Did Jesus exist...at all?

[Elijah John]

For debate, did Jesus exist,...at all? Even as a mere human being?

Or was he just a fictional character, invented for whatever reason?

Here's an OP for the absolute skeptic.

OK ladies and gentlemen, have at it!

[Zzyzx]

.

For debate, did Jesus exist,...at all? Even as a mere human being?

Or was he just a fictional character, invented for whatever reason?

EJ, it makes no difference to me (or my position) whether someone like the Jesus character existed as a wandering preacher or not.

What is significant is the belief structure created by later religion promoters (Paul/Saul and accomplices and Roman officials) that used the Jesus character (fictional or not) as the icon for a newly created splinter group from Judaism.

Stories told to 'deify' the icon form the basis of one of the world's 4000 religions. Many people believe them to be true and accurate -- and may attempt to defend them as such in debate.

[Elijah John]

.

For debate, did Jesus exist,...at all? Even as a mere human being?

Or was he just a fictional character, invented for whatever reason?

EJ, it makes no difference to me (or my position) whether someone like the Jesus character existed as a wandering preacher or not.

What is significant is the belief structure created by later religion promoters (Paul/Saul and accomplices and Roman officials) that used the Jesus character (fictional or not) as the icon for a newly created splinter group from Judaism.

Stories told to 'deify' the icon form the basis of one of the world's 4000 religions. Many people believe them to be true and accurate -- and may attempt to defend them as such in debate.

And for me as a believer..(that Jesus existed and had some very important things to say about how we relate to God and our fellow humans) it doesn't really matter if he actually existed. (though I do believe he existed as yes, a wandering preacher who was crucified by the Romans).

What is important to me are the teachings attributed to Jesus..whether or not they actually originated from this wandering preacher, of were distilled form the best of Judiaism, and put in the words and actions of a "fictional" character, such as Jesus.

It is possible that Jesus was thus used as a "literary device" in order to convey the teachings. In effect, Jesus was the personification of Judaism.

I think it was Thomas Paine who said that Jesus existed and was crucified by the Romans is a fact of history.

That his crucifixion "paid for the sins of humanity", is a matter of theological speculation.

Or words to that effect. Then again, those sentiments are often stated by modern historical Jesus scholars as well.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

For debate, did Jesus exist,...at all? Even as a mere human being?
Or was he just a fictional character, invented for whatever reason?

Thank very much.
I was too lazy to create a new thread.

I don't know what you mean by "absolute skeptic" because skepticism doesn't require any "Absolutes" and in fact, most skeptics would be quite AGAINST absolute claims of any kind. Absolutes are kinda hard to prove.

I don't believe that Jesus existed.
I don't KNOW if he did or not.. But I just don't believe that he did.

I would need a good REASON to believe that he actually did.

What I have before me as evidence, is religious propaganda.
Which I don't take as "Gospel".

[Willum]

Like most people, I believed Biblical Scholars, that in the very least he was a teacher - if nothing else.

But there seem to many info-warfare (propaganda) techniques at play, for example, the very debate about whether he was the son of God or a just a holy-man, instead of the premise you raise in the topic - did he even exist.

However, proto-Jewish accounts of Jesus, claim he was the product of a tryst between the no-longer virgin Mary and a soldier Tiberius Panthera.

Being an unlawful child, of any parentage would exclude him from being the saviour of Jerusalem.

On the other hand, the stories behind his birth, the three wise men - the stars in Orion's Belt, presented "Jesus" with Tiberius Caesar's favorite things - gold, frankincense and Myrrh. Then there is the possibly fictitious name 'Tiberius.' Is Tiberius Caesar a big enough used food dispenser to have presented himself as the father of Jesus?

Yes.

That and Isaiah describes Tiberius and his father exactly.

Something unusual was going on.

Then there are the after-effects; where are those people the healed, where are their stories? Where is Lazarus? What about his story and celebrity.

The NT is so overshadowed by the rise of Christ, that we forget he left Lazarus to tell us all what death was like...

Except, he said nothing afterwards.

Perhaps he recanted being part of such a deception.

Much-rambling, covering a lot...

[Elijah John]

BC, Willum and other skeptics. Don't you think the things that arouse your suspicions could likely be attributed to the myth-making that has surrounded this real man of history?

Causing you to doubt the whole thing?

Let me ask you this, what would be the motive of inventing Jesus as a mere man, preacher...out of whole cloth?

Personally, I understand how a process of myth-making may have occured, based on an excess of hero-worship.

But it seems likely to me that such myth-making was developed around the real (completely human) man.

Yeah, I cannot prove it...but such a likely scenario doesn't really call for much proof, does it?

That Jesus existed as human preacher is not really an extraordinary claim, so...

That he existed as a miracle working, deathdefying God-incarnate, IS however, an extraordinary claim which requires extraordinary evidence.

And frankly, for the latter, I don't find the NT evidence all that compelling.

For the former, I don't need much evidence.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

The main complaint leveled against the historical existence of Jesus results from the fact that Jesus went entirely unrecorded by anyone during the time he was supposed to have been alive. In truth however we have absolutely no historical evidence for the existence of most people who ever lived. However, according to the stories written about Jesus in the years following the time when the sources say he was executed, Jesus was claimed to have been a well known and controversial figure during his lifetime. Which makes it harder to reconcile the fact that no historical notice seems to have been paid to him at all when he was alive. Not even his supposed miracles seemed to cause any noticeable reaction from anyone at the time. And it is much easier to make spectacular claims for an individual who has been dead for years, then it is for a living person who would certainly be expected to live up to the claims.

Which should reasonably lead to the recognition that unrealistic claims concerning an individual whose very existence cannot even be confirmed should cause skepticism at best, and total rejection of those claims at worst. And yet it doesn't. Which has a good deal to say about the emotional wish fulfillment that the stories provide for many people. But wish fulfillment and the truth have no necessary relationship.

[Youkilledkenny]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

So long as it's kept in context I don't much care and it probably shouldn't matter much to people either.
I think claiming verbatim claims of such a character is a lot more dangerous and dishonest than saying YES or NO that he existed.

[Willum]

[Replying to Elijah John]

Let me ask you this, what would be the motive of inventing Jesus as a mere man, preacher...out of whole cloth?

What is glossed over is that Rome, for 400 years before Jesus, had a practice of usurping their conquered territories religions and fusing them with their own.

When they conquered Gaul, for example, Taran became identified with Jove, and so, since Jove = Taran, and Taran ruled through the divine majesty of Rome, Rome ruled Gaul through divine right.

In order to usurp the religion of Jerusalem, they needed a "one god concept," and Jove did certainly replace Elohim. They also needed a savior figure.

But not that savior of old, a warrior who would vanquish Jerusalem's foes...
No, Rome needed a pacifist, one who would redeem Jerusalem in a higher sense, yet still getting them to worship and obey the Roman Gods and Rome's sovereignty.

It failed - leading to a Diaspora. Many Jews who were fooled, became Christians, those who were not, were still left with only shreds of their prior culture and religion.

[historia]

For debate, did Jesus exist,...at all? Even as a mere human being?

Yes, this hypothesis best explains the historical evidence and is the consensus of modern scholarship.

I don't believe that Jesus existed.

This hypothesis appears to suffer from a number of problems. For starters, it begs two questions: How did the Christian movement come into existence if Jesus didn't exist? And why do all the ancient sources say he did? Further, why should we doubt the consensus of modern scholars on this point?

I would need a good REASON to believe that he actually did.

I just gave you two.