Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
zep73

Did Jesus Exist?

3,831 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

cormac mac airt
2 hours ago, Festina Lente said:

Evidence suggests Moses was an Egyptian, most likely a high priest trained in ritual magic.  This explains much of the Bible.  AbraCADabraHam. 

Valid and verifiable evidence suggests no such thing. "If" Moses were an Egyptian priest as you state then he was most definitely NOT Hebrew which means the Biblical story of his ancestry is a lie. Also, "IF" he was Egyptian then he worshiped Egyptian deities and even if one uses Akhenaten's worship of Aten as an inspiration for the Moses story then it should be pointed out that Egypt DID NOT eradicate the worship of the rest of the Egyptian pantheon, which means the Aten WAS NOT the only deity in Egypt. And once again the Bible claims that Moses was Hebrew in origin so your whole line of speculation otherwise is irrelevant to the discussion. 

cormac

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
32 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Steve Miller Band elevated to High Priests? 

[00.05:07]

~

That's a lot more entertaining than the current speculation. :D

cormac

  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II

YES I have no doubts! No one can or ever will be able to tell me different. Have had and receiving much proof and love.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zep73
10 hours ago, Debra F. II said:

YES I have no doubts! No one can or ever will be able to tell me different. Have had and receiving much proof and love.

Ignorance is bliss...

Edited by sci-nerd
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
21 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

Ignorance is bliss...

Imaginary friends with benefits.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt

Ignorance is correctable, willful ignorance should be pitied. 
 

cormac

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

What is the point/purpose of a spiritual outlook anyway? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
6 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

What is the point/purpose of a spiritual outlook 

having a spiritual outlook and faith in God is the point, the whole point, the truth and the only way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
4 minutes ago, Debra F. II said:

having a spiritual outlook and faith in God is the point, the whole point, the truth and the only way.

That's a non-answer. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
14 minutes ago, Debra F. II said:

having a spiritual outlook and faith in God is the point, the whole point, the truth and the only way.

I'm quoting you again. So what mental, physical, and emotional need does this satisfy? Why does god need faith in the first place? What is truth? And why is such an outlook the only way?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
20 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I'm quoting you again. So what mental, physical, and emotional need does this satisfy? Why does god need faith in the first place? What is truth? And why is such an outlook the only way?

It satisfies God and your soul keeping it safe and out of satan's consumption, keeps you sane and strong with continual wisdom. God doesn't need faith, God wants you to have faith in Him 100%. Truth as we understand the best we can, in these long distance times, truth that he loves us unconditionally and will strengthen us when we are weak, only He will be there when no ones else is, only He had the greatest power of and over ALL things... the only way cuz there's only one way HIS way, in HIS names sake. ONLY HE can and will uphold you with His right hand if righteousness : )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
1 minute ago, Debra F. II said:

It satisfies God and your soul keeping it safe and out of satan's consumption, keeps you sane and strong with continual wisdom. God doesn't need faith, God wants you to have faith in Him 100%. Truth as we understand the best we can, in these long distance times, truth that he loves us unconditionally and will strengthen us when we are weak, only He will be there when no ones else is, only He had the greatest power of and over ALL things... the only way cuz there's only one way HIS way, in HIS names sake. ONLY HE can and will uphold you with His right hand if righteousness : )

Satan only means accuser in Hebrew. Why does god need satisfaction, seems all too human. If god wishes for me to place faith in 'him', then god need to prove himself to me. Truth in your case is subjective and not purely if at all fact. God doesn't care, because god is an idea created by people. To explain the forces of nature, the unknown, to be their war chiefs, wish fulfillers, as a vague answer to that which people at that time didn't know. God is an idea. As for a soul, that hasn't been proven to factually exist. Once we are dead, that is it. No heaven, no hell, no reincarnation. Just bodily decay till we are fully devoured by microbes. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

Satan only means accuser in Hebrew. Why does god need satisfaction, seems all too human. If god wishes for me to place faith in 'him', then god need to prove himself to me. Truth in your case is subjective and not purely if at all fact. God doesn't care, because god is an idea created by people. To explain the forces of nature, the unknown, to be their war chiefs, wish fulfillers, as a vague answer to that which people at that time didn't know. God is an idea. As for a soul, that hasn't been proven to factually exist. Once we are dead, that is it. No heaven, no hell, no reincarnation. Just bodily decay till we are fully devoured by microbes. 

I understand where you're coming from. And where I come from, God the alpha and the omega is a jealous God it is for us and our satisfaction to have him as our father and the peace and his guidance for if we do not then the evil and the devil will devour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
Just now, Debra F. II said:

I understand where you're coming from. And where I come from, God the alpha and the omega is a jealous God it is for us and our satisfaction to have him as our father and the peace and his guidance for if we do not then the evil and the devil will devour.

You do know that Christianity is a Sun Worshiping religion right? It's basically a pagan religion. The devil is just a fable to keep the sheep in line. Seems rather petty that a being who is capable of creating an entire universe is jealous, did the other gods do a better job that him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
6 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

You do know that Christianity is a Sun Worshiping religion right? It's basically a pagan religion. The devil is just a fable to keep the sheep in line. Seems rather petty that a being who is capable of creating an entire universe is jealous, did the other gods do a better job that him?

lol - well my sabbath is on Saturday not SUNday, I'm very careful to follow the alpha and the omega God, not the ones below Him, and most likely He may have even created some of them,  no not pretty at all when He only wants the most highest and best for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
25 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

did the other gods do a better job that him?

I dont think there are other God's men and women may call themselves Gods... Entities may call themselves Gods. Others may appoint people and entities as Gods.  But there is only ONE God no else is can be, or ever will be higher than He, all else fall below and under His authority, even if He has placed special beings or entities in positions who may be called Gods. I believe certain religions may have even been created by Him only as a pathway back to the Him the ONE true GOD. No matter what us people will die yes rot, but will face the  Consequences of our thinking and our actions. Also believing that "some" people are special children of God, having direct pathways without the trials and challenges of spiritual warfare that some of us are faced with, for example a child born who can not talk or walk who never will who can not sin, I think they are here for a higher purpose and for our learning, for jobs to teach us compassion to show us love in ways that are unimaginable. Wow hu?? now were digging deep ; )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Crane Feather

 

Judging from past studies, my personal guess is that there were several people that fit the bill, and the legends grew up around them. There are a couple of things that do stick out though. The romans kept pretty good records and while some little disturbance in one of their properties would not have caught the eye of the scholars, we do know that Panchaus Pilot was a real person at the right time. This gives credence that he probably did order the execution of someone that the story grew up around. That’s not to say it was exactly the Jesus we know. It’s pretty clear that many parts of the story are borrowed from other traditions. This would have likely been at the behest of Constantine.   Constantine most likely didn’t really convert, but instead created modern Christianity in order to unify all the pagan traditions with Christianity for the sake of stability. Roman leaders were under a lot of political pressure to appease people. When the council of Nicecia put together the current Christian Bible they had to choose from a myriad  of texts floating around. Some really good stuff was left out ironically because it seemed to fantastic.

Something really interesting to note however, and popular amongst Christian apologists, is that there were Christian martyrs that went to their deaths at the hands of wild animals that swore they had met Jesus himself and witnessed the miracles. I think it’s highly likely there was a cult like rising with a central figure that would be our historical Jesus. 

As we have seen in modern times, people will go to death for their cult leader, but usually hey are real people. 

Edit 

Funny. It’s 5:30 am here. I just dozed off and had a dream where Pilot was complaining to me about all the pressure he was under from Rome. That’s what I get for getting into this stuff so early in the morning. 

Edited by White Crane Feather
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
1 hour ago, White Crane Feather said:

Something really interesting to note however, and popular amongst Christian apologists, is that there were Christian martyrs that went to their deaths at the hands of wild animals that swore they had met Jesus himself and witnessed the miracles. I think it’s highly likely there was a cult like rising with a central figure that would be our historical Jesus. 

As we have seen in modern times, people will go to death for their cult leader, but usually hey are real people. 

We have no primary source for anybody ever having met Jesus face-to-face, so necessarily nothing primary about anybody's death who swore to have witnessed any aspect of Jesus' career.

We do, however, have a primary source for a fairly early Christian dying in the arena (203 CE; the animals failed to kill her; she was finished by sword), and her extensive first-person prison diary (preserved and set in context anonymously, but the suspicion is that this editor was Tertullian). So, we know exactly what she died for: her visions.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/perpetua.html

Clever apologists spin the martyr situation as whether anybody would die for a lie. Nice rhyming scheme, but yes, now that you mention it, people have died for lies. But irrelevant, because probably nobody in particular sat down to cook up a liar's Jesus story. A lot of people had visions, however. Paul thinks there were hundreds of 'em, starting right from the very earliest days of the movement, and including all the big-name male founders, including himself.

Would anybody die for a vision? Yes; read all about it at the link.

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Crane Feather
1 hour ago, eight bits said:

We have no primary source for anybody ever having met Jesus face-to-face, so necessarily nothing primary about anybody's death who swore to have witnessed any aspect of Jesus' career.

We do, however, have a primary source for a fairly early Christian dying in the arena (203 CE; the animals failed to kill her; she was finished by sword), and her extensive first-person prison diary (preserved and set in context anonymously, but the suspicion is that this editor was Tertullian). So, we know exactly what she died for: her visions.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/perpetua.html

Clever apologists spin the martyr situation as whether anybody would die for a lie. Nice rhyming scheme, but yes, now that you mention it, people have died for lies. But irrelevant, because probably nobody in particular sat down to cook up a liar's Jesus story. A lot of people had visions, however. Paul thinks there were hundreds of 'em, starting right from the very earliest days of the movement, and including all the big-name male founders, including himself.

Would anybody die for a vision? Yes; read all about it at the link.

 

Thanks for the link. Yeah I have done a few things because of visions as well. I could even see risking my life in certain circumstances. I can see belief being that powerful.  

I suppose that the Jesus story is mundane enough that I don’t have a real reason to doubt it. Yes the magical stuff is what happens in legends, but I’m sure there have been quite a few Jesus like characters, so it’s not hard to believe that it happened at around that time, and this one just stuck and was giving more of a back story latter.

Heck there are still people that think David Koresh was Jesus, and the story happened all over again. If that one stuck around for a 1000 years with legendary inserts, we would have a similar sorry only with records. 

 

Edited by White Crane Feather
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Festina
On 12/11/2019 at 7:49 PM, cormac mac airt said:

That's a lot more entertaining than the current speculation. :D

cormac

What about this?  He obviously knows, this Great Sage and poet of our age.  Chilling, is it not? See my previous post about gematria and 9/11.  

Murder By Numbers.

https://youtu.be/W0geXR6qM7E

https://genius.com/The-police-murder-by-numbers-lyricsnd poet 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Festina Lente

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android
On 12/6/2019 at 9:50 AM, 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 agree that "Jesus was the son of God who was born of a virgin and yada yada"..... are absolutely "extraordinary claims". They are claims I don't believe in. However, let's leap beyond what we both agree on. Purely from an historical perspective, you seem to be saying that in order to determine whether a figure existed in real history, we need at least one of two things:

* The author MUST have met the individual he or she is writing about! And/or,

* An historical figure MUST leave physical evidence behind in order to be considered as such!

Using these two criteria, how many figures from ancient history that we accept to be "historical fact" would we change to "probably never have existed in the first place"????? Like I said, I don't believe in the miracles of the Bible but if I were to hold such a rigid view of ancient history as to demand unrealistic levels of proof or else assume "they never existed" then almost everything historians know about ancient history and people who are alleged to have lived in ancient history would be chucked in the bin. 

And I don't like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 

~ Regards, PA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android

The author of this article is making a mountain out of a molehill, in my estimation. They use unrealistic standards for ancient texts and then apply it to Jesus. 99.99999% of historians (you know, the people who studied their entire lives the topic of ancient cultures and people) accept an historical Jesus (but 99.999999% of historians are not practising Christians). And yes, this is uncomfortably close to an "argument from authority". But if 99.9999% of biologists claim that evolution is a fact, and then a Young Earth Creationist begins to use words like "irreducible complexity"..... yyour only conclusion is that this poor fella is a victim of his own hubris and the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

People who don't believe in the historicity of Jesus are, in my opinion (yes, that dreaded O word) guilty of falling into the Dunning-Kruger effect and thinking that they as a layperson have the expertise to tell the experts what is right and what is not. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
2 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

The author of this article is making a mountain out of a molehill, in my estimation. They use unrealistic standards for ancient texts and then apply it to Jesus. 99.99999% of historians (you know, the people who studied their entire lives the topic of ancient cultures and people) accept an historical Jesus (but 99.999999% of historians are not practising Christians). And yes, this is uncomfortably close to an "argument from authority". But if 99.9999% of biologists claim that evolution is a fact, and then a Young Earth Creationist begins to use words like "irreducible complexity"..... yyour only conclusion is that this poor fella is a victim of his own hubris and the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

People who don't believe in the historicity of Jesus are, in my opinion (yes, that dreaded O word) guilty of falling into the Dunning-Kruger effect and thinking that they as a layperson have the expertise to tell the experts what is right and what is not. 

I really don't know whether that % of historians of the period, agrees with the proposition of the historical Jesus, but it certainly suits the agenda of some here, to promote the idea it is a "live" debate that he was a literary  invention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne
36 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

People who don't believe in the historicity of Jesus are, in my opinion (yes, that dreaded O word) guilty of falling into the Dunning-Kruger effect and thinking that they as a layperson have the expertise to tell the experts what is right and what is not. 

But which Jesus are we discussing? IIRC, there were three or four "Jesuses" (Jesus-I?) running around at the time.

And by "Historical Jesus", do we discount all the alleged miracles? And that whole "only begotten son of God" stuff?

If we are talking about a 1st century Rabbi who tried to teach people to be better towards each other, I accept that. And he is no more divine than Ghandi, Martin Luther King, or John Lennon.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zep73
33 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Using these two criteria, how many figures from ancient history that we accept to be "historical fact" would we change to "probably never have existed in the first place"????? Like I said, I don't believe in the miracles of the Bible but if I were to hold such a rigid view of ancient history as to demand unrealistic levels of proof or else assume "they never existed" then almost everything historians know about ancient history and people who are alleged to have lived in ancient history would be chucked in the bin. 

And I don't like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 

Hello Paranandr Oidoid (sorry for messing your name up ;-)

The reason I am almost certain that the bible-Jesus never existed, is not just because of the article, but mainly because of all the gods, myths, legends and savior-figures that predates him, and who - funny enough - each have one or more commonalities they "share" with him, or events in his life. The article just adds to the pile.
It's just too far fetched to believe that all the legends came to life with him. I don't buy it.

As for other historical figures, I agree that we need to turn down the demands a notch, before we dismiss their historical existence. But we should also look at the context of their description. Does it seem like something the writer usually writes? Is it out of the ordinary? Does it resemble forgery? If no alarm bells sound, and it seems typical for the writer, there's no need to doubt it.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.