legov Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Fair enough, sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I think it is almost certain that Jesus existed. Social history is ultimately a very difficult subject, as by and large next to nothing written has survived from the classical period. We are left to interperate gravestones for a glimpse into ordinary Roman life. As Crackpot said, Messiahs were ten a penny in Judea, so the likelyhood that one was Jesus is not all that hard to believe. The question as to who he was is obviously the more interesting and impossible to answer. Its likely that Saul/Paul was a charlatan and didn't come into contact with Jesus. I have seen some theories that "Christianity" was a Roman invention as a tool to finally resolve the Jewish question. Give them a messiah, stop the violent sects from killing one another and calm matters down. Whatever the case may be there was a policy change when Vespasian opened up on the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 3, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 3, 2013 On what do you base your almost certainty? The Jesus of the bible did not exist. There are no contemporary accounts despite the number of commentators writing at the time. The Jesus of the bible was invented a couple of generations after he was supposed to have became a zombie. I don't see why the authors would have needed to have based their fiction on any particular one of the uncountable "messiahs". Just like Moby Dick wasn't about a whale the author knew personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Saying the Jesus of the bible did not exist is a whole different discipline than saying Jesus didn't exist at all, which I am sure you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 The Jesus of the bible did not exist.That really depends on how you define "Jesus of the bible".If you mean someone that did everything that is attributed to Jesus in the bible, then no.If you mean a Jew called Jesus who got baptised by John the baptist and was crucified by Pilate, then there's widespread belief that he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 3, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 3, 2013 The only Jesus I know is the one in the bible. I'm clarifying that that is the one we (or is it just me?) are discussing. There have always been "messiahs". We call them cult leaders nowadays. Most cults die when their leader does. There is no evidence that anyone continued to follow Jesus after he died, other than the fiction created a couple of generations later plagiarised (badly) from previous cults. There is no evidence he ever existed. Seeing as the four gospels don't seem to describe the same person, I'm not sure why anyone would want to draw the conclusion that Jesus must have existed. He might have and he might not. The evidence suggests he probably didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 3, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2013 Not buying the Turin shroud then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 3, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 3, 2013 If you mean a Jew called Jesus who got baptised by John the baptist and was crucified by Pilate, then there's widespread belief that he did. I don't care what people believe. There isn't any evidence. There is little contemporary evidence of Pilate (but enough that it is likely he existed). It is unlikely that crucifixion would have been carried out in Pilate's time. It was a rare occurrence then but very common 50-60 years later when the fiction was being made up. Staking was the Roman's usual mode of execution at the time of Pilate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 3, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 3, 2013 Not buying the Turin shroud then? How much do you want for it? Can you wash it first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted March 3, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2013 Not buying the Turin shroud then? How much do you want for it? Can you wash it first? Call it £2 and I will pay the post and packaging, it is delicate mind could be at least 500 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 3, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 3, 2013 It's been touched by an all-powerful god as proof of his existence 1500 years after he lived. How could he be so dumb as to make it delicate? That's the kind of stupid mistake a faker would make. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 You are in a very small minority of historians then if you do not believe that Jesus existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Crucifixtion was a very common method of execution, be it with a cross beam or without, be it to a tree or a sperate stake of wood, nailed to it or strapped to it. Tacitus writes about the X and XV legions under Titus kicking off and using all manner of crucifxition post siege of Jerusalem and there was also plenty staked out after the end of the Servile War on thr Appian Way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 4, 2013 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 4, 2013 All the above just proves the point that nobody actually knows. So how can anybody base an entire religion on it? Easy. They make it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 As Don said, there are two widely accepted facts about Jesus; his baptism and execution. The rest is down to faith I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 4, 2013 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 4, 2013 As Don said, there are two widely accepted facts about Jesus; his baptism and execution. The rest is down to faith I suppose. I agree with Limpid - those two "facts" are only "widely accepted" by Christians. Not a shred of actual contemporary evidence for either. It's ALL down to faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 As Don said, there are two widely accepted facts about Jesus; his baptism and execution. The rest is down to faith I suppose. Facts require evidence . What is the evidence for these two events ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ads Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Widely accepted by historians, Christian or otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 4, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 4, 2013 Widely accepted by historians, Christian or otherwise. They really aren't, no matter how many times it gets repeated. It's easy to prove me wrong though. Show me the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Widely accepted by historians, Christian or otherwise. Historians don't adhere to the same stringent analysis that a scientist would per se. There isn't a historian in the world who could claim to have any concrete evidence in regards to the biblical character Jesus . It's all maybes, probablys and possiblys. Lots of things are widely accepted by historians but it doesn't make them fact . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts