The Historical Jesus

[h311inac311]

So; I'm curious about where you guys stand on the reality of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

Do you believe that Jesus was a real person? Or do you believe that he was just made up by the disciples? How much of the story do you think is true?

[Foxaèr]

.0000001% realistic.

[The Grand Nudger]

So; I'm curious about where you guys stand on the reality of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

Do you believe that Jesus was a real person? Or do you believe that he was just made up by the disciples? How much of the story do you think is true?

Christ is a composite character.  The story isn't a news report from the judean front, it's an establishment myth.  Some of the stories were wholly fabricated by disciples or people who fancied themselves disciples, sure. The entirety of acts. Pauls many revisions. Others appear to predate the jesus story...and are often pointed to as a potential source for the content of Some Guy's various speeches, along with the personal persuasions of the actual writers and editors. Others amount to alterations made centuries after the alleged fact by poor or motivated editing alone. The whole thing is, ultimately, a sort of bottom up organic process where it doesn't really make sense to lay the blame for christianity at the foot of any one person or even any one century. You could call it an establishment legend, I suppose, since so many people mistakenly believed the jots and the tittles were historical for so long.

Here's a q for you. Does it even matter? If there were no christ, would you not believe that a christian life was a/the good one?

[brewer]

So; I'm curious about where you guys stand on the reality of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

Do you believe that Jesus was a real person? Or do you believe that he was just made up by the disciples? How much of the story do you think is true?

jesus was a person or a conglomeration of many people. It was not a hybrid god. True/truth is subjective, factual........... very little.

[Fake Messiah]

Do you believe that Jesus was a real person?

That seems like an impossible question because even those historians who take Gospels to contain some historical facts about Jesus, consider that they are something like 95% made up (lies). And there isn't any other evidence of him except in the NT. Like what do you mean by "was Jesus a real person?"

From what I understand the "real" Jesus did not exist but rather there might have been someone, like an apocalyptic preacher, who inspired myths about him. Like, you can't say there was a historical Santa but rather a guy who inspired Santa Claus mythology. Granted, there is more evidence that the guy who inspired Santa Claus mythology actually existed.

[Foxaèr]

The only historical reference for a faith-based belief is that someone confused imagination for reality.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

So; I'm curious about where you guys stand on the reality of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

Do you believe that Jesus was a real person? Or do you believe that he was just made up by the disciples? How much of the story do you think is true?

Jesus is historical in the same sense that King Arthur is historical. It’s certainly possible that there were some trouble-making evangelists running around 1st Century Palestine, but things like the virgin birth, the sermons/parables, and the Resurrection are no more historical than Excalibur or the grail quests.

Boru

Edit: yeah, what Fake Messiah said.

[h311inac311]

Interesting, this is the first time I've encountered a historical narrative this skewed against Jesus.

Here is my first question for all of you, when did people start to point out that Jesus wasn't a real person? Or that all of the miracles were made up? How long did it take the ancient world to produce this account?

As far as I know, Luke is actually a highly regarded historian. As the author of his gospel as well as Acts; I have heard that so far every single name of a person, place or a thing that can be accounted for by modern archaeology has been confirmed to be true. A quote from New Testament scholar Greg Bloomberg, "A historian who has been found trustworthy where he or she can be tested should be given the benefit of the doubt in cases where no tests are available." So far we have more than 70 confirmed tests of Luke's historical accuracy which means that Luke is, by any standard, a trustworthy historian.

Beyond this we have the over-abundance of copies of the New Testament, every-single book and letter has more than 1,000 early copies for us to compare against one another. Yes, scholars will make mistakes, but they won't make the same mistakes in the same places. Consider this simple example.

The cat leaped
A cat jumped
the dog jumped

Here we have 3 copies of 1 original message. Can you tell me what the original message is even though each copy is off by 1 out of every 3 words.

With 4 biographies, all of which containing a compatible story, I think we have every reason to believe in the Historical Jesus, but beyond that we have the witness of the apostles, men who were willing to die for their risen King.

[Foxaèr]

Interesting, this is the first time I've encountered a historical narrative this skewed against Jesus.

[h311inac311]

Do you believe that Jesus was a real person?

That seems like an impossible question because even those historians who take Gospels to contain some historical facts about Jesus, consider that they are something like 95% made up (lies). And there isn't any other evidence of him except in the NT. Like what do you mean by "was Jesus a real person?"

From what I understand the "real" Jesus did not exist but rather there might have been someone, like an apocalyptic preacher, who inspired myths about him. Like, you can't say there was a historical Santa but rather a guy who inspired Santa Claus mythology. Granted, there is more evidence that the guy who inspired Santa Claus mythology actually existed.

Mara Bar Samrion, "What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. Wat advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that their Kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise King die for good; He lived on in the teaching which He had given."