Did Jesus exist?

[Mole]

There has never been a civilization not based on a religion and ours is based on christianity. And each religion has a central mytho-poetic figure and ours is Jesus Christ.

It is possible, even likely, there was a real person, on whom the mytho-poetic Christ was based. However the mytho-poetic Christ is a world removed from the real or historical Jesus.

All those in love with Jesus are in love with the mytho-poetic Christ. And he is our mytho-poetic Christ.

 

[Beargryllz]

There has never been a civilization not based on a religion and ours is based on christianity. And each religion has a central mytho-poetic figure and ours is Jesus Christ.

It is possible, even likely, there was a real person, on whom the mytho-poetic Christ was based. However the mytho-poetic Christ is a world removed from the real or historical Jesus.

All those in love with Jesus are in love with the mytho-poetic Christ. And he is our mytho-poetic Christ.

As a child of western civilization, I vehemently reject Christ in favor of Heracles on grounds of general badassery

 

[InTheFlesh]

There has never been a civilization not based on a religion and ours is based on christianity. And each religion has a central mytho-poetic figure and ours is Jesus Christ.

It is possible, even likely, there was a real person, on whom the mytho-poetic Christ was based. However the mytho-poetic Christ is a world removed from the real or historical Jesus.

All those in love with Jesus are in love with the mytho-poetic Christ. And he is our mytho-poetic Christ.

Well said

 

[wildcat]

This is quite polemic. Some people believe Jesus was a divine being, some believe he is a fraud, but, ime, very few people question his existence. I have been through all these phases and today I sincerely believe the Church created him. What do you think?

Source: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_nojesus.html

The earliest translation of a Gospel existed in Egypt well before 50 A.D.
It is evident the original version in Greek existed at a much earlier date.
The academics' note that the Gospels do not allude to historical sources is absurd.

 

[ahriman]

Jesus the man probably existed, but Jesus was a fairly common name. As for Jesus the anointed one, the son of God e.t.c I highly doubt it.

 

[Mole]

Existence transcending death

Jesus the man probably existed, but Jesus was a fairly common name. As for Jesus the anointed one, the son of God e.t.c I highly doubt it.

"Jesus the annointed one, the son of God etc", exists as part of our mytho-poetic heritage. We know very little of the historical Jesus but we know a whole library about our mytho-poetic Christ. And on top of that, our Western Civilization is built on our mytho-poetic Christ. And our mytho-poetic Christ will last at least as long as our Western Civilization and probably beyond. So our mytho-poetic Christ transcends not only his own death but even the death of Western Civilization.

 

[ICUP]

Yes, I believe he existed. It doesn't seem all that far-fetched. The bible in itself, when read with reason, is not far-fetched. It is what people make of it that becomes crazy, and that's what the bible actually warns of. Problem is, no one reads it and just accepts some crazy's interpretation of it. They never gain a true understanding of what it means.

 

[Mole]

Yes, I believe he existed. It doesn't seem all that far-fetched. The bible in itself, when read with reason, is not far-fetched. It is what people make of it that becomes crazy, and that's what the bible actually warns of. Problem is, no one reads it and just accepts some crazy's interpretation of it. They never gain a true understanding of what it means.

We are able to understand the meaning of the natural world by doing experiments. But we can't understand the mytho-poetic world, or the supernatural world, by doing experiments.

And when we disagree about the natural world, we can usually settle the matter over time by doing scientific experiments. But when we disagree about the supernatural world, or the mytho-poetic world, there are no scienfic experiments we can do to settle the issue. So disagreements about te supernatural world are intractable.

 

[ZPowers]

As a non-expert on the extent of evidence available and someone who knows there is limited evidence for any individual, non- ruler's life, I'd say maybe, but as a very logic-based person and non-Christian, at best he was just a guy with very progressive ideas.

 

[Helios]

The historical consensus is that Jesus existed.

 

[Totenkindly]

The historical consensus is that Jesus existed.

Can you expand on that?

 

[Totenkindly]

The earliest translation of a Gospel existed in Egypt well before 50 A.D.
It is evident the original version in Greek existed at a much earlier date.
The academics' note that the Gospels do not allude to historical sources is absurd.

General Ref: http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom

 

[Helios]

Can you expand on that?

There's little more to say. Questioning Jesus' existence is equivalent to questioning that smoking increases the risk of contracting lung cancer or doubting evolution. Having little knowledge of these areas, I accept in each case what the consensus of relevant experts informs me is the case.

Still, it is easily demonstrable that the website to which the OP refers is dubious at best, and far from scholarly:

Jesus. 1.1. No Primary Source (First-Person) Accounts of Jesus Exist

This is unclear: what is a "primary source account", or even a "first-person account"?

No historians of the time mention Jesus. Suetonius (65-135) does not.

The exact dates of Suetonius' birth and death are unknown, which the author fails to acknowledge. Moreover, the dates the author provides have not been encountered by me before. Also, Suetonius isn't an historian.

Furthermore, the author neglects to tell us that Suetonius perhaps does indeed mention Jesus:

"Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from the city." Suet. Claudius. 25.

The note which accompanies this in my translation (see below) reads:

"It is generally thought that Suetonius has here confused the common slave name 'Chrestus' with 'Christus', and that the disturbances he mentions were the result of Christian missionizing among the Jewish population of Rome."

Incidentally, I came across this some time ago, whilst reading Suetonius for his account of Claudius' reign, rather than using him as a means by which to bolster a jejune atheism.

Tacitus mentions a Jesus, but it is likely that after a century of Christian preaching Tacitus was just reacting to these rumours, or probably talking about one of the many other Messiah's [sic] of the time.

Thus the author needn't mention Suetonius' supposed failure to mention Jesus, for Suetonius was writing around the same time as Tacitus, and can hence also be summarily dismissed. The author also fails to tell us in what work Tacitus mentions Jesus-most likely because the author is unaware Tacitus wrote more than one work.

I'm reluctant to continue, since, as was made clear above, my knowledge of this area is very limited. However, what is clear is that the author is certainly not engaged in an academic pursuit: like most people who rape historical inquiry, the author's only interest is in polemics and self-gratification.

(The translation I am using is Suetonius, Rives, J.B. (contributor) and Graves, R. (translator). The Twelve Caesars. London: Penguin, 2007).

General Ref: http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom

I hope you've not just assumed that CARM is a reliable source for, well, anything.

 

[ICUP]

We are able to understand the meaning of the natural world by doing experiments. But we can't understand the mytho-poetic world, or the supernatural world, by doing experiments.

And when we disagree about the natural world, we can usually settle the matter over time by doing scientific experiments. But when we disagree about the supernatural world, or the mytho-poetic world, there are no scienfic experiments we can do to settle the issue. So disagreements about te supernatural world are intractable.

There are underlying meanings to many of the stories in the bible. Yes, you can understand them by merely trying. It is not this monsterous, hairy, venemous ordeal the way a lot of people have made it out to be. It's just a book. And take away all of the crap surrounding it, blowing it out of proportion, changing the meanings of it, and using it for destruction, it can be meaningful. It's a book of wisdom. No more, and no less. I don't need a scientific experiment to prove to me that some of the wisdom applies to my everyday life. There are many other books of wisdom out there that I can read also, and gain something from. I don't need to prove them non-existent or non-meaningful in order to be an agnostic.

I am not religious, and I don't consider myself a Christian. But it's not the Bible that is the problem with Christianity necessarily... it is organized religion that is screwed up.

 

[Beorn]

We are able to understand the meaning of the natural world by doing experiments. But we can't understand the mytho-poetic world, or the supernatural world, by doing experiments.

Meaning usually includes intentionality. What is the natural world trying to convey to us?

 

[Sniffles]

Here's Dr. Bart Ehrman discussing this issue with the Infidel Guy. It gets funnier as time goes by.

[youtube="yRx0N4GF0AY"]Dr. Ehrman vs Infidel Guy p1[/youtube]
[youtube="8SIhX4BWCPU"]Dr. Ehrman vs Infidel Guy pt2[/youtube]

 

[Z Buck McFate]

For what it’s worth, Tacitus’s mention is towards the end of Book XV (#44):

But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid to the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had it’s origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

I happened to have this bookmarked in my Historians of Ancient Rome book, because it struck me as being so odd when I first read it.

 

[Beorn]

Here's Dr. Bart Ehrman discussing this issue with the Infidel Guy. It gets funnier as time goes by.

[youtube="yRx0N4GF0AY"]Dr. Ehrman vs Infidel Guy p1[/youtube]
[youtube="8SIhX4BWCPU"]Dr. Ehrman vs Infidel Guy pt2[/youtube]

LOL

I liked when he started recommending books by shoddy theologians to Ehrman.

I stopped listening after the guy claiming Jesus never existed attacked Ehrman for making absolutist statements.

 

[Totenkindly]

Here's Dr. Bart Ehrman discussing this issue with the Infidel Guy. It gets funnier as time goes by.

Cool, I'll watch this tonight when I get home. I've got a few of Ehrman's books but I don't think I've seen him in video yet.

 

[Mole]

The Mystical Jesus

The historical consensus is that Jesus existed.

There probably was an historical Jesus but that is immaterial because it is the mytho-poetic Jesus, the mystical Jesus, the supernatual Jesus, that is the focus of Western Civilization.

And just as we create the mytho-poetic Jesus, the mytho-poetic Jesus creates us. And what has he created?

He has created a civilization that for the first time in human history has overcome scarcity. He has created a civilization that for the first time has abolished institutional slavery, emancipated women and protected the human rights of children.

He has created a civilization that gave birth to the Enlightenment, science, modern medicine and liberal democracy, and even romantic love.