he’s entirely fictional.
Anything else you’d like to say?
For example, perhaps you’d like to link to this thread.
Jesus and Buddha are myths with the same origin.
:dubious:
Meh. I’m an atheist, but I have no problem believing that a guy named Joshua bar-Joseph existed. His life story, though, has been comingled with so much myth that hard facts are nonexistant.
To declare he never existed seems foolish to me.
My theory is that Jesus was a magician and the Bible is a very large chinese whisper.
Let me guess: You just read Acharya S. or the 16 Crucified saviors?
Who’s Joshua bar-Joseph? Is that Jesus’ real name? I have nothing to add to the debate, I just didn’t understand the reference.
no.
Why? He never wrote anything. Nothing he supposedly said was original. There’s probably more proof that he didn’t exist than that he did.
Well, here is your big opportunity to present said proof. Some ‘proof’ for the Jesus/Buddha goofiness would also be nice.
The same origin??? Then, I’m going to ask for some evidences. Seems like a rather gratuitous statement…
Joshua bar Joseph = Jesus fils de Joseph
You’re talking out of your ass, aren’t you? Had you proof you would have said, “There’s proof that he didn’t exist, and here it is.”
Put up or shut up.
Depends what you mean by “Jesus never existed”. For instance, is Jesus story was the result of conflating the stories of several characters? For instance, of the rabbi Jesus ben Sira and of the the Essenian “master of justice”, could you really say that Jesus existed? What if it were a completely transformed story based on some Zaelot (not sure it’s the proper english spelling) who fought the roman occupation?
Some people point out that the belief in an angelos-christos (who wasn’t a living human) in messianist judaic sects predate the reference to an incarnated christ and that the most likely authentic letters of Paul don’t include any reference to the life of such an human messiah, and deduce from these elements that the original belief was in a spiritual and not incarnated christ, and that the story of his earthly life was made up later on the basis of various tales.
I’ve a two tomes book on my shelves where the author try to demonstrate that the main elements of the life of Jesus (and some precise details) can be derived by Mishdrah from the old testament, and that the story wasn’t the acccount of a real life, but predictions about the Messiah, originating in the Jewish community in Alexandria during the 1st century B.C., predictions which would have been later completed/embellished by a messianic sect.
Not believing in the actual existence of a Jesus who would have been at least somehow similar to what is described by the gospels isn’t considered as foolish by everybody.
Well, I’m convinced!
Okay, not so much. Regardless of what one may think of Christ or Christianity, the evidence that the man we call Jesus Christ actually existed is good.
The Roman historian Tacitus (AD c.56-c.115) recorded that the Christian movement began with Jesus, sentenced to death by Pontius Pilate. Suetonus (AD c.69-c.140) refers to the expulsion of the Jews from Rome because of a riot instigated by “Chrestus” in AD c.48, generally thought to be a confused reference to Jesus and the Christians. Pliny the Younger ( AD c.61-c.112) wrote in a letter to Emperor Trajan that the Christians sang a hymm to Christ as God. Among early Jewish sources, the Babylonian Talmud speaks of a man named Jeshu ha-Nocri, a false prophet who was hanged on the eve of the Passover for sorcery and false teaching. The historian Josephus ( AD 37, d. after 93) recounts the AD 62 martyrdom of James, “the brother of Jesus called the Christ.”
By and large the Roman histories surrounding Jesus show a recongituion that a cult had sprung up around a prisoner they had executed, and the Jewish sources say that he was a Jew put to death for false prophecy and that he had a brother named James. Animosity between Jews and Christians was great at the time, and it would have been easy for the Jews to question whether Jesus actually existed, but neither they nor the Romans ever did.
I’m guessing he’s referring to the “Mythic Hero Archetype” theory that notes the many shared events of ancient legendary heroes. As noted in the link, though, that in itself doesn’t mean a Jesus never existed.
When you add that to the lack of record of such a lionization, though, despite a good number of other records of the time and area, it doesn’t look likely.
Almost. It’s “zealot”, related to “zeal”, which means the same as “fervour” etc.
I guess to some degree it depends on how you define “Jesus.” The Jesus of the gospels is largely mythologized, Paul’s "Christ’ even more so. If youdefine Jesus as an incarnation of God walking the earth and performing miracles, you aren’t going to find any historical support.
If you define Jesus simply as Yeshua, the founder of the Jewish sect that evolved into Christianity, then there is some extra-Biblical evidence in Josephus and Tacitus that such a figure existed who was executed by Pilate. Even if we completely discount the heavily interpolated passage from Josephus, there is still another passage in jewish Antiquities which makes reference to the stoning of James, the brother of Jesus.
There is also the circumstancial evidence of Christianity itself, including the sayings tradition attributed to him. I think the weight of the evidence is that some historical figure existed whose teachings gave rise to Christianity. I think the evidence is also pretty strong that this guy was crucified. Other than that, we can’t say much at all for certain.
In short, there was probably a guy named Jesus who taught some cool things and had a following which continued after his execution. Whether he was God is a whole different question.
If Jesus had never existed, the Jewish & Roman authorities prior to 312 could have made short work of the C’tian movement, which made assertions that certain events occurred around an actual flesh&blood person. Dismiss the very existence of the person & the movement either vanishes or has to reformulate, as did some Gnostic groups which placed more importance on ideas & mythic archetypes than what did or didn’t happen in the material realm.