Was Jesus Only Human?

[Jayhawker Soule]

On the face of it, I agree.

But put in context, and considering the actual contents of the beliefs and its pretty much indisputable "borrowing" of other, rivalling or older, ideas and religions, I think that quickly raises many many questions.

Since the issue being addressed is that of historicity rather than divinity, these "many questions" are irrelevant.

So, for example, we have the story of the inherently contentious relationship between Paul and the Jerusalem sect. Which do you consider more likely, that it's a complete fabrication, or that it's a (perhaps self-serving) tale evidencing a very real cult with a very real leadership and a very real following?

 

[Muffled]

I am of the opinion that a man called 'Jesus' existed, he was probably intelligent with a commanding personality, which made him stand out from the crowd, but like the rest of us was a mixture of good and not so good. The gospels writers used Jesus as their figurehead when creating the character of the promised messiah. I believe much of what they attributed to Jesus was either highly exaggerated or untrue, like the virgin birth and the resurrection myths. However, it is possible some things were factual, like him having a high opinion of himself, a very human condition, if not a pleasant one. As a kid he supposedly went off to the Temple to 'impress' the elders with him knowledge, without asking his parents permission, which was very naughty. Maybe they grounded him until he was 30, when he came to public attention. Jesus could have been a clever magician, the so called miracles were possibly nothing more than magic tricks, which took in the gullible. The exorcism nonsense did him no credit at all, as it caused a herd of pigs to fall over a cliff, animal cruelty, and harmful to the pig farmer, who presumably didn't get any compensation. Telling people to leave their responsibilities to follow him was stupid and very wrong. I can see why he angered the religious hierarchy of the day, not that was any excuse for having him crucified.

All in all I think he would have been an interesting person to get to know, but certainly not deserving of worship and adoration.

I believe all of the above is a figment of your imagination.

 

[Muffled]

I thought the same thing at one point, that perhaps a figure named Jesus existed and said a few wise things that made people think he was some sort of prophet of a higher being. Of course, when you do the research, there is no credible evidence that such a man ever existed.

I believe the Bible is credible evidence because it is the word of God.

 

[Muffled]

Of course, when one respects the distinction between evidence and proof one realizes that the credibility of the evidence is, in part, a function of the credibility of the investigation and discernment of the person evaluating it.

I believe I don't need proof. I have never seen a satellite but it seems logical they exist because it makes sense out of being able to communicate live from the other side of the world. Of course it is my analysis of the evidence of communication.

 

[sojourner]

Was Jesus Only Human?

The historic Jesus was human. The mythic Jesus is also fully human, and fully Divine. (BTW: We, too, are made of the “stuff” of God, according to the Bible.)

 

[sojourner]

Not a chance.

You can continue to believe that this is all about “liberal intrigue,” if you like, but that’s not a very responsible exegetical (or theological) position to take.

 

[sojourner]

Still waiting wading through the acird insulting rants.

Can I get you an aperitif and some slippers — perhaps something to read? It’s likely to be a long wait...

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I believe I don't need proof.

It shows.

 

[PruePhillip]

I have no need to craft anything from any scripture.
The claimed bible prophecies aren't any more impressive to me then quranic prophecies or whatever other religion you don't believe in are to you.

I gave you my answer and I can only repeat myself.

What Quranic prophecies are you referring to?

 

[shunyadragon]

Can I get you an aperitif and some slippers — perhaps something to read? It’s likely to be a long wait...

Patience . . . patience.

 

[shunyadragon]

Since the issue being addressed is that of historicity rather than divinity, these "many questions" are irrelevant.

So, for example, we have the story of the inherently contentious relationship between Paul and the Jerusalem sect. Which do you consider more likely, that it's a complete fabrication, or that it's a (perhaps self-serving) tale evidencing a very real cult with a very real leadership and a very real following?

In such contentious opposition the accusation that those who believe differently are the evil sect by all concerned. Not much has changed in the history of tribal world views.

 

[Spartan]

The historic Jesus was human. The mythic Jesus is also fully human, and fully Divine. (BTW: We, too, are made of the “stuff” of God, according to the Bible.)

Evidence for your claim that the fully human and fully Divine Jesus is a myth? Your claim, now need evidence for!

 

[shunyadragon]

Evidence for your claim that the fully human and fully Divine Jesus is a myth? Your claim, now need evidence for!

There is no evidence to determine the nature of Jesus as either 'only human,' or other various religious beliefs as Divine and human. By far most historians acknowledge Jesus as a real person in history, but beyond that historians consider religious claims as 'set' in history and not history.

 

[Spartan]

There is no evidence to determine the nature of Jesus as either 'only human,' or other various religious beliefs as Divine and human. By far most historians acknowledge Jesus as a real person in history, but beyond that historians consider religious claims as 'set' in history and not history.

Nope. Nice try, though.

 

[JJ50]

Evidence for your claim that the fully human and fully Divine Jesus is a myth? Your claim, now need evidence for!

You need evidence to prove the guy was some sort of god, which is not very credible.

 

[shunyadragon]

Nope. Nice try, though.

Not a coherent response . . .

. . . still waiting.

There is no evidence to determine the nature of Jesus as either 'only human,' or other various religious beliefs as Divine and human. By far most historians acknowledge Jesus as a real person in history, but beyond that historians consider religious claims as 'set' in history and not history.

 

[sojourner]

That's a theory that Q is embedded in Matthew and Luke. You can believe that but I don't share it.

Believe it? Heck, I’ve seen it!

 

[sojourner]

Evidence for your claim that the fully human and fully Divine Jesus is a myth? Your claim, now need evidence for!

A master’s degree and you don’t know the difference between “historic Jesus” and “mythic Jesus?” You must have been sick the day they taught theology at theology school...

 

[shunyadragon]

A master’s degree and you don’t know the difference between “historic Jesus” and “mythic Jesus?” You must have been sick the day they taught theology at theology school...

A religious agenda based on faith takes precedence over education whether a Masters nor PhDs piled on.

 

[Spartan]

A master’s degree and you don’t know the difference between “historic Jesus” and “mythic Jesus?” You must have been sick the day they taught theology at theology school...

I know the difference. The mythic Jesus is your half-baked delusion, and is common among spiritually-challenged skeptics.