The Historical Christ

[Giff]

So Giff, is your reason for thinking Christ was a made-up figure 'someone else has a good reason'? Not good enough. Defend your belife yourself!

I was saying that the scientific community has little to do with history. No more than history has anything to do with physics.

But I say as many historian say: There is very little evidence of Jesus exictence. Don't know why you talking about science here for.

Also as I seen and what I've looked thru doesn't show any evidence that Jesus of Nazareth would have exicted. I think it's a chance that he is a made up figure but there also is a chance that there have exicted someone with the same name that the character is based on.

The evidence you prestented is either not vaild or not showing any real evidence of any Jesus of Nazareth. Those who have written his name have done hundreds of years later after his supposed death. So that's not valid to me.

[dagda]

You brought up science, not me.

It was about 50 years or so after his death.

I disagree. I think there is enough evidence to suggest that the Christ existed, but I respect your opinion.

[Giff]

You brought up science, not me.

It was about 50 years or so after his death.

I disagree. I think there is enough evidence to suggest that the Christ existed, but I respect your opinion.

Read thru my post and yes I brought up the scientific community. Meant the historican community. In sweden is history a part of science.

No, thre is not enough evidence of Jesus. The evidence you provided was either manupilated, written a long time after his supposed death or not mentioning him.

What document do you refer to that is mentioning him 50 years after his supposed death? EVen so as I said there's no document from the time he was supposed to LIVE that exists that tells about him. John the Baptist that lived during that time is historical confirmed to have exists since documents about him during that time exists. But not Jesus.

[Tiberius]

To be quite honest, although I have no doubts that Jesus as a man probably did exist in some form (i.e. as a teacher/leader), the truth is that the actual evidence for his existence is a lot less than the evidence for people who came before him, such as Archimedes or Aristotle.

The fact that there are hardly any sources from when Jesus lived is quite a major anomaly. You have to at least admit that dagda.

[Giff]

It could be that Jesus just is a complete fictional carachter as someone who have existed. The biblical Jesus is either way fictional. The question is if there was a person that version in the bible is based on or not.

[LEDO]

If we examine Jesus from a rational and scientific point of view as Giff pointed out, we can make some definite statements about his life as protrayed in the NT.

1) The virgin birth and nativity scene are false, as well as any connection he had to Herod.
2) The resurrection and most likely the crucifixion are also false.
3) Miracles are false.
4) Most likely John the Baptist is also story bound.

When we take away what we know about Jesus to be false with certainity, what do we have left? Could we even call that man Jesus, if he existed?

There are also problems with dismissing Jesus as completely fictional. The main one is now what do we do with a character known as "James, the brother of Jesus?" There are very few people claiming he was fictional too. There is much evidence outside of the Bible to show James existed. How did he get that name?

If Jesus existed, most likely he was from Jerusalem. It would be even possible Dr. Tabor's tomb was his family tomb. In dissecting the works of James, it appears he didn't believe Jesus to be a God.

[Samson]

I was saying that the scientific community has little to do with history.

Dagda, Since the definition of "Science" is to gain, "Knowledge", then a Scientific Community would have everything to do with your opinionated breakdown. Historians, Archeologist etc. are who you and everyone else have to thank for showing us that there has been no evidence (Other than a book) that there was actually a "Jesus" character....

HOWEVER!!! Just as someone else stated earlier, I have no doubt there may have been a "Jesus" but by far not the one betrayed so "Mythological" as the "Christian Bible" has.

The Christians couldn't even get the word "Grave" correct and instead replaced with "Hell" in the Old Testament. So what else do you think they may have...."Slipped Up" on??? I can name about 80 different contradictions (even though there are more) from the Bible.

Sir, what you have done is no different than what every other Christian has done for centuries......"Cherry Pick"....

That book is the last one in the world I would ever put any type faith in........

[Kyuuketsuki]

I was saying that the scientific community has little to do with history.

Dagda, Since the definition of "Science" is to gain, "Knowledge", then a Scientific Community would have everything to do with your opinionated breakdown.

I'm beginning to like you, LOL!

Kyu

[Samson]

I'm beginning to like you, LOL!

LOLOL... Very nice....

I guess it just upsets me to some extent that people refuse to do even the smallest amount of research when it comes to the Christian Bible...

I had someone tell me the other day that; if the Bible was not the truth, then why do you have so many scholars studying it.....etc.

I didn't know whether to call for a medic or simply walk away shameful for our human race in wondering how we have made it this far...

[Edwardo Piet]

But on the other hand, cut us some slack : We're only fucking apes! So called 'Higher' apes maybe, but apes nonetheless.

EvF