And I’d ask him if he wanted to try to ride my unicycle. 
I took the wording from the Apostles Creed.
That sounds like a lot of a fun and I’d be interested in watching some episodes if they were available.
That guy who fought Rocky?
In Rocky VI through Rocky XVII. There were 12 of them. 
Measure for Measure had it right, it was called Meeting of the Minds. No idea if it’s available anywhere. If it’s not it should be. The whole concept should be brought back, actually.
As should Jesus.
Why should you invite him?
Let him pay for dinner, especially the wine, fish & bread.
His Dad gets it for him, wholesale.
Come on. When people play these parlor games and say “Jesus” it’s obvious they don’t mean Jesus Garcia, the guy who lives on the end of the block. Why would he be a fantasy dinner guest? He’s having a barbecue Saturday. Bring the kids!
How about this: “Bring me the person the Jesus in the King James Version of the Bible is based upon who lived the longest time ago.” If that comes up “no such person”, the mechanism just screwing with me and can’t even bring me someone as well-documented as Ronald Reagan.
Literal genies can be fun, right up to the point they cease being literal and start being jackasses.
You can repeat this as often as you like. Won’t make it any truer, though. I can just request to have Ronald Wilson Reagan, Cubs’ radio announcer, author of “Where’s the Rest of Me?” and graduate of Eureka College, and --voila. If I decide to ask for less-well-documented data, “Reagan, you know, that guy who all these right-wing nutjobs cream in their jeans over,” I’m taking my chances.
You might be confident that referring to the Bible must taken as an indisputable fact. I’m not–it’s loaded with factual errors, myths, inconsistencies. Referring to it as a source of reliable data reveals your bias in this context–you would prefer risking not getting to play my little game to learning how poor the Bible is a source of reliable data. You’d just be spiting yourself, but it’s fascinating to watch, I admit.
This is all about risk/reward, and you’re risking a lot and then getting mad at me for opining that I’d play it much more safely than you would.
Look, it hardly matters how reliable the Bible is, or isn’t. Either there was an actual itinerant Judean preacher during the reign of Tiberius who was the basis for the Jesus of the Gospels, or there wasn’t. If there was, that’s the one we want. If not, then we’re SOL. I suppose it’s possible that the Gospel writers could have cobbled the story of Jesus together from the lives of two or more such characters, but the likelihood of that seems pretty remote, and I’d certainly concede that that would be another SOL case.
I’m missing the importance of translating this concept into something a step away from something you could feed into a computer. As Larry Borgia said, it’s clear we’re not talking about Jésus Garcia who lives down at the end of the block.
ETA: read “the basis for the Jesus of the Gospels” with emphasis on basis. If there was one such preacher living at that time that provided the kernel of verisimilitude that the Gospel writers started with and then wrapped a pile of myths from other sources around, then he’s still the guy we want.
You’re correct, RT, in insisting that vague reference is the best we can do here (“the man described in the New Testament”) but my point is that I can point you to data that I consider much reliable in terms of what people DID, or WROTE, or SAID (and not what was written by other people about them) that I can confidently put in my description that will pertain to the person I have in mind, some of whom are more ancient than Jesus Christ. It’s fascinating that Christians, given a chance to talk to a long list of fascinating historical figures, will gladly throw it all away for a dubious chance to talk to someone whom they can’t describe other than in vague, general, unreliable terms.
This all started when I thought, “Sure, I’d put Jesus on my dinner guest list–love to talk to him” until I realized I had no sure way of referencing him as an historical figure.
I would put it this way - I would trade all the other guests for a chance to get a definitive explanation for the origins of Christianity, be that a myth, a mythologized preacher or a real, walking god-man.
And would you take Jesus with you everywhere you’d planned to go?
Or maybe would you change your plans for just a day or so?
Would you be glad to have Him meet your very closest friends,
Or hope that they would stay away until His visit ends?
And would you be glad to have Him stay forever on and on?
Or would you sigh with great relief when He at last was gone?
Oh, it might be interesting to know the things that you would do,
If Jesus came in person to spend some time with you.
Guess I’m missing the fascinatingness of this. Christians believe that the Jesus of the Gospels was a real, historical human being - and God. If the only reason he might not show up for dinner is that he might not have existed, then you’re saying “it’s fascinating that people who believe in Christ, believe in Christ.” Well, um, that’s the point. We Christians do in fact believe in Christ, you know.
Would you be disappointed to find out that Jesus existed, but that he was just a regular guy with no magical powers or divine status, but was just a mistaken fanatic?
Short version: ‘if Jesus stopped by, you’d have to clean up your appearances, wouldn’t you?’ This sorta stuff trains young Christians to be the very best in whitewashed sepulchers.
I would, upon reflection, get so much certain knowledge from asking questions of Abe Lincoln and Julius Caesar and Will Shakespeare and Leonardo Da Vinci and Richard III and my own dad and dozens of others I’m far more confident I could describe with a great deal of accuracy and precision that, finally, I would forego this tempting crapshoot. It’s a mystery you’d be getting closer to, Dio, but there are lots of things I’m curious about, not just the one. The way I’ve set this game up, you wouldn’t even know what you’d done wrong in setting up the description the way you had, so you might well end up knowing nothing more than you do right now.
That’s a less simple question than you think it is, but the answer’s still simple: yes, I would be disappointed (and a bit perplexed), but I’d want to know the truth.
I’d be more perplexed than disappointed, though, because I believe I’ve been interacting internally with something across the decades that seems to have wanted to be acknowledged by this name and has had a much more powerful connection with the stories in the Bible than with other literature. If I was provided with persuasive evidence that Jesus was not who and what I believe he is, I’d want to get a better handle on what’s been going on inside me for all this time, and why it’s acted the way it has.
That “something” exists for people of all religions. It isn’t specific to Christianity or to Jesus. In Hinduism, the belief is that all gods (including Jesus) are really ultimately Brahman (the ultimate ground of all being, beyond all direct understanding or description), and that “gods” are really just devices by which people can gain access. They’re ventriloquist dummies for Brahman. They manifest in ways that people can understand them. They allow you to understand God as a mother, a father, see it in nature, as a jokester, as a warrior, etc. All are metaphors. All are true metaphorically. None are real, just useful images projected by the viewer.