Question for Christians & ex-Christians

[Desert Snake]

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.

I'm not sure, but many scholars seem to hold the belief that Jesus did exist

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I'm not sure, but many scholars seem to hold the belief that Jesus did exist

Maybe you could prove me with a link where they back it up? Cause I haven't really been able to find anything significant on the historical jesus. Plus is that their personal opinion or scholarly opinion? I ask this cause even non Christians/atheists believe he existed (as we have seen from this thread) but they haven't really explained why/how?

 

[Desert Snake]

Maybe you could prove me with a link where they back it up? Cause I haven't really been able to find anything significant on the historical jesus. Plus is that their personal opinion or scholarly opinion? I ask this cause even non Christians/atheists believe he existed (as we have seen from this thread) but they haven't really explained why/how?

I don't know, actually. Looks like we might have some research to do

 

[F0uad]

Its due many Historical reports regarding him that they belief he existed what seems logical and no its not only the bible.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Its due many Historical reports regarding him that they belief he existed what seems logical and no its not only the bible.

Some are forgeries and all are written well after the supposed life of Jesus = hearsay.
Try again.

 

[RogerTheAtheist]

When I was Christian I believed that Jesus existed as described in the bible and that he was both fully god and fully man. Now I believe that a historical Jesus probably existed that inspired the character of the gospels, but he didn't have magical powers.

 

[Desert Snake]

Now I believe that a historical Jesus probably existed

Yes, that would be the "historical" Jesus that many non-Christians believe in, or believe existed

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

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 believe that Jesus actually existed as described in the New Testament.

 

[Ivan-Michael]

I believe that Jesus existed, but whether he did everything that was reported in the bible is unkown to me.

key word:' Believe', = Not knowing.
Another word: 'Think', as in 'I think this ot that', same as believe, not knowing.
Jesus is Yashua=salvation= salvage,
Christos= annointed= the SUN, life giver on planet earth.
I don't know that a guy called Jesus ever existed is more appropriate, how could anyone know? We were not there to witness, it's a hearsay. Pure info, no facts.

 

[Desert Snake]

I believe that Jesus actually existed as described in the New Testament.

As do I. I have no reason to disbelieve the NT.

 

[Desert Snake]

key word:' Believe', = Not knowing.
Another word: 'Think', as in 'I think this ot that', same as believe, not knowing.
Jesus is Yashua=salvation= salvage,
Christos= annointed= the SUN, life giver on planet earth.
I don't know that a guy called Jesus ever existed is more appropriate, how could anyone know? We were not there to witness, it's a hearsay. Pure info, no facts.

This is a slippery slope you're on , because we have to believe many historical references for literally anything to make sense. Picking and choosing to our whim what to/not believe isn't going to provide accurate answers, and will only make things more confused as people try to find "correlations" between say mythos and the NT, and the theory becomes increasingly fantastical as Jesus and other personages become Sun-gods etc.

 

[Breathe]

Do you believe that Jesus actually existed, or do you think it is just a 'mythos'?

Both; I believe he existed as an individual, and some of his teachings are contained within the Gospels -- but that there are many fables and myths within the text (the Gospels, and the whole of the Bible), as with any other religious scripture; I don't think they should be -- nor are meant to be -- taken literally.

Do other Christians you know believe in the NT as fact or myths just to relate stories?

Both; most as fact with some myths for spiritual teaching purposes.

 

[Desert Snake]

Both; I believe he existed as an individual, and some of his teachings are contained within the Gospels -- but that there are many fables and myths within the text (the Gospels, and the whole of the Bible), as with any other religious scripture; I don't think they should be -- nor are meant to be -- taken literally.


Both; most as fact with some myths for spiritual teaching purposes.

Yep, couldn't agree more.

 

[F0uad]

Some are forgeries and all are written well after the supposed life of Jesus = hearsay.
Try again.

Ignorance in its finest please show me these forgeries, next time don't talk about things you know nothing about.
Let me start quoting scholars who are not Christian and see highlighted area's:

In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (now a secular agnostic who was formerly Evangelical) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285

Robert M. Price (a Christian atheist who denies the existence of Jesus) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 028106329X page 61

Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Micjhael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200

What about the people like Nero, The Jerusalem Council, Church fathers, Pilate, Thallus, or what about Pliny the Younger are they also forgeries? and these aren't even Biblical sources.

 

[Desert Snake]

Ignorance in its finest please show me these forgeries, next time don't talk about things you know nothing about.
Let me start quoting scholars who are not Christian and see highlighted area's:

In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (now a secular agnostic who was formerly Evangelical) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285

Robert M. Price (a Christian atheist who denies the existence of Jesus) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 028106329X page 61

Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Micjhael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200

What about the people like Nero, The Jerusalem Council, Church fathers, Pilate, Thallus, or what about Pliny the Younger are they also forgeries? and these aren't even Biblical sources.

I agree. I find it far more difficult to believe in a mythical Jesus than a historical Jesus.

 

[Ivan-Michael]

This is a slippery slope you're on , because we have to believe many historical references for literally anything to make sense. Picking and choosing to our whim what to/not believe isn't going to provide accurate answers, and will only make things more confused as people try to find "correlations" between say mythos and the NT, and the theory becomes increasingly fantastical as Jesus and other personages become Sun-gods etc.

True, we do have a problem, how are we going to 'know' anything?
Do we really have to 'know' anything?
We are stuck, because there isn't a way to know for sure.
History was manipulated to the degree that now days some information is emerging, challenging the official version of 'history' as presented in the history books.
So we want to 'see' hard fact, not photos which could be manipulated, not TV programs.
You are right about history should make sense, well, does it?
If it does for you, then fine.
But not everyone can agree the official version in light of allegations that recently some people found many historical 'facts' and historical 'personas' to be a hoax perpetrated by the same group or organisation who hold the control over what we see, hear, read and ultimately 'believe' for the purpose of controlling us.
This not a conspiracy 'theory', it is a fact.
How can I say that?
I read the Bible and I see something which most perople can not see, because I learned something that most people either don't want to know anything about or they simply never heard of it.
How many people do you know who study the 'law' and its origins, the 'history' of the 'law'?
not many.
I asked a prominent barrister a simple question about the origin of the word 'citizen' and what it means, he didn't know but went to his Carmelite associates and they told him what they knew, they could only tell him when they thought it started but couldn't say what it really meant.
They claimed that as far as they knew it originated during the French Revolution, what it meant was a different matter, they were not privy to that.
This material is not well publicised for a reason.
This also means that in Rome there were no 'Citizens', the word simply did not exist.
Somebody made the word up, a new word which was first published in the Napoleonic civil code, that's after the french revolution.
What it really means is a different matter, the main point here, ''history books are false on that single word, and you start wondering what else is false?
I can tell you, a lot.
Books were written for a purpose and our welfare was not the intention.
Confusion, yes, confounding the language, yes, this is not a long long time ago when Jehova confounded the language of some poor souls far far away, it is happening right now everyday and it did not start yesterday.
Ask why did the Franks create a 'new' language for their 'laws' in the 9th century? what was the language of the Law prior to that, did the Romans use it? Of course they did, and Julius Caezar did not say E tu brutus in latin, that's Shakespeare, I have it from a good source that in the senate they spoke a different language but do we know that? of course not.
The Brutus quote is in a book, a Shakespeare book and we take it as history.

 

[Muffled]

No. No it doesn't. He said he is the son of God, as are we all. He said no one comes to the Father but through him... yes, through his teachings of learning to know who and what God is, which was forgotten. Krishna taught the same thing 1,000 years earlier. "I and the Father are one"... yes, we are all one with God... Advaita in Hinduism. Krishna taught the same thing 1,000 years earlier. So, Jesus was a great teacher but not necessarily God. Sent by God, sure, but he never declared he was God, iirc.

If we were all one with God there wold be no evil in the world. The fact that evil is in the world proves the statement is incorrect. The Bible says that everyone sins and therefore no-one can claim to be one with God except God Himself who does not sin.

Krishna claimed to be God but he adheres to Hindu philosophy that animals have souls and they definitely do not. Since Krishna lacks this knowldge He is not all knowing and therfore not God.

 

[Muffled]

Sure they could. Particularly when it comes to the Resurrection, there's no way to verify the details because only the disciples supposedly saw Jesus after his death.

The only way such deception could be exposed is if the accounts differed considerably in the relevant details.

Hmm.

-Nato

1Co 15:6 then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep;

One could make a case that the twelve disciples/apostles got together and made up a story but Paul is claiming a much larger number of witnesses which appears to counter that kind of conjecture.

 

[Muffled]

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

Shape shifting is also reported in Norse myths. There are also Biblical instances that suggest it also. It simply requires having the power and knowledge to change the DNA since a person or animal is made of atoms which theoretically can be moved.

 

[Ingledsva]

This is a slippery slope you're on , because we have to believe many historical references for literally anything to make sense. Picking and choosing to our whim what to/not believe isn't going to provide accurate answers, and will only make things more confused as people try to find "correlations" between say mythos and the NT, and the theory becomes increasingly fantastical as Jesus and other personages become Sun-gods etc.

Actually there are Biblical refrences to YHVH as a Sun God.


Psalm 84:11, “…For the Lord is a SUN and a shield.”


Mal 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an furnace; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as dry straw: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.


Mal 4:2 but arises to those reverent of my name, the SUN of Justice with Healing from his rays breaking forth and scattering ...


St. Peters in Rome has a third century mosaic of Jesus as the Sun God in the Solar Chariot.

Beth-Shemesh - House of the Sun.

According to Unger's Bible Encyclopedia the Hebrew originally worshipped the sun and continued to do so off and on throughout the OT Bible stories.

*