we have nothing??

false.

we have history of the culture from archeology, and history of the culture tends to be more accurate in th ebible, then history of a man/god mythology.

in scripture they created a myth over a man according to scholars and historians.


Im stating jesus history is very grey at best, but some history can be pulled out. and what is pulled out is up for debate.




because I try and state its my opinion, not common knowledge. I also have no problem admitting were guessing at alot of this.

there is only so much known with certainty and that is very little, EXCUSE me for trying to investigate and try and find answers to gain more knowledge on the subject.




false again, we are dealing with opinions here, not facts.




thast exactly what historians and scholarships are all about

adding information to their base

Writing everything off as guesses, dismissing scholars when they don't agree with you, and dismissing anything the doesn't agree with you as not having any historicity is not what historians and scholarships are all about. It not how one learns anything.

The culture tells us nothing about how many followers Jesus had. The only thing that tells us that, is the Bible. However, you constantly write everything off as not having historicity, or simply dismiss it.


So, maybe you want to lay down exactly what we can know from the Bible, what history we can know. Then such as task as answering your question would be more fruitful, as people wouldn't have to worry about you just dismissing their arguments because they have no historicity.

 

[fallingblood]

so we all kinda agree that there is no real evidence to support he existed right, we have the bible and that doesnt count as its roughly 2000yrs old and has no first person accounts, but for some reason we are kinda going on as if he did exist.

That isn't how it is at all. I suggest you look back to my response earlier on this thread. There is evidence he existed.

so historical jesus didnt exist(as far as we know), and biblical jesus is well as far as we can tell is just a story.
so everything we say is just opinion, just theorys and really doesnt mean anything.

That isn't how it is at all. You seem to have ignored my first response to you.

anyways just to throw some stuff out there and make up a story to fill in that 23yr gap.

jesus gets married at the age of 24, to a 16yr mary magdalene.
soon after they begin trying for a child but nothing happens. unfortuanatly jesus got hit in the testicles at the age of 14 thus he cant have kids, so after 4yrs (and after jesus lost his faith) mary cant take it and has an affair, by which gave her no fruit to bare and a label as a whore. Jesus cant handle what happened and goes into a spiral of depression and after 2 yrs jesus found god and with god he found forgiveness and thus with his new found love in god started his ministry.

You could have at least made it interesting. I give you an F for no creativity.

also if people say that there was just a high level of illiteracy back in the day and thats why there is no written evidence, then how is there the bible?
also how did the authors(talking about who wrote the new testament as a whole) hear about marys immaculate conception seems a bit funny hey with who was it? Gabrielle coming down from the sky, seems a bit kookoo think the people of the day would have thought so too.

The Bible was written by literate people? That seems easy enough. As for the immaculate conception, they made it up. That is how Alexander the Greats, and Augustus' miraculous birth stories came about as well.

also what about when he spent 40days in the desert with no food or water was tempted 3 times, i wouldnt think jesus the son of god would come out bragging about it, "yeah bro i like totally just spent 40 days in the desert man, far out it was tough i had no food or water man christ(thats me) i was even tempted by the devil 3 times and guess what i resisted him every time. pretty good hey"

Again, myth. You see it in all ancient works.

 

[outhouse]

I don't know about Paul, that again would just be conjecture.

I think I agree with you on every point and the difference between us appears to be the point of acceptance.

If the evidence for Jesus is not concrete but you are asked to accept the weight of evidence following his life then that is a leap of faith, and you need to trust that the evidence you do have is enough to lead you to that conclusion.

Some will accept that the evidence suggests Jesus existed and others will not. I do not think of it as right or wrong, merely a line that people draw.

From my perspective I find if you hold evidence to be a minimum requirement, then at least you have a base upon which you can defend your point. I have no doubt that if Jesus did exist he was written about. If those writings exist, they exist in one of the most excavated places on earth, and will be found. Until then I reserve judgment.

well it is about opinions :bow: and I used to think he was myth.

Its just I feel the literature that we have, has a foundation from a real man, later twisted by early writers to make him more of a preacher.

when it comes to certainties i draw the line, and its not very long.


there was a traveleing teacher/healer of judaism, who was baptized by john and spoke in parables, he ticked the romans off and was quickly put to death on a cross.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

These Jesus-Myth people just don't seem to realize that they look as just as irrational as Holocaust-deniers, Nibiru believers, Scientologists and other conspiracy theorist.

You guys believe in a conspiracy theory, do you realize that?

 

[outhouse]

Writing everything off as guesses, dismissing scholars when they don't agree with you, and dismissing anything the doesn't agree with you as not having any historicity is not what historians and scholarships are all about. It not how one learns anything.

The culture tells us nothing about how many followers Jesus had. The only thing that tells us that, is the Bible. However, you constantly write everything off as not having historicity, or simply dismiss it.


So, maybe you want to lay down exactly what we can know from the Bible, what history we can know. Then such as task as answering your question would be more fruitful, as people wouldn't have to worry about you just dismissing their arguments because they have no historicity.

the problem here, is that you give more historcity to jesus life in gospels then I do. So yes I will appear that way.

ALL scholars and historians give or take away historicity surrounding his life. at will.

you pick and choose scholars the same way I do, so dont act like im the one way out there with my view.

we have opinions and I have respected yours in the past.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Ill take Sprongs approach to Judas


Judas Iscariot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The book The Sins of the Scripture, by John Shelby Spong, investigates the possibility that early Christians compiled the Judas story from three Old Testament Jewish betrayal stories. He writes, "...the act of betrayal by a member of the twelve disciples is not found in the earliest Christian writings. Judas is first placed into the Christian story by the Gospel of Mark (3:19), who wrote in the early years of the eighth decade of the Common Era." He points out that some of the Gospels, after the Crucifixion, refer to the number of Disciples as "Twelve", as if Judas were still among them. He compares the three conflicting descriptions of Judas's death - hanging, leaping into a pit, and disemboweling, with three Old Testament betrayals followed by similar suicides.
Spong's conclusion is that early Bible authors, after the First Jewish-Roman War, sought to distance themselves from Rome's enemies. They augmented the Gospels with a story of a disciple, personified in Judas as the Jewish state, who either betrayed or handed-over Jesus to his Roman crucifiers. Spong identifies this augmentation with the origin of modern Anti-Semitism.

Spong is not a historian but a theologian. And a theologian with an agenda so I don't trust him

 

[outhouse]

I am of course talking about the sect regardless of the time of Jesus but as a historical reality in general. an early Christian sect did exist, and this group was indeed recognized by Jews and non Jews alike. the time of their existence on a historical time table was not long after Jesus, and links could be made through the members of the sect to Jesus and his time.

Sorry for the late responce, I wanted to take my time with this.

I agree whole hearted. I see what your talking about now and your right.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

if we just follow some of the gospels in a very vague light guessing for the truth. we dont see the biblican man. We see a man who walked and taught over 2000 years ago who was a poor man, and he was a working mans preacher, he was a preacher for everyday modern man. In my opinion its why he was so popular.

He wasn't some rebel against the government. He was an apocalyptic cult leader and he was popular at all. He was widely rejected even in Galilee and was an abysmal failure as prophet and leader

 

[outhouse]

Spong is not a historian but a theologian. And a theologian with an agenda so I don't trust him

Despite that, the whole judas charactor has historical issues.

the gospel writers were writing to a roman audience and turned Pilate into a innocent man, and he was anything but that. There is a theme to shine a neutral light on romans and a negative one on jews.

thanks for playing devils advocate, its how we can learn. :beach:

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Despite that, the whole judas charactor has historical issues.

the gospel writers were writing to a roman audience and turned Pilate into a innocent man, and he was anything but that. There is a theme to shine a neutral light on romans and a negative one on jews.

thanks for playing devils advocate, its how we can learn. :beach:

Ok so do you any proof that Judas didn't exist? Keep in mind that the evidence given to us by applying the criterion of multiple attestation and dissimilarity to the sources we have is pretty solid

 

[outhouse]

He wasn't some rebel against the government. He was an apocalyptic cult leader and he was popular at all. He was widely rejected even in Galilee and was an abysmal failure as prophet and leader

sure he was a rebel. he figured out a way to hit the romasn where it hurt. Money.

Romans were there for one reason and one reason only. to extort money from the jewsih culture. And the romans hated that position. Pilate was almost a nobody and giving him control over that area was almost like a slap in the face. he was a battle hardened bloody barbarian who wasnt even a true roman. he was fired for being so brutal and many think after that he committed suicide

why would he not be. ? he was written in that way.

according to gospel, he was preaching to tax collectors trying to get them to quit extorting money. he succeded with two. he didnt like paying taxes, and gave up everything he owned so he would have nothing to tax and urged others to do the same. he wanted to change the money system so romans would have no reason to be there. very smart approach if you ask me, because you could'nt beat them with might and brute force. so jesus used his brains. he was also ticked off at the corrupt jewish governemt and thats what got him killed according to gospels. he goes to the temple is questioned about not paying taxes, goes to the temple and basically walks into the bank and turns a tellers station upside down and starts a riot. he's arrested a few days later when they catch up with him in the cover of nightfall and put him on a cross after being charged with perverting the nation and not paying taxes and claiming to be a king of which he claims is not of this world.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

sure he was a rebel. he figured out a way to hit the romasn where it hurt. Money.

Romans were there for one reason and one reason only. to extort money from the jewsih culture. And the romans hated that position. Pilate was almost a nobody and giving him control over that area was almost like a slap in the face. he was a battle hardened bloody barbarian who wasnt even a true roman. he was fired for being so brutal and many think after that he committed suicide

why would he not be. ? he was written in that way.

according to gospel, he was preaching to tax collectors trying to get them to quit extorting money. he succeded with two. he didnt like paying taxes, and gave up everything he owned so he would have nothing to tax and urged others to do the same. he wanted to change the money system so romans would have no reason to be there. very smart approach if you ask me, because you could'nt beat them with might and brute force. so jesus used his brains. he was also ticked off at the corrupt jewish governemt and thats what got him killed according to gospels. he goes to the temple is questioned about not paying taxes, goes to the temple and basically walks into the bank and turns a tellers station upside down and starts a riot. he's arrested a few days later when they catch up with him in the cover of nightfall and put him on a cross after being charged with perverting the nation and not paying taxes and claiming to be a king of which he claims is not of this world.

He didn't care about taxes or rebelling against the Romans. He believed the world was coming to an end and that God would overthrow everyone not just the Romans. He was an apocalypticist

 

[outhouse]

Ok so do you any proof that Judas didn't exist? Keep in mind that the evidence given to us by applying the criterion of multiple attestation and dissimilarity to the sources we have is pretty solid

he is thought of as a real charactor by many.

but paul and Q dont say a word about him

the only reason many say he existed is by criterion of embarrassement.

still alot of debate in this boy

 

[outhouse]

He didn't care about taxes or rebelling against the Romans. He believed the world was coming to an end and that God would overthrow everyone not just the Romans. He was an apocalypticist

that is debated heavily on what he ment about the kingdom of god.

and there are bible verses that go both ways


all jews hated romans, yet you claim jesus would be different?

 

[outhouse]

He didn't care about taxes or rebelling against the Romans.

really? then why did they write it all in?

 

[outhouse]

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

Most contemporary scholars of the historical Jesus consider him to have been an independent, charismatic founder of a Jewish restoration movement,

why would he want to restore the jewish religion then?? if he thought the end was coming soon???


and why restore the jewish religion? he viewed them as corrupt.

why? because pilate put the high priest in charge. judaism was in fact infected by roman control, and roman control ment one thing with certainty. TAXES

 

[CynthiaCypher]

really? then why did they write it all in?

He heals a Roman's servant and also when asked about paying taxes to Caesar said "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars"

Does a person says and does such look like a tea-party tax rebel to you?