Did Jesus Exist?

[sci-nerd 4,451]

Quote

For most of my life, I had taken it for granted that Jesus, although certainly not a god, was nevertheless an historical personage – perhaps a magician skilled in hypnosis. To be sure, I knew that some of the world’s greatest scholars had denied his existence. Nevertheless, I had always more or less supposed that it was improbable that so many stories could have sprung up about someone who had never existed. Even in the case of other deities, such as Zeus, Thor, Isis, and Osiris, I had always taken it for granted that they were merely deified human heroes: men and women who lived in the later stages of prehistory – persons whose reputations got better and better the longer the time elapsed after their deaths. Gods, like fine wines, I supposed, improved with age.

About a decade ago, however, I began to reexamine the evidence for the historicity of Jesus. I was astounded at what I didn’t find. In this article, I would like to show how shaky the evidence is regarding the alleged existence of a would-be messiah named Jesus. I now feel it is more reasonable to suppose he never existed. It is easier to account for the facts of early Christian history if Jesus were a fiction than if he once were real.

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

[TrumanB 294]

Piney has an interesting theory on this topic. He existed but...

[The Eternal Flame 603]

Piney also says that the star of Chrismas never existed... 

[danydandan 13,779]

@Piney people are using your name in vain.

From any research I have done. The Biblical Jesus most certainly didn't exist, as one person. He was more than likely an amalgamation of a number of persons. There are only two possibly three primary sources that mention the name Jesus so it's rather difficult to say definitively he did or didn't. 

[Mr Guitar 297]

As I understand it, that was a pretty common name (whichever version/translation you like) back in the day so, yes, there probably was a 'Jesus' (or a whole bunch of them) wandering around that part of the world (there's a lot of them in Mexico to this day), but beyond that, I don't think there's anything mysterious about him. Yes, he might have been a teacher or priest or whatever, but 'son of god' - nope - no more than Jim Jones, or any of the other pretenders that have come along. I've always thought "Stranger In A Strange Land" by Robert A. Heinlein puts religion in an interesting light.

[Piney 54,904]

14 minutes ago, danydandan said:

@Piney people are using your name in vain.

Meh, you know my thoughts on it. 

Therapeut and Essene teaching with a little Alexandrian Greco-Buddhism thrown in the mash and then attached to a doomsday prophet who the Romans flattened with a rock....

.....then Paul got a hold of it, twisted it and *Oh my!*.......then Rome got a hold of it twisted it further and *Oh ****!*

[and then 38,261]

For a guy that people so fervently disbelieve in, they seem to spend an awful lot of time trying to convince others of their belief.  If He didn't exist, why do people even care?  Were His words a threat?  Do they think they can remove the religion that grew up around Him?  Go for it.  I guess we all need a hobby  

[sci-nerd 4,451]

14 minutes ago, and then said:

For a guy that people so fervently disbelieve in, they seem to spend an awful lot of time trying to convince others of their belief.  If He didn't exist, why do people even care?  Were His words a threat?  Do they think they can remove the religion that grew up around Him?  Go for it.  I guess we all need a hobby  

Our history, languages, holidays and even the way we measure time itself, revolves around him.
As a person who cares a lot about facts, I find it interesting to dig into them, and investigate how much of it is real, and what is false (or highly unlikely).

As the investigation in the article shows, it seems our history and culture are primarily based on ancient lies and made up stories. And that is interesting!

Edited December 5, 2019 by sci-nerd

[Piney 54,904]

12 minutes ago, and then said:

Do they think they can remove the religion that grew up around Him? 

No need to. It's dying on it's own. 

[danydandan 13,779]

1 minute ago, sci-nerd said:

Our history, languages, holidays and even the way we measure time itself, revolves around him.
As a person who cares a lot about facts, I find it interesting to dig into them, and investigate how much of it is real, and what is false (or highly unlikely).

As the investigation in the article shows, it seems our history and culture are primarily based on ancient lies and made up stories. And the is interesting!

One big giant Mandela Effect. 

[Orphalesion 4,747]

Aside from whether Jesus was historical or not....I kinda have to groan at this part.

Quote

Even in the case of other deities, such as Zeus, Thor, Isis, and Osiris, I had always taken it for granted that they were merely deified human heroes: men and women who lived in the later stages of prehistory – persons whose reputations got better and better the longer the time elapsed after their deaths.

Seriously? I'm not saying that it's not possible that some gods grew from that. But I doubt it's their "standard origin". Some were created through gradual humanization of animal worship ("Cow Eyed" Hera was originally a cow goddess, Demeter and Poseidon might have started as divine horses and the various half-animal gods of Egypt) through the personification of natural elements and forces. Some were created to fill needs (even today children will make up unseen protectors and friends) Some might have been created from dreams or hallucinations. Others from tall tales and some were downright fabricated by those in power.
No need to make everyone a "defied hero".

[sci-nerd 4,451]

3 minutes ago, Orphalesion said:

Seriously? I'm not saying that it's not possible that some gods grew from that. But I doubt it's their "standard origin". Some were created through gradual humanization of animal worship ("Cow Eyed" Hera was originally a cow goddess, Demeter and Poseidon might have started as divine horses and the various half-animal gods of Egypt) through the personification of natural elements and forces. Some were created to fill needs (even today children will make up unseen protectors and friends) Some might have been created from dreams or hallucinations. Others from tall tales and some were downright fabricated by those in power.
No need to make everyone a "defied hero".

To be fair, he does not claim that the ancient gods stems from real human heroes. It's just the way he personally imagined their emergence. And besides, I think it's meant more as a metaphor of how legends are made, than something he truly once believed.

[Piney 54,904]

16 minutes ago, Orphalesion said:

Aside from whether Jesus was historical or not....I kinda have to groan at this part.

Seriously? I'm not saying that it's not possible that some gods grew from that. But I doubt it's their "standard origin". Some were created through gradual humanization of animal worship ("Cow Eyed" Hera was originally a cow goddess, Demeter and Poseidon might have started as divine horses and the various half-animal gods of Egypt) through the personification of natural elements and forces. Some were created to fill needs (even today children will make up unseen protectors and friends) Some might have been created from dreams or hallucinations. Others from tall tales and some were downright fabricated by those in power.
No need to make everyone a "defied hero".

Dyeus Pater (Zeus) was originally the deified sky who was personified later.

Thor's a "tough one". I never studied and thought him out. He's a spiritual mutt. 

 

[TrumanB 294]

this book is pretty interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hiram_Key

I read it when I was 13-14 (around 20 years ago) but remember that I couldn't leave it...a page turner.

Edited December 5, 2019 by TrumanB

[Habitat 8,543]

This argument is beloved of those who have an agenda to sh*tcan religion in general, and Christianity in particular, I think it fails, for the same reason that the persistent speculation about who really authored the works that have came down to us as being by William Shakespeare, is not that important, the importance is in the content of the works. So it is with the Jesus tale, if it explicates deep truth, then I don't care who said it, if it does not, then ditto, it matters not.

[Doug1029 6,519]

I looked at the issue of a historical Jesus.  I didn't really come to a conclusion.  It seems there COULD HAVE been a historical Jesus, but also, what many of you are saying about "Jesus" being a common name and there being multiple Jesus prototypes are probably accurate, too.

But consider:  if the events (at least most of them) had occurred somewhere other than Jerusalem, that would explain the lack of historical references to Jesus.

Could they have occurred at Qumran?

The great earthquake of 33 AD that is mentioned in the Bible left considerable damage at Qumran, but today no evidence of it remains in Jerusalem.  Varve counts suggest that the epicenter was clsoer to Qumran than to Jerusalem.

Suppose that the "miracles" were really initiation ceremonies at Qumran?

I think the best we can do from the available evidence is say that Jesus MIGHT have existed.

Doug

[Doug1029 6,519]

6 minutes ago, Habitat said:

This argument is beloved of those who have an agenda to sh*tcan religion in general, and Christianity in particular, I think it fails, for the same reason that the persistent speculation about who really authored the works that have came down to us as being by William Shakespeare, is not that important, the importance is in the content of the works. So it is with the Jesus tale, if it explicates deep truth, then I don't care who said it, if it does not, then ditto, it matters not.

It fails because neither side can muster the evidence to support its own conclusions.

Doug

[Habitat 8,543]

1 minute ago, Doug1029 said:

It fails because neither side can muster the evidence to support its own conclusions.

Doug

We immediately know that no proof exists of anything supernatural happening , and it seems to be the supernatural that reels people into being interested in it. So it becomes a matter of looking at the material apart from that, as to what may indeed be testable, for its usefulness.

[Orphalesion 4,747]

21 minutes ago, Piney said:

Dyeus Pater (Zeus) was originally the deified sky who was personified later.

Thor's a "tough one". I never studied and thought him out. He's a spiritual mutt. 

 

The last time I read about Thor's origins the best that was suggested (due to him being a god of thunder and his association with oaks) that he developed from a Proto-Indo-European Storm god, who was also developed into other similar deities (like Perun) and in Greece possibly was merged into Zeus (since oaks were also the holy tree of Zeus at Dodona)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perkwunos

[sci-nerd 4,451]

14 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

It fails because neither side can muster the evidence to support its own conclusions.

The burden of evidence lies with those who make extraordinary claims. Like the claim that a god walked the Earth 2000 years ago.
The next logic step is to investigate if there is any truth to that. But there isn't. None of the Biblical writers met Jesus. Neither did any contemporary historians. And there is zero physical evidence.

Therefore the claim fails.

[Habitat 8,543]

1 minute ago, sci-nerd said:

The burden of evidence lies with those who make extraordinary claims. Like the claim that a god walked the Earth 2000 years ago.
The next logic step is to investigate if there is any truth to that. But there isn't. None of the Biblical writers met Jesus. Neither did any contemporary historians. And there is zero physical evidence.

Therefore the claim fails.

I don't recall any "claim" by the named personage, that he was a "God walking the Earth", although I haven't read it exhaustively. Perhaps you would do better to examine what he is quoted as claiming.

[Habitat 8,543]

And as far as  religious "claims" go, that is a word the implies a demand for something, lucky for the whingers, you are under no obligation to render anything, so what is the problem ?

[sci-nerd 4,451]

3 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I don't recall any "claim" by the named personage, that he was a "God walking the Earth", although I haven't read it exhaustively. Perhaps you would do better to examine what he is quoted as claiming.

The article is investigating the existence of the man described in the new testament - a man that the new testament claims to be divine.
I know that the article only focuses on the existence of said man, so maybe I should have phrased it differently. My bad.

[Habitat 8,543]

All sorts of silly things have been said about the Jesus person, many of them completely contradictory. I think the starting point should be, and perhaps the departure point also, what was he supposed to have said ?

[Will Due 5,380]

4 minutes ago, Habitat said:

All sorts of silly things have been said about the Jesus person, many of them completely contradictory. I think the starting point should be, and perhaps the departure point also, what was he supposed to have said ?

 

He said, don't look here, don't look there, because "the kingdom of God is within you".