Question for Christians & ex-Christians

[George-ananda]

Does it need to? Do you expect it to be all-correct or all-wrong? I don't, I still don't seem to have difficulty deciphering Jesuss' message, hey may be that's just me or my own interpretation

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say when I said: I believe Jesus was definitely a real historical figure. I don't think the NT gets it all-correct or all-wrong.

I was trying to make a statement against Biblical Literalism and a statement against Christian-bashers. You trying to find the intelligent Jesus message is the position I was trying to support with my statement.

 

[Jainarayan]

I see him as I would any other bodhisattva. A very cool guy.

I think bodhisattva is a good description, especially if one believes he is still guiding sentient beings. I'm beginning to subscribe to this.

 

[Desert Snake]

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say when I said: I believe Jesus was definitely a real historical figure. I don't think the NT gets it all-correct or all-wrong.

I was trying to make a statement against Biblical Literalism and a statement against Christian-bashers. You trying to find the intelligent Jesus message is the position I was trying to support with my statement.

Acctually it seems like many Christians are the most critical of other Christians

Yeah, I get what you're saying

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Do you believe that Jesus actually existed, or do you think it is just a 'mythos'? Do other Christians you know believe in the NT as fact or myths just to relate stories?

This question has been raised in another thread, what is the majority view of the NT by Christians, fact or mythos

cheers

I am not convinced he existed. There is very little evidence outside the bible that he did. I can not say 100% that he didn't, but I'm more on the side of most likely he didn't.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

The bible is a book of historical fact. The accounts are factual, the people are factual, the places are factual, the timing is precise and calculable and the events are factual as archeology has proved.

Jesus is as real an historical figure as Alexander the Great.

....you might as well believe in Hercules..or that Zeus actually did come down as a swan and rape women, in my opinion

 

[Desert Snake]

I am not convinced he existed. There is very little evidence outside the bible that he did. I can not say 100% that he didn't, but I'm more on the side of most likely he didn't.

Why do you think so?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Why do you think so?

Because there is little evidence outside of the bible that he did. If I believe 100% that Jesus existed as an historical figure then I might as well believe that all "holy" people from every religion existed as historical figures. Maybe Jesus was loosely based on an actual person or several actual people, but maybe also Hercules was based on real people. However I wouldn't call Hercules an historical figure.

 

[Desert Snake]

Because there is little evidence outside of the bible that he did. If I believe 100% that Jesus existed as an historical figure then I might as well believe that all "holy" people from every religion existed as historical figures. Maybe Jesus was loosely based on an actual person or several actual people, but maybe also Hercules was based on real people. However I wouldn't call Hercules an historical figure.

What about the Buddha?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

What about the Buddha?

To be honest I don't know hardly anything about Buddha

 

[Desert Snake]

To be honest I don't know hardly anything about Buddha

O.k., well probably less evidence that he actually existed than Jesus, but since you don't know about the Buddha don't worry about it.
The problem with your logic is that many, many, historical figures have no actual provable evidence that they existed, it's a slippey slope going down that route

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

but if there is very little evidence that he actually existed from non buddhist sources then I would probably say he didnt exist as an historical figure but could of been based on several people or loosely on a person, much like what I think about Jesus

 

[Desert Snake]

but if there is very little evidence that he actually existed from non buddhist sources then I would probably say he didnt exist as an historical figure but could of been based on several people or loosely on a person, much like what I think about Jesus

Fair enough. I think Jesus actually existed, the stories surrounding Him don't match the usual concepts that tend to be applied to 'mythical' figures, there is very much about Jesus that is realism, and frankly I haven't read a credible source that doesn't think He existed

 

[Awoon]

Do you believe that Jesus actually existed, or do you think it is just a 'mythos'? Do other Christians you know believe in the NT as fact or myths just to relate stories?

This question has been raised in another thread, what is the majority view of the NT by Christians, fact or mythos

cheers

I used to, now I dont.
I used to believe in Santa Claus, now I dont.

Jesus has no historical existence outside the bible.

 

[Desert Snake]

I used to, now I dont.
I used to believe in Santa Claus, now I dont.

Interesting, I never believed in Santa Claus

Jesus has no historical existence outside the bible.

So you don't believe in any historical figures unless it is attested in various different sources?

 

[Awoon]

So you don't believe in any historical figures unless it is attested in various different sources?

I dont need to believe in anyone that was fathered by a ghost.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

O.k., well probably less evidence that he actually existed than Jesus, but since you don't know about the Buddha don't worry about it.
The problem with your logic is that many, many, historical figures have no actual provable evidence that they existed, it's a slippey slope going down that route

But like I said the problem with your logic is that If I applied it to other "holy" people from other faiths I would come to the conclusion that they were historical figures also. The problem when it comes to religious figures is that there is so much hocus pocus surrounding them that it's difficult to determine what is historical fact and what isn't. Even if Jesus was based on a real person, how far has the authors wandered from the truth about this person I wouldn't be able to determine without non christian sources written round the time Jesus was meant to have lived, which we don't have. So as far I know Jesus could of merely shared the same name as the "historical Jesus"

 

[Desert Snake]

But like I said the problem with your logic is that If I applied it to other "holy" people from other faiths I would come to the conclusion that they were historical figures also. The problem when it comes to religious figures is that there is so much hocus pocus surrounding them that it's difficult to determine what is historical fact and what isn't. Even if Jesus was based on a real person, how far has the authors wandered from the truth about this person I wouldn't be able to determine without non christian sources written round the time Jesus was meant to have lived, which we don't have. So as far I know Jesus could of merely shared the same name as the "historical Jesus"

Well, I do believe the Buddha existed too, for example.
I'm just asking whether you think Jesus existed, not whether you are a Christian or believe everything written about Him

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Well, I do believe the Buddha existed too, for example.
I'm just asking whether you think Jesus existed, not whether you are a Christian or believe everything written about Him

What I'm trying to say Is I can not determine 100% whether or not Jesus existed as an historical figure, and I can not say what is historical or not historical about him from the bible alone. But I lean more towards that he wasn't an historical figure because no sources (especially no non-christian sources) around the time he was meant to have lived exist.
Probably alot of mythological figures and gods were influenced by real people. For example if I were to write a novel, some of the characters might be influenced by people I know from real life but I wouldn't say the characters in my novel are historical figures.
We have to remember that the authors of Jesus had a religious agenda and they wished to convert people to their faith. So I can't trust even their written belief in the existence of Jesus without other sources. While I can accept Alexander the Great existed for example because he wasn't a figure of a movement that expects me to worship him or believe he is divine in some way and dedicate my life to serving him.

Also can you please give me examples of the historical figures you mentioned who have very little evidence that they did exist?

 

[Desert Snake]

What I'm trying to say Is I can not determine 100% whether or not Jesus existed as an historical figure, and I can not say what is historical or not historical about him from the bible alone. But I lean more towards that he wasn't an historical figure because no sources (especially no non-christian sources) around the time he was meant to have lived exist.

Fair enough, that was the question in the OP
Probably alot of mythological figures and gods were influenced by real people. For example if I were to write a novel, some of the characters might be influenced by people I know from real life but I wouldn't say the characters in my novel are historical figures.
We have to remember that the authors of Jesus had a religious agenda and they wished to convert people to their faith. So I can't trust even their written belief in the existence of Jesus without other sources. While I can accept Alexander the Great existed for example because he wasn't a figure of a movement that expects me to worship him or believe he is divine in some way and dedicate my life to serving him.

Also can you please give me examples of the historical figures you mentioned who have very little evidence that they did exist?

Most of them? the further you go back in history the less evidence we have of historical figures existing.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Most of them? the further you go back in history the less evidence we have of historical figures existing.

Jesus is 2000 years old, and we have more evidence of ancient pharohs/kings existing than Jesus. This is proven by archaeological findings through text, tombs and sources in and around the neighbouring kingdoms regarding ANY person of special interest. Considering that this "Jesus" figure has caused such a huge following of individuals throughout the ages and he is meant to be The Messiah... why is there less evidence for his presence in documented history. All text regarding anything about Jesus is written well after his death.