JESUS <3

[Minimalist]

Carrier:

All mystery religions centered on a central savior deity (literally called
the soter, 'the savior', which is essentially the meaning of the word 'Jesus',
as explained in Chapter 6, §3), always a son of god (or occasionally a
daughter of god), who underwent some sort of suffering (enduring some
sort of trial or ordeal) by which they procured salvation for all who participate
in their cult (their deed of torment having given them dominion over
death). These deaths or trials were l itera11y ca11ed a 'passion' (patheon, lit.
'sufferings'), exactly as in Christianity.78 Sometimes this 'passion' was an
actual death and resurrection (Osiris); sometimes it was some kind of terrible
labor defeating the forces of death (M ithras), or variations thereof. All
mystery religions had an initiation ritual in which the congregant symbolically
reenacts what the god endured (1ike Christian baptism: Rom. 6.3-4;
Col. 2. 1 2), thus sharing in the salvation the god had achieved (Gal. 3.27;
1 Cor. 1 2. 1 3), and all involve a rituaJ meal that unites initiated members in
communion with one another and their god (I Cor. 1 1 .23-28). All of these
features are fundamental to Christianity, yet equally fundamental to all the
mystery cults that were extremely popular in the very era that Christianity
arose.79 The coincidence of all of these features together lin ing up this way
is simply too im probable to propose as just an accident.

Notably all the mystery religions were products of the same sort of cultural
syncretism. The Eleusinian mysteries were a syncretism of Levantine and
Hellenistic elements; the mysteries of Attis and Cybele were a syncretism of
Phrygian and Hellenistic elements; the mysteries of Jupiter Dolichenus were
a syncretism of Anatolian and Hellenistic elements; M ithraism was a syncretism
of Persian and Hellenistic elements; the mysteries of Isis and Osiris
were a syncretism of Egyptian and Hellenistic elements. Christianity is simply
a continuation of the same trend: a syncretism of Jewish and Hellenistic
elements. Each of these cults is unique and different from all the others in
nearly every detail-but it's the general features they all share in common
that reflect the overall fad that produced them in the first place, the very features
that made them popular and successful within Greco-Roman culture.

On the Historicity of Jesus, pgs 98-100

Just the same old crap which would have been quite common to first-second century denizens of the Roman Empire.

[AFTT47]

I don't know. I've tried to follow the arguments pro and con but both sides lose me. History isn't my subject!

As others have pointed out though, there are no new ideas in Christianity except perhaps the concept of eternal damnation.

[SteelCurtain]

I'm not convinced that he was an actual person.

Also, the propagation of and population of cults is not anything particularly difficult or surprising.

[Jenny A]

Worrrrrrd to the heathens!!  

So, do you think Jesus was a real person?

Mostly likely there was a rabbi or prophet named Jesus about 2000ish years ago.

I'm simply asking if you think there was a man 2000ish years ago named Jesus who brought forth these new "ideas" that we now call Christianity.

That's a slightly different question.  There would be no Christianity if he'd never preached.  But, I don't think Christianity has much to do with what he taught.  I'm not sure he thought he was divine.  He preached the kingdom of god on earth was coming soon, before his death even.  He expected god to raise the weak and poor and humble the strong and rich.   He told people to behave as if that were so.  He said that he and his disciples would be god's representatives of earth.  He thought he was the son of god as David and Salomon were sons of god not as the begotten son of god.  

He may have expected to die at the hands of the Romans before he was crucified but not at the beginning of his ministry.  

Christianity is what his disciples and those that followed made out of his death. What they made of it, causes Christians to ignore much of what he taught.  Much of that is still in the gospels.

[Catholic_Lady]

Worrrrrrd to the heathens!!  

So, do you think Jesus was a real person?

Mostly likely there was a rabbi or prophet named Jesus about 2000ish years ago.

I'm simply asking if you think there was a man 2000ish years ago named Jesus who brought forth these new "ideas" that we now call Christianity.

That's a slightly different question.  There would be no Christianity if he'd never preached.  But, I don't think Christianity has much to do with what he taught.  I'm not sure he thought he was divine.  He preached the kingdom of god on earth was coming soon, before his death even.  He expected god to raise the weak and poor and humble the strong and rich.   He told people to behave as if that were so.  He said that he and his disciples would be god's representatives of earth.  He thought he was the son of god as David and Salomon were sons of god not as the begotten son of god.  

He may have expected to die at the hands of the Romans before he was crucified but not at the beginning of his ministry.  

Christianity is what his disciples and those that followed made out of his death. What they made of it, causes Christians to ignore much of what he taught.  Much of that is still in the gospels.

Why do you believe He was a real person?

[Spooky]

I doubt the Biblical Jesus is anything but a rebranded myth.

[Catholic_Lady]

I have another question, since it seems the majority of you don't think Jesus was any type of real person, does it bother you that much of the world uses His (supposed) birth to tell time?

I'm talking about the fact that we're in the year 2015... and anything before that is referred to as Before Christ? (BC)

[Jenny A]

Why do you believe He was a real person?

Because it he is so very place specific, and it is not the sort of place that a made-up god would reside.  The whole birth narative is designed to explain that unexceptional place.  If he were fiction made up by Jews it would start in Bethlehem.  If he were fiction made up by gentiles he wouldn't be Jewish. Because unlike a god, he found baptism necessary and submitted to John the Baptist.  Because crucifixion is not a kind a martyrdom Jews would have made up; in fact it is why Saul did not believe he was the messiah.   Because Saul/Paul is so concerned about being as authoritative as those who knew him when he was alive.

[marcosmasliaev]

There's historical references about him. You can find it easily in the web.

[Minimalist]

Thanks for the answers, everyone.

I am curious about something. Do yall have any theories as to who actually began spreading the Christian faith, if not Jesus? And do you believe this happened 2000 years ago?

You'll have to define what you mean by xtianity.  Before you do, consider this from Bart Ehrman's Lost Christianities.

The wide diversity of early Christianity may be seen above all in the theological beliefs embraced by people who understood themselves to be followers of Jesus. In the second and third centuries there were, of course, Christians who believed in one God. But there were others who insisted that there were two. Some said there were thirty. Others claimed there were 365.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that God had created the world. But others believed that this world had been created by a subordinate, ignorant divinity. (Why else would the world be filled with such misery and hardship?) Yet other Christians thought it was worse than that, that this world was a cosmic mistake created by a malevolent divinity as a place of imprisonment, to trap humans and subject them to pain and suffering.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that the Jewish Scripture (the Christian “Old Testament”) was inspired by the one true God. Others believed it was inspired by the God of the Jews, who was not the one true God. Others believed it was inspired by an evil deity. Others believed it was not inspired.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that Jesus was both divine and human, God and man. There were other Christians who argued that he was completely divine and not human at all. (For them, divinity and humanity were incommensurate entities: God can no more be a man than a man can be a rock.) There were others who insisted that Jesus was a full flesh-and-blood human, adopted by God to be his son but not himself divine. There were yet other Christians who claimed that Jesus Christ was two things: a full flesh-and-blood human, Jesus, and a fully divine being, Christ, who had temporarily inhabited Jesus’ body during his ministry and left him prior to his death, inspiring his teachings and miracles but avoiding the suffering in its aftermath.

In the second and third centuries there were Christians who believed that Jesus’ death brought about the salvation of the world. There were other Christians who thought that Jesus’ death had nothing to do with the salvation of the world. There were yet other Christians who said that Jesus never died. How could some of these views even be considered Christian? Or to put the question differently, how could people who considered themselves Christian hold such views? Why did they not consult their Scriptures to see that there were not 365 gods, or that the true God had created the world, or that Jesus had died? Why didn’t they just read the New Testament?

Pgs 2-3

All of this preceded the monolithic church which rose up in the aftermath of Emperor Constantine so you'll have to figure out which "xtianity" you are referring to.