Was Jesus a real person?

[davidivad]

for me, there are two scenarios.

one where god is a supreme reason for all.

one where existance can be logically explained.

i will never force a man's faith because it is his choice, but the most reasonable answer is the winner for me.

[Robittybob1]

I think we have taken this thread off topic, if you really want to discuss this in detail i suggest you start your own thread. I have to say that if god is real and he wants me to know he is real then he knows exactly what would convince me. I could say something flippant like move planets or raise the long dead but technology could conceivably do these things, I have no idea how and see no reason to speculate in that direction.

 

But the burden of proof isn't on me, I simply do not buy what theists are selling so proof would depend on what god you are selling. If you take a literal translation of the bible as factual then the god of the bible is demonstrably not true.

That was typical, all along they want empirical evidence but can never define what the empirical evidence might be. In the gospel stories Jesus proves himself by doing miracles. Now that must be a struggle, for a rationalist, I suspect, could never expect a miracle, yet that is just what is needed.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Moontanman]

That was typical, all along they want empirical evidence but can never define what the empirical evidence might be. In the gospel stories Jesus proves himself by doing miracles. Now that must be a struggle, for a rationalist, I suspect, could never expect a miracle, yet that is just what is needed.

Define a miracle...

That was typical, all along they want empirical evidence but can never define what the empirical evidence might be. In the gospel stories Jesus proves himself by doing miracles. Now that must be a struggle, for a rationalist, I suspect, could never expect a miracle, yet that is just what is needed.

Define a miracle...

Oh and yeah, give me some evidence that Jesus performed miracles... I've seen a mans leg grow three inches under a pastors healing touch, very impressive if you don't know the con...

[Robittybob1]

Define a miracle...

 

Oh and yeah, give me some evidence that Jesus performed miracles... I've seen a mans leg grow three inches under a pastors healing touch, very impressive if you don't know the con...

One that springs to mind was Lazarus. Bring a person up from the grave. I previously mentioned Mel Tari, he said he has done that.

http://taministries.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Raising-the-dead-v2.0.pdf

Mel Tari, who wrote ‘Like a Mighty Wind’, a book about

the Indonesian revivals, wrote of several people being raised

from the dead - even a body that had been dead two days and

was decaying badly. However, another book (much less

popular!), was written after this revival, refuting the claims

with evidence of false or third hand reports. The research

showed that many of the ‘dead’ people had rather been in

comas and that the local people often did not understand the

difference between the two states.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Ten oz]

Earlier in the thread I saw comments made that after 2,000yrs anyone could be said not to have lived. That plus the argument that Jesus' having been real is the best explanation for Christianity feels empty. Julius Caesar lived over 2,000yrs ago and there is an enormous amount of evidence of his life. Much was written about him and art work created contemporarily to his life. Not only in Roman but all the areas he traveled and impacted like Egypt. Ceasar himself wrote things and fragments of those writings exist. No magical claims to dig though searching for cross references. Tons of contemporary work. Everything from portraits, cions that bore his face, to works made from his own hands.

one might argue that Caesar can not be compared to Jesus because Caesar was so powerful and influential; what was Jesus? Jesus had he lived was influential enough to convince people he was GOD and start a religion that has gone on to dominate the globe. Billions pray to Jesus today, not Caesar. Yet Caesar has for more documented? Caesar was obviously more important to his contemporaries?

[Eise]

one might argue that Caesar can not be compared to Jesus because Caesar was so powerful and influential; what was Jesus? Jesus had he lived was influential enough to convince people he was GOD and start a religion that has gone on to dominate the globe. Billions pray to Jesus today, not Caesar. Yet Caesar has for more documented? Caesar was obviously more important to his contemporaries?

 

Again so silly. Caesar was Emperor of Rome. And why would a huge movement could not have a small beginning? In the time Jesus lived nearly anybody found it interesting. It only became really interesting some time afterwards. Then people started writing down what they had heard about Jesus. Much exaggeration, more and more during time. So of course we nearly only have Christian sources. What could we expect otherwise?

 

But you reject the Pauline letters and the gospels, without even knowing how historians treat these texts, how they conclude that there is a historical core in it. With one sweeping 'it was written by believers, so there are of no historical value at all' you refuse to have a closer look. Is that a scientific attitude? Why not study them as an historian, and see what one gets?

 

Surely: not the son of God changing water into wine. But a person who some people found so fascinating that they continued to believe in his teachings.

[Ten oz]

 

Again so silly. Caesar was Emperor of Rome.

And Jesus was said to be GOD by those whom bothered to chronicle his life.

[Robittybob1]

Earlier in the thread I saw comments made that after 2,000yrs anyone could be said not to have lived. That plus the argument that Jesus' having been real is the best explanation for Christianity feels empty. Julius Caesar lived over 2,000yrs ago and there is an enormous amount of evidence of his life. Much was written about him and art work created contemporarily to his life. Not only in Roman but all the areas he traveled and impacted like Egypt. Ceasar himself wrote things and fragments of those writings exist. No magical claims to dig though searching for cross references. Tons of contemporary work. Everything from portraits, cions that bore his face, to works made from his own hands.

one might argue that Caesar can not be compared to Jesus because Caesar was so powerful and influential; what was Jesus? Jesus had he lived was influential enough to convince people he was GOD and start a religion that has gone on to dominate the globe. Billions pray to Jesus today, not Caesar. Yet Caesar has for more documented? Caesar was obviously more important to his contemporaries?

Well what about the story we had to swallow as children, the one about Romulus and Remus the founders of Rome?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romulus_and_Remus

 

 

Possible historical bases for the broad mythological narrative remain unclear and disputed.^[4] The image of the she-wolf suckling the divinely fathered twins became an iconic representation of the city and its founding legend, making Romulus and Remus preeminent among the feral children of ancient mythography.

And Jesus was said to be GOD by those whom bothered to chronicle his life.

Give us some confirming references of what you mean please?

Edited October 22, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Moontanman]

One that springs to mind was Lazarus. Bring a person up from the grave. I previously mentioned Mel Tari, he said he has done that.

http://taministries.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Raising-the-dead-v2.0.pdf

So your miraculous evidence is a conman?

[Robittybob1]

So your miraculous evidence is a conman?

Is anyone perfect? I knew him as an evangelist and later I read he has had some bad business deals and they make a fuss over it. Can that change what happened in Indonesia in the sixties?

 

Now there is a YT with Mel talking about crossing a river, it is called "walk on water miracle" but he clearly says that as far as they know they were walking on the bottom of the river.

 

So it is not as if he sets out to deceive you, but others later call that "walking on water".

Edited October 22, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Moontanman]

Is anyone perfect? I knew him as an evangelist and later I read he has had some bad business deals and they make a fuss over it. Can that change what happened in Indonesia in the sixties?

 

Now there is a YT with Mel talking about crossing a river, it is called "walk on water miracle" but he clearly says that as far as they know they were walking on the bottom of the river.

 

So it is not as if he sets out to deceive you, but others later call that "walking on water".

There is a word for your world view... I see no reason to continue to discuss this with anyone who can't see a problem that is that blatant...

[Robittybob1]

There is a word for your world view... I see no reason to continue to discuss this with anyone who can't see a problem that is that blatant...

And what is that word? The person with the problem is you!

Edited October 23, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Moontanman]

And what is that word? The person with the problem is you!

Gullibility...

[Robittybob1]

Gullibility...

I didn't fall for your pet dragon prank. You have no reason to call me gullible for you can't show that I have failed in any aspect.

[Eise]

And Jesus was said to be GOD by those whom bothered to chronicle his life.

 

C'mon, Ten oz. You are really disqualifying yourself. Caesar fought a war, conquered France, got dictator of Rome, and was killed in the senate, etc etc.

 

And Jesus was a 'guru' of a small sect, that afterwards happened to grow out to a huge religion. A preacher having whatever pretensions (I don't think you find in the early gospels that Jesus calls himself God), why should a non Christian historian be interested in such a person?

Edited October 23, 2014 by Eise

[Robittybob1]

 

C'mon, Ten oz. You are really disqualifying yourself. Caesar fought a war, conquered France, got dictator of Rome, and was killed in the senate, etc etc.

 

And Jesus was a 'guru' of a small sect, that afterwards happened to grow out to a huge religion. A preacher having whatever pretensions (I don't think you find in the early gospels that Jesus calls himself God), why should a non Christian historian be interested in such a person?

This sort of reminds me of how I felt when I was exploring the Bible and I wondered why didn't Jesus make sure his story was properly documented?

 

So maybe this Gospel written by Jesus will be found one day, just like the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and the Nag Hammadi Texts were found. It is still possible that a new gospel will be found. But where? Will it be another Book of Mormon that vanishes?

Has it been hidden in something like the Ark of the Covenant? There was the Copper Scroll which gave all the locations of the treasures from the Temple but nothing has been found yet. That Ark must be around somewhere!

"Mystery Of 'Copper' Dead Sea Scroll Unravels"

http://www.rense.com/general21/my.htm

Was that ever followed up? I haven't heard about it if it has.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Eise]

This sort of reminds me of how I felt when I was exploring the Bible and I wondered why didn't Jesus make sure his story was properly documented?

 

Because he was just a preacher, like many others, who had a few more followers, and was not really the son of God with a responsibility for all of humanity. He just warned his audience that they should prepare for the kingdom of God, that would come soon. Historians assume he could not write, but he possibly could read, because he knew the Jewish scriptures.

 

Jesus was not planning a world religion, he was preaching his 'insights' to everybody who wanted to hear it, that's all.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Eise

[Robittybob1]

 

Because he was just a preacher, like many others, who had a few more followers, and was not really the son of God with a responsibility for all of humanity. He just warned his audience that they should prepare for the kingdom of God, that would come soon. Historians assume he could not write, but he possibly could read, because he knew the Jewish scriptures.

 

Jesus was not planning a world religion, he was preaching his 'insights' to everybody who wanted to hear it, that's all.

Yes he would have been too busy performing miracles and healing all the sick to have time to write anything down!

 

I'm not a theologian, in any form, but I seemed to prick up my ears when I heard this verse being mentioned today: 1 John 5:6-8

For it I think if someone could decipher what it is saying it will give us a clue as to how to prove whether Jesus was real or not.

What does all that mean about there being "three that testify"?

http://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm

 

 

Overcoming the World

…6This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify: 8the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

I read a few commentaries, on the above verses, but all seemed to throw us back into the Bible for proof.

 

The Bible can't be the water and the blood.

 

The Bible is too inaccurate to be of use in this case. I might say I know what "spirit" is for I read from that spiritual book, but water and blood seem more physical or even physical (water) and biological (blood).

Blood has at times referred to spirit, and water as semen, but that would mean that spirit comes up twice.

I have absolutely no idea how water and blood could testify to anything.

OK even forensically blood would only be useful if you had the body as well.

 

Could it be water; that is the person Jesus.

The blood as in blood relatives, friends and disciples (as recorded in the Gospels)

The Spirit as in revelations through the Spirit.

 

That would have made sense in the days of Jesus and soon after but not today, as the water and the blood are both recorded in the Bible.

Does that mean there has to be some other proof out there? For if we accept that the Bible is one of the three, and the spirit the other, what then is the third testimony?

There must be something else somewhere.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Robittybob1

[yahya515]

Many accept as a matter of fact that Jesus, as described by Christianity, was a real person and it is only his divinity that is up for debate. I grew up believing as much. As an adult I realized that I have never read credible information that proved a historical Jesus. In discussions with people through the years I have found that challanging a real life historical Jesus quickly becomes battles where I am asked to prove he wasn't real person. Ultimately there seems to be a general lack of proof either way. So I ask the forum for thoughts. Is the Christian story of Jesus based on an actual living man named Jesus who live around 2,000 years ago?

Here is what I find to be a compelling explanation for why a historical Jesus most likely did not exist.

I think Jesus is real. the person who created this character is definitely God, because such imaginary person with everything Jesus did and said, has not been created, even by people who compose novels and movies, spiderman, batman ,etc are nothing compared to Jesus, and those people who invented movie characters witnessed the visit to Mars and Moon, because he was invented by God he is real.

[Robittybob1]

I think Jesus is real. the person who created this character is definitely God, because such imaginary person with everything Jesus did and said, has not been created, even by people who compose novels and movies, spiderman, batman ,etc are nothing compared to Jesus, and those people who invented movie characters witnessed the visit to Mars and Moon, because he was invented by God he is real.

That is an interesting point of view, if I understood you correctly, you are saying "Jesus was formed in the imagination of God so he is therefore real".

Thank you.

(IF we are living in a 3D simulation theory??) Who imagines us?

Edited October 23, 2014 by Robittybob1

[Moontanman]

I didn't fall for your pet dragon prank. You have no reason to call me gullible for you can't show that I have failed in any aspect.

There is nothing but empty assertions in everything you claim, gullibility is the root of everything you have asserted. I might disagree with some of the rest of the posters but your assertions are nothing but claims made on faith, that is gullibility... You have absolutely no evidence but you assert it as if it were true based on nothing but baseless assertions. I can't prove your assertions aren't real any more than you can prove my invisible dragon isn't real.

 

That which can be asserted with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence...

I think Jesus is real. the person who created this character is definitely God, because such imaginary person with everything Jesus did and said, has not been created, even by people who compose novels and movies, spiderman, batman ,etc are nothing compared to Jesus, and those people who invented movie characters witnessed the visit to Mars and Moon, because he was invented by God he is real.

I think Jesus is not real because anyone could have made up his character, the idea of Jesus is based on several other gods made up by people. Humans have created many characters beyond Jesus in power and scope and none of them are real, Yahweh has no physical evidence any more than Thor or Zeus and your claim that Jesus is real because he was made up by God is nonsense of the highest order...

[Robittybob1]

There is nothing but empty assertions in everything you claim, gullibility is the root of everything you have asserted. I might disagree with some of the rest of the posters but your assertions are nothing but claims made on faith, that is gullibility... You have absolutely no evidence but you assert it as if it were true based on nothing but baseless assertions. I can't prove your assertions aren't real any more than you can prove my invisible dragon isn't real.

 

That which can be asserted with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence...

 

 

So throughout history when someone said I had a dream, or a vision, or even a thought you would dismiss this as a mere assertion? I had my vision and it came the second time too for I denied it the first time, and I'm asking that you also get it as a measure of grace.

Are you denying what actually happened simply because you yourself didn't experience this?

 

What claims do you make for your pet dragon?

[yahya515]

There is nothing but empty assertions in everything you claim, gullibility is the root of everything you have asserted. I might disagree with some of the rest of the posters but your assertions are nothing but claims made on faith, that is gullibility... You have absolutely no evidence but you assert it as if it were true based on nothing but baseless assertions. I can't prove your assertions aren't real any more than you can prove my invisible dragon isn't real.That which can be asserted with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence... I think Jesus is not real because anyone could have made up his character, the idea of Jesus is based on several other gods made up by people. Humans have created many characters beyond Jesus in power and scope and none of them are real, Yahweh has no physical evidence any more than Thor or Zeus and your claim that Jesus is real because he was made up by God is nonsense of the highest order...

There are two things that make something real imaginary, lying and saying things that are impossible, for God he does not lie and he can do anything.

[John Cuthber]

There are two things that make something real imaginary, lying and saying things that are impossible, for God he does not lie and he can do anything.

Anything apart from demonstrate His own existence or so it seems.

Do you understand that making statements like that, without any evidence, on a science website makes you look a bit silly?

It's also very close to the logical fallacy called "begging the question".

Please explain why you do it.

[Moontanman]

So throughout history when someone said I had a dream, or a vision, or even a thought you would dismiss this as a mere assertion? I had my vision and it came the second time too for I denied it the first time, and I'm asking that you also get it as a measure of grace.

Are you denying what actually happened simply because you yourself didn't experience this?

Exactly, if you can't show it to someone else it is not knowledge. Like I said earlier, millions of people think they get abducted by aliens every night does that mean I have to consider their reports factual?

 

 

 

 

What claims do you make for your pet dragon?

 

 

Only I can see it or interact with it, that makes it an unsupported assertion unworthy of anyone's belief...

Edited October 23, 2014 by Moontanman