The Historicity of Jesus Christ

Cypress said:
^^^ Attempts to surreptitiously change and divert the topic of the thread.

The topic is whether or not the man Jesus of Nazareth existed as a historical person.

The topic is not whether he was divine, whether the miracles literally happened, or whether everything in the Christian canon is literally true.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised you rise to Perry's bait. He's low IQ and more than a little "off".

People like Perry are to be played with, not treated like adults in an intellectual discussion.
 
EdwinA said:
Ye.s When they were 'written down' is just a dishonest attempt at misleading people into believing it's a story made up many years after the fact. That is clearly not the case, as is shown by other events in the time frame. A lot of crypto-pagans and both left and right wing ideologues have a vested interest in destroying Christian influence on culture, dishonest economic practices, sexual deviancy, and promotions of the traditional family structures in favor of some fake 'rationalism' and 'technocracy' fads.

Others hope to peddle their own mythical fictitious rewrites as somehow becoming valid if they can destroy the credibility of the orthodoxy, as Walther Bauer and his flunky Elaine Pagels tried to do with their agenda re Gnosticism, building some silly conspiracy theory around 'the real Jesus' being somehow repressed and the 'truth' destroyed over the centuries by evil churches n stuff as a substitute.
Click to expand...
"Nothing was ever written about Jesus until 60 years later" is a trope so widely published in atheist blog posts, that it attained mythical status and was accepted without question.

There is a lot of legitimate literary criticism of the bible that can be studied.

But this thread asked if Jesus was a historical person, and there are no reputable scholars of antiquity who place any credibility on the Jesus myth movement. It's completely fringe to suggest the human Jesus was a fabrication invented in the last decades first century A.D.
 
Obtenebrator said:
909 people died voluntarily at the behest of Jim Jones
82 people died voluntarily at Waco
39 people killed themselves for Heaven's Gate
79 people offed themselves for the Solar Temple cult

Being willing to die for a belief is nothing new, nor is it an indicator that the beliefs one dies for are, ipso facto, real.
Click to expand...
Don't forget those who actively took control of aircraft so as to fly them into buildings, not only killing themselves but taking others with them.
 
Cypress'll Fix It! said:
But this thread asked if Jesus was a historical person, and there are no reputable scholars of antiquity who place any credibility on the Jesus myth movement. It's completely fringe to suggest the human Jesus was a fabrication invented in the last decades first century A.D.
Click to expand...

Well it's a good thing that no one on here is demanding he was fabricated. :)
 
Cypress'll Fix It! said:
Having that much perpetual rage can't be healthy psychologically.
Click to expand...

Says the man who can't even READ my entire posts and does nothing but insult me with every single post because he hates me so much. Even when I compliment him he still flies into a rage.
 
Last edited:
EdwinA said:
Ye.s When they were 'written down' is just a dishonest attempt at misleading people into believing it's a story made up many years after the fact.
Click to expand...

The Gospel of Mark, the oldest one, dates from about 66 to about 70years after the events.

The only generally agreed reference to Jesus that Josephus made that was most likely legitimate was that James the Just had a brother called Christ. The other reference may or may not be a forgery or a partial forgery.

That is clearly not the case, as is shown by other events in the time frame. A lot of crypto-pagans and both left and right wing ideologues have a vested interest in destroying Christian influence on culture, dishonest economic practices, sexual deviancy, and promotions of the traditional family structures in favor of some fake 'rationalism' and 'technocracy' fads.
Click to expand...

Interesting you should say that. It doesn't apply to me. I'm OK with a real historical Jesus but I'm also OK with much of the Gospels being made up or so "gilded" as to call into question much of the narrative's absolute accuracy.

But I think the TEACHINGS ARE AMAZING. They have some incredible value. And yes, they are a boon to our civilization....when we follow them.

And, DEFINITELY I agree that Christianity has had a SIGNIFICANT if not DOMINANT mark on our culture. No doubt about it.

Others hope to peddle their own mythical fictitious rewrites as somehow becoming valid if they can destroy the credibility of the orthodoxy, as Walther Bauer and his flunky Elaine Pagels tried to do with their agenda re Gnosticism, building some silly conspiracy theory around 'the real Jesus' being somehow repressed and the 'truth' destroyed over the centuries by evil churches n stuff as a substitute.
Click to expand...

But it's all part and parcel of how religions evolve. People add stuff as they are "inspired" to do. It's possibly how we wind up with the Gospels being a mix of real people and unreal events (miracles). People didn't add them to be duplicitous. They added them because they felt right. Either they had a "vision" or they "thought" Jesus did miracles, etc.

That's it at the end of the day. The Gospels may very well be quite true although it would be strange. Think about if you had to write a story about someone you'd never met from 30-40 years ago. Now couple that with shortened lifespans on average and you see that it would be tough to get a true journalistic level retelling of the story. Nor was that ever the original purpose of the Gospels.
 
Hume said:
I never understood why people even care if Jesus was a historical figure.
Click to expand...
Some people like history, and want to get history right.

Most people probably want to believe the role model their culture gets its ethos from was real. A historical Jesus as a role model is more compelling than the mythical Johnny Appleseed.
 
martin said:
It would fine be to say Jesus was a real person if the story didn't go bonkers from there.
Click to expand...
Separating the man from the myth not only applies to Jesus, but also Buddha, Muhammed and any other historical figures.

Regardless of one's religious beliefs or thoughts about Jesus, his ideas as relayed through the Gospels are good ones and shouldn't be denounced simply because many Christians only pay lip-service to those ideas.
 
Cypress said:
Some people like history, and want to get history right.

Most people probably want to believe the role model their culture gets its ethos from was real. A historical Jesus as a role model is more compelling than the mythical Johnny Appleseed.
Click to expand...
Yes, only Christians care.
 
Commander Dutch said:
Separating the man from the myth not only applies to Jesus, but also Buddha, Muhammed and any other historical figures.

Regardless of one's religious beliefs or thoughts about Jesus, his ideas as relayed through the Gospels are good ones and shouldn't be denounced simply because many Christians only pay lip-service to those ideas.
Click to expand...

Certainly.
 
@Cypress: it is clear you think much of the core of Christianity is a big joke and beneath your contempt, but I'm curious what you think the real Jesus was all about?

You act as if his teachings are beneath you. You have come up with a way to explain the "Resurrection" that either has Jesus slinking off in the dark of night like a conman or the Disciples were all liars and buried the mortally wounded Jesus but didn't tell anyone. What they apparently told people was that Jesus "disappeared" from in front of them.

You seem to have a REALLY dim view of Christ, the Disciples and the faith altogether.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top