Intelligent Atheists: Who/What Was Jesus?

[Minimalist]

I personally believe the question is irrelevant.  We know there was no Jesus with superpowers, which is the crux of Bible.  Because of that, the question of who Jesus really was, if anyone, becomes purely academic.

The only reason to even argue about it is to antagonize the faithful.

As reasons go that is a pretty good one.

[robvalue]

Jesus was, and is, locked in my basement and fed a diet of muesli and cauliflower.

[Edwardo Piet]

I envy Jesus' diet.

I love museli.

[Crossless2.0]

Jesus was, and is, locked in my basement and fed a diet of muesli and cauliflower.

Then you're doing it wrong, Rob. Threaten him with nothing but pork 24/7. Either he eats only grudgingly and after holding out as long as he can stand it (Jew with a breaking point), he starves to death (Jew committed to Mosaic law), or he eats without hesitation and lends credence to Christian claims that the Law really was superseded in his view.

Put the needs of humanity to get this shit sorted out above your own petty desire for a sex slave. Is that too much to ask?

[robvalue]

*sigh*

Fine. Just one more time with him, brb.

[Crossless2.0]

*sigh*

Fine. Just one more time with him, brb.

Ok, once more. Then cook that ham!

[Edwardo Piet]

Yeah. And after you've "cooked his ham" go cook some actual ham.

[Cleo]

God is basically Yahweh. An old sun God.
Jesus was basically part of the PR campaign for Christianity that was the new testament. If you believe in it then you believe Jesus is part of the holy trinity. He is God, God is him. If you don't believe it then at best Jesus was a man. A man who, if accounts are remotely accurate, was the David Blaine of his day with the added bonus of having abit of an entourage. Of course the case could be made that Jesus didn't exist due to a total lack of evidence outside of religious works. For my purposes its irrelevant which, I don't really care. Although I would guess its abit of both. A man existed but what we read about him is mostly myth.

I now have a question for you; if someone was not intelligent to the point of being extremely unintelligent would they be aware of it?

They may not be self-consciously aware for significant periods of time. Despite this, the intention is to attract more 'intelligent' debate whenever possible, even if extreme unintelligence is inevitably unavoidable. Even if one possesses intelligence, one can still demonstrate ranges of intelligence regarding different topics. In that sense, intelligence can be seen as a sliding scale which one may be capable of choosing to engage with or not.

I now have a question for you; is it intelligent to respond to topics which one considers irrelevant and does not care about?

[Jenny A]

A rabbi was simply a respected teacherror of Jewish law. As a Jewish teacher with following he was rabbi.

Who wrote The Epistle of James and when is far from certain.

[Vincent]

Hello everyone,

I would like your honest views on who or what you think Jesus really was, with some reasonable justifications please.

I ask this because some say he was a myth, some say he existed, some say he represents a sun god, etcetera...

I am simply unsure and require answers for further discussions.

Thanks!

Hello!

You're probably not going to get a straight, direct, and agreed-upon answer to this question, because everyone has a different take on the character of Jesus, whether he was the son of God, or whether he even existed. My answer reflects only what I think of him. 

As far as I am concerned, there is enough historical and archaeological evidence to convince me that a man named Jesus did live some 2000 years ago. He was a prophet of sorts, preached Christianity to people in the Middle East, and was probably killed for it. 

However, as far as all the other supernatural claims go - divine birth, walking on water, actually healing people, feeding thousands, being God (or the son of God, or a piece of God, or whatever you want to call it), being resurrected after 3 days, ascending into Heaven - I take all of that with a grain of salt. Most - if not all - of the evidence to support those claims is shaky at best. Chances are more likely that it's just shit that's been twisted and exaggerated over the years, especially given the ignorance and gullibility of humans during that time. And I find it quite strange that so many people were able to see this guy do all this shit, and so little record of it survived through history outside of the Bible. Bottom line for me: I don't trust ancient ass books to tell me what is true, especially not ones as vague, dividing, and untrustworthy as the Bible. Need I remind you, it's the same book that claims two of every animal in the world would be able to stay on a wooden ship manned by one family for 40 days.