Was Jesus a real person?

[Eise]

18 for Thales vs 3 for Jesus and that is accepting both of Josephus' are legit. Big difference in my opinion. Plus the mathematical works of Thales are real. As a matter of exaggeration of fiction someone couldn't not have come up with those equations. Nothing in Jesus' story is so definitive. All of it could just be pure fiction.

 

That is very one-sided. If you take e.g. Seneca's fragment about Thales: it is only a sneer to Thales' position that everything is made of water. And he just could have read that in the same fragment we have from Aristotle. And also his mathematical proof is disputed. Of course, not that the proof would not be correct, but if he really was the discoverer of it.So your idea of the truth of Thales' Theorem does not add anything to the question if he existed or not. Here you are comparing apples and oranges: mathematical truth and historical truth.

 

Compare this with the gigantic body of texts we have about Jesus. The problem is that you sweep away with one stroke everything that is written by Christians. The historian approach would be to ask: is it possible to find historical facts in these stories? With all the insecurities that historians have to live with, they conclude in an overwhelming majority that he existed. Jesus' existence fits to the historical and cultural background in Palestine as we know from other sources. It fits to what happened afterwards: lot of Christians spreading out in Asia-minor, Greece and Rome. Even antique critics of the new sect never disputed the existence of Jesus. And based on the research of all the sources, historians accept following facts:

 

- Jesus was baptised by John the baptist

- He was a wandering preacher in the tradition of apocalyptics

- He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.

 

That's it. It is not much. But I wonder what would be left of Thales if we would apply the same hard criteria as the mythicists do with the question of Jesus' existence.

[Robittybob1]

... 31 AD is not necessarily the death date of jesus of nazareth ...

Why would you reject 31 AD? I like the Thursday crucifixion as it gives a more mathematically correct three days and three nights in the tomb.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Moontanman]

Compare this with the gigantic body of texts we have about Jesus.

Is there any chance you could cite some of this gigantic body of texts?

[andrewcellini]

Why would you reject 31 AD? I like the Thursday crucifixion as it gives a more mathematically correct three days and three nights in the tomb.

i'm not, historians don't have any exact day or time for the supposed death of jesus of nazareth, hence the range of values that have been estimated.

 

you seem to have a bias to the story-book version of jesus rather than an actual person; you are trying to fit reality to the gospels. if he actually died, what makes you think he rose? why must he spend only 3 days (hint this is a common jewish symbol for harmony between opposing forces) in the tomb if he is a corpse by this time? is he being moved?

[Ten oz]

That is very one-sided. If you take e.g. Seneca's fragment about Thales: it is only a sneer to Thales' position that everything is made of water. And he just could have read that in the same fragment we have from Aristotle. And also his mathematical proof is disputed. Of course, not that the proof would not be correct, but if he really was the discoverer of it.So your idea of the truth of Thales' Theorem does not add anything to the question if he existed or not. Here you are comparing apples and oranges: mathematical truth and historical truth.

 

Compare this with the gigantic body of texts we have about Jesus. The problem is that you sweep away with one stroke everything that is written by Christians. The historian approach would be to ask: is it possible to find historical facts in these stories? With all the insecurities that historians have to live with, they conclude in an overwhelming majority that he existed. Jesus' existence fits to the historical and cultural background in Palestine as we know from other sources. It fits to what happened afterwards: lot of Christians spreading out in Asia-minor, Greece and Rome. Even antique critics of the new sect never disputed the existence of Jesus. And based on the research of all the sources, historians accept following facts:

 

- Jesus was baptised by John the baptist

- He was a wandering preacher in the tradition of apocalyptics

- He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.

 

That's it. It is not much. But I wonder what would be left of Thales if we would apply the same hard criteria as the mythicists do with the question of Jesus' existence.

I do sweep away with one stroke everything written by Christians because all of it includes the impossible and is written by people who by their own words claim to be talking about god first and a man second. Things written about Thales do not include: vigin birth, resurrection, being the son of god, being the human form of god, the holy ghost, miracles, and etc, etc, etc. All references to Thales could be true. No obvious fiction about Thales. None of the writings about Thales being full of obvious exaggerations or worship. That is the point of mentioning the math, the works credited to Thales are possible. The works credited to Jesus by Christians are impossible. Context matters in literature and the Christian works are religious ones about God and not about true history.

 

Archeology and science has proven written history unreliable time after time. History is often written with an agenda. As I referenced earlier up until the last century the majority of historians accepted the Exodus story or Noah's flood as true. Many historians and Archeologists devoted their careers to finding the proof. Now, after many failed attempts and science firmly indicating no, question marks are finally being put around the Exodus story and a global flood. The lack of physical evidence is overwhelming regardless of what has been written. Yet the belief in these stories are so strong many still insist that they must have been based on smaller more regional events and the search continues while most people are still tought these things as truth.

 

Let's be honest; not only is written history often unreliable but it is very bias. Up until recent times the only history treated with respect by the western world was European and Christian history. Europeans cared little for what the Chinese and Indians in Asia had written or believed. Same goes for how they felt about Natives in the Americas. Who knows how much history went up in flames as Europeans conquered the world. History is written bu the winners after all. European history until recently has been world history and everything else just mysticism and voodoo. Some intelligent folks knew better but fear of imprisonment, ridicule, or worse (depending on the century) kept most in their place. So yes, many history books say that Jesus was real, that Thales and other Greeks were real while often calling none European/Christain history's myths. There is over a thousand years of this bias to dig through. Which is why I sweep away Christian writings about Jesus. I have no reason to believe they are honest. No reason to believe they haven't been changed by purposeful editing or bias mistranslation.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Ten oz

[Robittybob1]

i'm not, historians don't have any exact day or time for the supposed death of jesus of nazareth, hence the range of values that have been estimated.

 

you seem to have a bias to the story-book version of jesus rather than an actual person; you are trying to fit reality to the gospels. if he actually died, what makes you think he rose? why must he spend only 3 days (hint this is a common jewish symbol for harmony between opposing forces) in the tomb if he is a corpse by this time? is he being moved?

During the time I was doing my research on the topic, I never found any historian that seemed to finally crack the solution to the Jesus story, the census, the Star of Bethlehem, the birth date, the year of crucifixion, extra. So I was determined to solve it, and the maths had to be correct. Now the reason I wanted to find the solution is what throws most people.

Let's say I had a weird dream where it seemed some "factual information" was part of it.

The subconscious had come up with the following, "Mary the mother of Jesus had twins. Jesus the firstborn and John (St.John) the other whom they abandoned (adopted)."

So where it says in the Gospel of John (John 19; 26-27), where Jesus is handing the care of Mary over to John, it is because he "was" the biological son of Mary, in "fact" the twin brother of Jesus.

So that seemed to give me a whole new set of criteria to solve the dating issue.

If I could find out how old John was I'd know about Jesus.

Now there was a bit more information in the Christian writings about John for he lived a long time (for the Christians were wondering if he would ever die). I found a reference which said he lived till he was about 120, and another where he live till the reign of Trajan, nothing exact but that definitely put his birthdate back a long way into the BC period, but could the nativity stories still be historically accurate?)

 

In the Gospel of John it says:

Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me."

Because of this, the rumor spread among the believers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"

So the author of John is recording part of a conversation he had with Jesus, and its interpretation, for 120 years of age in those days was an exceptional ripe old age.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Robittybob1]

Does anyone think they can really make sense of this?

The Unreliable Birth Story of Jesus

[Eise]

Hi Ten oz,

 

OK, I understand your point about mathematical truth and Thales now.

 

Yes there is no reason to believe the miracle stories about Jesus. However, in the three points I mentioned above, on which most historians agree that these are historical facts, not much is left of these 'amazing stories'.

 

What you must see however is that there is a clear development in Christian scriptures: the more recent they are, the more fantastic they are. From the other side, the older the texts, the more difficult it is to fit the life of Jesus as it described in the ideal of a Messiah figure. Simply said: the life of Jesus was not what one would expect of a saviour of the Jews. The simplest explanation is: Jesus really existed, and his life story had to be bended and reinterpreted so that it would be acceptable for Christians. If everything was made up from the beginning then they could have done a much better job. And again: you do not find politicians or historians in antiquity that deny that Jesus existed.

 

Add the fitting historical context to it (existence of apocalyptic beliefs in those days, Roman occupation of Palestine, existence of Pilate, John the Baptist), and the minimum facts about Jesus one can consider proven are the three I mentioned.

 

For all the reasons why most historians think Jesus really existed, read Ehrman, Did Jesus exist?.

[Robittybob1]

If Jesus was born in 17 BC and died in 31 AD he was 47-48 years of Age and this fits with the writings of Irenaeus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Detection_and_Overthrow_of_the_So-Called_Gnosis#Main_arguments

 

In Book II, chapter 22 of his treatise, Irenaeus asserts that the ministry of Jesus lasted from when he was baptized at the age of 30 until at least the age of 40:

[F]rom the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information. And he remained among them up to the times of

Trajan

. Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement.

[12]

So I take that as confirmation that John remained among the elders during the times of Trajan, and that Jesus was between 40 - 50 when he was crucified.

 

 

Trajan (/ˈtreɪdʒən/; Latin: Imperator Caesar Nerva Traianus Divi Nervae filius Augustus;^[1] 18 September 53 – 8 August 117 AD) wasRoman emperor from 98 AD until his death.

So there was plenty of time for John to get to 120 years of age if he was also born in 17 BC.

 

Do you think Judea had a census in that 17 BC? I think there was some evidence they did, but it was such a long time ago that I did my study, I wonder if I can find it again?

Augustus Caesar had fairly good records of what he got up to. All from Wikipedia.

 

 

Augustus (Latin: Imperator Caesar Divi F. Augustus;^{[note 1]} 23 September 63 BC – 19 August 14 AD) was the founder of the Roman Empire and its first Emperor, ruling from 27 BC until his death in 14 AD.^{[note 2]}

Herod’s rule marked a new beginning in the history of Judea. Judea had been under the rule of the Hasmonean Dynasty from 140 BCE until 37 BCE; Herod overthrew the Hasmonean Antigonus and established the Herodian Dynasty, ruling until his death in 4 BCE.

So neither of those reigns clash with the birth of Jesus in 17 BC.

Edited October 14, 2014 by Robittybob1

[davidivad]

we are all forgotton so quickly...

yea, they nailed that dude.

Edited October 14, 2014 by davidivad

[Robittybob1]

we are all forgotton so quickly.

I wouldn't call 2000 plus years quick. With the internet we have better access to the records than ever before.

[davidivad]

they asked him if he was the the son of god and he said he was just a man.

[Robittybob1]

 

 

18. From that year when Gnaeus and Publius Lentulus were consuls (18 BC), when the taxes fell short, I gave out contributions of grain and money from my granary and patrimony, sometimes to 100,000 men, sometimes to many more.

From the Deeds of Augustus http://www.unrv.com/government/deedsaugustus.php

Could this short fall in the taxes have been the initiator of that taxation recorded in the NT?

they asked him if he was the the son of god and he said he was just a man.

 

When was that? Citation please? The thing that still mystifies me, if my theory is right that Jesus and John were twins, was it just pot luck which of the two would become the Christ? Luke 1:35 The "Holy one" is the firstborn of the womb.

 

 

The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.

Edited October 14, 2014 by Robittybob1

[davidivad]

what, are you a computer or something?

 

"good lord, wheres the front end to this thing?"

maybe python will work...

Edited October 14, 2014 by davidivad

[Robittybob1]

what, are you a computer or something?

 

"good lord, wheres the front end to this thing?"

maybe python will work...

Is that a compliment or a curse? As I said it took me years to come to these conclusions. 1991 - 2001

[davidivad]

thats a long time to be doing someone elses bookkeeping...

must be pretty important.

remember that the client is always right.

Edited October 14, 2014 by davidivad

[Robittybob1]

thats a long time to be doing someone elses bookkeeping...

must be pretty important.

Wouldn't you do something like that if you could discover 'truth'. It was important to me, for sure. I refused to work till I found out what was the truth. OK as I said my family were worried about me, but after a couple of years I did go back to work.

[davidivad]

for me the truth is the human condition.

[Robittybob1]

I'm surprised no one has asked if there was any proof in the historical records if Jesus was a twin? Twins seem to have their own human condition.

A sentence in a book on the Gospel of Thomas written by Elaine Pagels was my first clue that there was something in it, she wrote something like; "Does this mean Jesus had a twin brother as this ancient text implies".

More references were found in the book "Thomas the Contender".

Even in the Christian scriptures is the hidden mystery of why Jesus' brother Jude (Thomas Judas Didymis) was called the "Twin"? Judas might have looked like Jesus, so was he Jesus's twin brother or just a brother?

I wrote to Elaine Pagels but she couldn't relate to Jesus actually having a twin brother.

 

 

Google - "Elaine Pagels, née Hiesey, is the Harrington Spear Paine Professor of Religion at Princeton University. The recipient of a MacArthur Fellowship, she is best known for her studies and writing on the Gnostic Gospels."

"Thomas the Contender" http://gnosis.org/naghamm/bookt.html

To me it seemed to say even thought they call you "the twin" (of Jesus) you are my brother.

The secret words that the savior spoke to Judas Thomas which I, even I, Mathaias, wrote down, while I was walking, listening to them speak with one another.

The savior said, "Brother Thomas while you have time in the world, listen to me, and I will reveal to you the things you have pondered in your mind.

"Now, since it has been said that you are my twin and true companion, examine yourself, and learn who you are, in what way you exist, and how you will come to be. Since you will be called my brother, it is not fitting that you be ignorant of yourself. And I know that you have understood, because you had already understood that I am the knowledge of the truth. So while you accompany me, although you are uncomprehending, you have (in fact) already come to know, and you will be called 'the one who knows himself'. For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all. So then, you, my brother Thomas, have beheld what is obscure to men, that is, what they ignorantly stumble against."

 

 

 

The Gospel opens with the words, "These are the secret words which the Living Jesus spoke, and which the twin, Judas Thomas, wrote down." Those who first read the text were amazed: Did Jesus have a twin brother, as this text implies? Could it be an authentic record of Jesus' sayings? According to its title, it contained the Gospel According to Thomas. Yet unlike the gospels of the New Testament, this text identified itself as a secret gospel. This gospel contains many sayings that parallel those in the New Testament; yet others were strikingly different, -- sayings as strange and compelling as Zen koans.

That phrase is on the internet too today, but remember my research was in the days of nothing but library interloan.

http://www.csec.org/index.php/archives/23-member-archives/355-elaine-pagels-program-3608

Edited October 14, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Robittybob1]

It is a bit weird the references are listed in Google but I can't find them in the threads!

I seem to be the only one who points the finger toward John (the beloved disciple) being Jesus' twin brother.

I have been through a lot of Google results pages and still suprised that no one has picked up on this idea.

 

 

 

 

• Are We Alone In the Universe? - Page 23

   

  forum.woodenboat.com › The Bilge

   

  Aug 21, 2011 - 50 posts - ‎15 authors

  ... in 91 that I had experiences like that you read of in the scriptures. a vision of text appeared to me it said "Mary the Mother of Jesus had twins.

  Are We Alone In the Universe? - Page 32

   

  forum.woodenboat.com › The Bilge

   

  Sep 6, 2011 - 50 posts - ‎11 authors

  Prior to that I had a vision of reading a heavenly book and the message I got was "Mary the Mother of Jesus had twins. Jesus the firstborn and ...

   

   

  Is it possible to believe in God, and be a darwinist at the ...

   

  www.sciforums.com › Philosophy › Religion

   

  Aug 15, 2013 - 20 posts - ‎7 authors

  "Mary the Mother of Jesus had twins. Jesus the firstborn and John (St.John) the other, whom they abandoned (adopted)." Now that gave me ...

Edited October 14, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Ten oz]

@ Robittybob1, in my opinion the New Testement, like most religious texts, are a collection of works written cryptic and ambiguously enough to lend themselves to any number of ideas. Actually, rather than picking solely picking on religious works I should've phrased that as any fictional work sold as non fiction. For example people are seemingly always finding new meaning in the work of Nostradamus or the readings of Edgar Cayce. In the Bible God both seeks vengeance and promotes a proportional response while at the same time champions forgiveness and turning the other cheek. Jesus (god in human form or at least god's human spokesman) said no man is without sin and was seemingly against the death penalty. Meanwhile god himself killed many humans in Babylon, Egypt, flood the while planet, and etc. So I think people can twist the gospels into meaning or telling whatever story they want. Which is one of the reasons I don't trust them as historically accurate. They (the writings) say whatever to translators and believers want them to say.

[Robittybob1]

This Dyneslines blog deals with the issue of the twinship of Jesus:

http://dyneslines.blogspot.co.nz/2008/02/jesus-twin.html

.... On this interpretation Jesus had a twin brother, also born of Mary. One child was divine, the other an ordinary human being. This seems bizarre, yet the situation is not without precedent--at least in classical mythology. One parallel concerns the supreme Greek hero Heracles (Hercules), who had a mortal twin named Iphicles. According to the story, Alcmene had conceived a child with her husband, Amphitryon. Then she attracted the amorous attentions of Zeus, who made love to her in human form--in the guise of her husband Amphitryon. As a result of these couplings two children grew in her womb, one the son of a mortal, the other the son of a god.

In the case of Mary I think we should say both were divine. For if the first born was to be called Jesus what determines which of the two babies, that are twins, comes out first to get the birthright. Was it a 50:50 chance that the real Jesus became the Son of God or did the non real Jesus beat his bother through the birth canal? If you name your babies before they are born did you name them correctly?

I have not been given any answer to this issue yet.

@ Robittybob1, in my opinion the New Testement, like most religious texts, are a collection of works written cryptic and ambiguously enough to lend themselves to any number of ideas. Actually, rather than picking solely picking on religious works I should've phrased that as any fictional work sold as non fiction. For example people are seemingly always finding new meaning in the work of Nostradamus or the readings of Edgar Cayce. In the Bible God both seeks vengeance and promotes a proportional response while at the same time champions forgiveness and turning the other cheek. Jesus (god in human form or at least god's human spokesman) said no man is without sin and was seemingly against the death penalty. Meanwhile god himself killed many humans in Babylon, Egypt, flood the while planet, and etc. So I think people can twist the gospels into meaning or telling whatever story they want. Which is one of the reasons I don't trust them as historically accurate. They (the writings) say whatever to translators and believers want them to say.

That is a reasonable view of the Bible as a whole but in every aspect I have looked into of the history of Jesus it seemed to hold out as long as he was born in 17 BC and died in 31 AD. he was therefore twelve when he returned from Egypt.

 

http://www.christianity.com/god/jesus-christ/life-on-earth/myths-of-the-resurrection-11571385.html?p=3 That explanation was a bit of a laugh!

Edited October 15, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Robittybob1]

... For all the reasons why most historians think Jesus really existed, read Ehrman, Did Jesus exist?.

There is a full AudioBook here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi7SPkzwnNg

I'm listening to it but dozing off, now and then. Struck a section where Erhman is arguing that Jesus and Judas Thomas were actual twins.

Did you note that section Eise?

Edited October 15, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Eise]

I'm listening to it but dozing off, now and then. Struck a section where Erhman is arguing the Jesus and Judas Thomas were actual twins.

Did you note that section Eise?

 

No. Please give me the page number.

 

But I assume it is in one of the last chapters, where Ehrman, beyond what historians generally accept as facts, give his best educated guess as historian about how he sees Jesus' life. He is very clear that this is his subjective view, and that many other historian might not agree. But it has not much to do with your dogmatic view.

[Robittybob1]

 

No. Please give me the page number.

 

But I assume it is in one of the last chapters, where Ehrman, beyond what historians generally accept as facts, give his best educated guess as historian about how he sees Jesus' life. He is very clear that this is his subjective view, and that many other historian might not agree. But it has not much to do with your dogmatic view.

I like your little red friend! it might have been around 4 hours into the Audiobook.