Did Jesus exist? (Poll)

[whollygoats]

Well, it seems that there were a lot of little fires at once...y'know, Herakles, and Asklepius, and Attis, and Serapis and Dionysus. Oh, and Mithras.

Oop...Found a new one, Hypsistos.

Cheeses, these things were proliferating faster than Cleopatra's past lives.

 

[whollygoats]

Then, there is Apollonius of Tyana. Does everybody agree that he is historical?

Hey, he effectively spit in an emperor's face and got away with it. He sounds a shipload more divine that some idiot carpenter who got himself pinned up.

 

[humbleman]

You realize that these soldiers almost certainly employed a professional letter writer, don't you?

This is why is so amazing the writings of the new testament written in so excellent Greek can be possible thanks to professional writers. The authors were Israelite (or Jews as many call them) who had no knowledge of Greek grammar.

This is common in several places, were people from other nations learn to speak the language of the land but can't write it.

Israelite in Judea spoke Aramaic and Hebrew, even Josephus wrote that cost him a lot learning how to write in Greek.

The gospels and letters of the new testament were written by Greeks experts in their language. This scenario calls for the idea that the original writings of the new testament are translations made later on. No one knows how close or accurate are compared to the original ones. \

It is possible, by reading letters sent one to another, that the "fathers" of Christianity called for the destruction of the writings in Hebrew. In their letters, there are records of the changes they imposed for the assemblies, for example the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday- in order to be the further as possible from "Judaism".

The "fathers" of Christianity had the agenda of finally separate the assemblies of Christians from the Synagogues of the Jews.

The Dead Sea Scrolls show that people from Judea spoke and wrote in Aramaic and Hebrew, and there was no need to write the gospels in foreign language until later. The order was to announce the "good news" in Judea first, later in Samaria, and later to the lands of the world. The original writings should be directed to the Hebrew spoken people first, the Greek, Latin, and other languages second.

 

[humbleman]

What profit did Joseph Smith have in creating his story; and what profit did his early followers have? What profit did Jim Jones have?

Joseph Smith indeed existed. He didn't invent a story about him, but a story about a group of people coming from another continent to America.

By degenerative genetics these people of the book of Mormon got extincted and their bones which were low in calcium, became dust. Mm mm mm ... bad ending.

Joseph Smith was a religious renegade, after being in disagreement with his Church, he just invented a new one. That's all.

Jim Jones indeed also existed. People made complaints that they donated lots of money to his Church and they were disappointed with what Jones did with the money. Hey! but this is common with any investment. You can lose all your money in one day. Plus, when you donate, you have no right anymore to claim anything, you have donated the money, like a gift. If the receiver of the money uses it in things you won't agree, too late... you should check before you give your donation.

Well, the guy took his congregation to another land, to live in accord of his and their beliefs. No idea why authorities from the US went to his place. He was in a land far away, whatever he was making, the people with him was in agreement. I should leave him in peace, he wasn't bothering anyone and the group of people around him were with him on his ideas.

He reached what he wanted, to be out of a society which he considered as sinful. Hermits do that all the time, they isolate themselves. No big deal.

With the followers of Jesus. They didn't isolate themselves, they were living in the city, they weren't frustrated of the teachings in synagogues in order to invent a different religion.

If Jesus never existed, then you have a bunch of Israelite idiots who decided to be prosecuted, died with terrible deaths, all because they invented a fairy tale... rather than just say they were sorry, let me go I was joking, etc.

Surely you are right... lol...

Those Israelite were a bunch of idiots, right?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I replied "I'm sure he didn't exist" since I take it that we're talking about the Jesus of the Bible, and I don't believe in this particular fairy tale.

That being said, I'm also quite convinced that the story was partially based on often invented but also occasionally true biographical details of one or several existing individuals.

And just possibly, one of them may have been a truly admirable bloke.

Too bad he had to die on a cross, if that bit is true...

As we say in French, Il n'y a pas de fumée sans feu.

Oh, wait, you also say it in English! There's no smoke without a fire. Fantastic!

Who knows.
EB

If superman is the smoke, what is the fire?

If Bigfoot is the smoke, what is the fire?

If a story about a man coming back to life is the smoke, what is the fire?

I could continue but that's the idea.

 

[funinspace]

What profit did Joseph Smith have in creating his story; and what profit did his early followers have? What profit did Jim Jones have?

Joseph Smith indeed existed. He didn't invent a story about him, but a story about a group of people coming from another continent to America.

By degenerative genetics these people of the book of Mormon got extincted and their bones which were low in calcium, became dust. Mm mm mm ... bad ending.

Joseph Smith was a religious renegade, after being in disagreement with his Church, he just invented a new one. That's all.

Yes, a somewhat different invention. But still no ‘profit’, and he and his followers endured hardships and even some deaths for being different…

If Jesus never existed, then you have a bunch of Israelite idiots who decided to be prosecuted, died with terrible deaths, all because they invented a fairy tale... rather than just say they were sorry, let me go I was joking, etc.

Surely you are right... lol...

Right about what? I never said that Jesus person was purely fictional. But the Christian fables read no more real IMPOV than the made up shit, that the founders of the LDS believed and were persecuted, and some even died for. People are willing to be persecuted/prosecuted for many things, though it still maybe not an everyday human trait.

Those Israelite were a bunch of idiots, right?

Odd question…but no. However, they were very much people of their time and place; and were certainly in quite the cross hairs of various cultures. However, they were really really bad for losing sense of the possibly the world’s oldest surviving literary pun from the Sumerian myth Enki and Ninhursag. As Enki was healed by Ninti, whose name means both "lady of the rib," and "lady who makes live".

 

[blastula]

There's no good evidence anybody who could have known Jesus was executed after being offered a chance to recant some belief about him.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I think Mormons hold that Bigfoot and the biblical Cain are one and the same.

So if I'm mormon, is Cain the historical Bigfoot or is Bigfoot the historical Cain?

 

[funinspace]

I think Mormons hold that Bigfoot and the biblical Cain are one and the same.

So if I'm mormon, is Cain the historical Bigfoot or is Bigfoot the historical Cain?

You may be abel...

 

[ideologyhunter]

Jesus wrote the plays of Shakespeare.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

"a figure who at least existed and did at least some of the things attributed to the figure given that name"

That seems a bit vague. How many things need to be attributable?

 

[whollygoats]

"a figure who at least existed and did at least some of the things attributed to the figure given that name"

That seems a bit vague. How many things need to be attributable?

As I pointed out elsewhere, Jesus bin Ananus has that distinction. As per Josephus.

 

[Speakpigeon]

I replied "I'm sure he didn't exist" since I take it that we're talking about the Jesus of the Bible, and I don't believe in this particular fairy tale.

That being said, I'm also quite convinced that the story was partially based on often invented but also occasionally true biographical details of one or several existing individuals.

And just possibly, one of them may have been a truly admirable bloke.

Too bad he had to die on a cross, if that bit is true...

As we say in French, Il n'y a pas de fumée sans feu.

Oh, wait, you also say it in English! There's no smoke without a fire. Fantastic!

Who knows.
EB

If superman is the smoke, what is the fire?

People who have so much more strength and perhaps close-combat skills or something that they seem like, well, supermen (or women).

If Bigfoot is the smoke, what is the fire?

Branches of humanity that have remained isolated until very recently, like perhaps the aborigine people in Australia, but on a much smaller scale and somewhere in the Himalaya.

If a story about a man coming back to life is the smoke, what is the fire?

A man we all were absolutely certain was dead and buried but isn't and come back to say hello, perhaps with a made-up story about having been dead for a while.

I could continue but that's the idea.

Me too.
EB

 

[ruby sparks]

"a figure who at least existed and did at least some of the things attributed to the figure given that name"

That seems a bit vague. How many things need to be attributable?

I agree that my OP was a bit vague on that.

It's also interesting to see that a few people voted 'likely not exist' even while accepting that there may have been 'someone' (and one person voting 'none of the above' because to that person he 'always existed and still does'). Lol.

It's also a tricky question for me to answer even now.

But...

I'd say (belatedly) that there was a 1st C Judean preacher guy who was crucified would be a bare minimum.

Though even then...


Really, I suppose I was trying to see how many subscribed to him being wholly made up, or never having come to earth.

 

[ruby sparks]

"a figure who at least existed and did at least some of the things attributed to the figure given that name"

That seems a bit vague. How many things need to be attributable?

As I pointed out elsewhere, Jesus bin Ananus has that distinction. As per Josephus.

If Jesus bin Ananus is the guy that for example 'Paul' is referring to, then.....possibly.

Basically, I'm talking about a dude who was the original leader/prophet.

I mean, I've already myself dabbled in considering Judeas the Gallilean as a candidate, and his name wasn't even Jesus.

By the way, I'm not assuming Paul, or Jesus, or even Jesus bin Ananus existed.

 

[Atheos]

"Where there's smoke there's fire," like "What goes up must come down" is a demonstrably false colloquialism. It sounds profound but that's it. Sounding profound doesn't make something true.

There are many stories that are the products of imagination and fantasy, and which require no basis in actual events. With the available corroborating evidence (nothing but anonymous stories containing impossible narratives that claim things happened decades earlier in places thousands of miles from where the stories spring up) it is completely possible that no single person was behind these incredible tales. I happen to think that there probably was a historical Jesus (who bore little semblance to the stories he inspired) but I have no concrete reason for believing this. For me it is only a slightly more economical position based on the tales that exist today.

A short visit to Snopes.com is all it takes to be inundated with the extent to which people will make stuff up with absolutely no apparent motive. Much like a reaction between ammonia and hydrochloric acid, vast plumes of smoke can be produced with absolutely no fire or even heat. In other news it is unlikely that the Voyager probes will ever come down.

 

[Speakpigeon]

"Where there's smoke there's fire," like "What goes up must come down" is a demonstrably false colloquialism. It sounds profound but that's it. Sounding profound doesn't make something true.

There are many stories that are the products of imagination and fantasy, and which require no basis in actual events. With the available corroborating evidence (nothing but anonymous stories containing impossible narratives that claim things happened decades earlier in places thousands of miles from where the stories spring up) it is completely possible that no single person was behind these incredible tales. I happen to think that there probably was a historical Jesus (who bore little semblance to the stories he inspired) but I have no concrete reason for believing this. For me it is only a slightly more economical position based on the tales that exist today.

A short visit to Snopes.com is all it takes to be inundated with the extent to which people will make stuff up with absolutely no apparent motive. Much like a reaction between ammonia and hydrochloric acid, vast plumes of smoke can be produced with absolutely no fire or even heat. In other news it is unlikely that the Voyager probes will ever come down.

I would agree it's not one hundred percent true but on average it's more often true than not which is why the fire brigade will spring into action whenever somebody signals smoke somewhere in town.

To me it just means it's just really unlikely the whole of the Bible's story of Jesus would have been invented.

Although it's even more unlikely that the whole, or even most of it, would be true.
EB

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I would agree it's not one hundred percent true but on average it's more often true than not which is why the fire brigade will spring into action whenever somebody signals smoke somewhere in town.

To me it just means it's just really unlikely the whole of the Bible's story of Jesus would have been invented.

That's true of all literature.

 

[Speakpigeon]

I would agree it's not one hundred percent true but on average it's more often true than not which is why the fire brigade will spring into action whenever somebody signals smoke somewhere in town.

To me it just means it's just really unlikely the whole of the Bible's story of Jesus would have been invented.

That's true of all literature.

Not quite.

Fiction sure will always take a lot from reality as we know it but the characters can be essentially imaginary, even if inevitably inspired somewhat from real life.
EB

 

[Artemus]

It's also interesting to see that a few people voted 'likely not exist' even while accepting that there may have been 'someone'

If you are going to accept that as sufficient cause to say someone existed then you have to accept that Citizen Kane (or Rambo, as someone said earlier in the thread) are historical figures. They're not.