Was Jesus real or pure myth?

[Wertbag]

I just finished watching the latest Paulogia video, where Godless Engineer gives a summary of the mythicist position in a 20min video:

 

 

While a lot of the history is suspicious, and the number of similar God-men surprisingly high, is that enough to conclude Jesus never existed?  I feel both sides have fair arguements, and the data is limited to base any firm answer on, so I've ended up sitting on the fence on this one.

 

I probably lean to a real person, in part because of the point raised that Jesus is said to be from Nazareth, then the gospel authours needed to shoe horn in his birth in Bethlehem to meet prophecy.  If they were just going to make him up, then why not simply say he was from Bethlehem and skip all of the work to force him to be born several weeks travel away from his home?

 

What do you all think?  Real or Myth?

[pantheory]

I would say that it is certain that the Jesus of the Bible never existed. Nor is/ was there a God in the first place which fathered him, or someone like him.

 

But the question then arises whether there were  real living people from which parts of the New Testament are based? were any of these people named Jesus upon language translation?

 

Most biblical scholars claim there was no non-biblical evidence for Jesus during his lifetime. But there is a great deal of evidence that Christianity spread quickly  after the supposed death of Jesus. During the time of Nero, hatred of the Jews and Christians became popular in Rome. This was only about 30 years after the supposed death of Jesus. Nero supported the Roman religion of Gods financially and to do this he had banned many other religions in Rome punishable by death. Judaism and Christianity (considered a sect of Judaism) were two of the many banned religions that could not be openly practiced in Rome. In a edict of 64 AD, even torture was allowed to get a confession from those practicing banned religions. This was profitable for Nero since he could have believers properties seized for himself. 

 

Jews were in rebellion at the time in Israel and Judea, which cost Nero and his follower a lot of money to quell the rebellions. So those practicing Judaism, and the Christianity sect of it, were hated by those that knew of them and considered them anti-Roman. Collectively they were one of the favorite targets of destruction and Colosseum torture entertainment.

 

This was about 30 years after the supposed death of Jesus. Most Christians believe the spread of Christianity was because of the teachings of Paul, But was Paul a real person? Although there seems to be historical evidence that Paul was a real person who taught Christianity, Paul never met Jesus  when Jesus was alive. Just the spirit of Jesus supposedly appeared to Paul in a dream posthumously, according to the Bible.  But none of the historical documents concerning Paul can be verified as being written during Paul's lifetime, and one or more may even be forgeries of the historians.

 

https://mwtb.org/products/pmt-historical-evidence-for-the-apostle-paul?variant=41063788675252

 

 

[Joshpantera]

On 4/21/2022 at 5:41 PM, Wertbag said:

I probably lean to a real person, in part because of the point raised that Jesus is said to be from Nazareth, then the gospel authours needed to shoe horn in his birth in Bethlehem to meet prophecy.  If they were just going to make him up, then why not simply say he was from Bethlehem and skip all of the work to force him to be born several weeks travel away from his home?

 

What do you all think?  Real or Myth?

 

That stuff was done well after the fact. There's so much more to the jesus puzzle. Nazareth was a second century settlement and probably not much of anything early first century, if it all. A Nazarene was a reference to a religious sect. So it looks like jesus the Nazarene was presented as jesus from Nazareth during the 2nd century when such a place existed and coinciding with when the gospels appear into history. They are not in the historical record until after Marcion's gospel sometime around the mid 2nd century. Someone else then sees a problem with it and makes a shift to Bethlehem for prophetic reasons, who knows? 

 

But that's all basically an aside to the biggest glaring issue. The gospel myths have literally taken bits and pieces from the lives of some of the 20 Jesus's mentioned in Josephus and woven them together as if they are referring to a single person. There's a Jesus who did this, a Jesus who did that. That's more evidence pointing towards 2nd century creation because it had to have happened after Josephus wrote in the late 1st century. People who were making these myths were trying to use historical works to try and weave the story together. A myth with projections backwards. Some historical revision involved. 

 

This is why Ehrman's arguments for a literal jesus of Nazareth from the 1st century as described has many problems with it and some people don't just roll over and accept his thesis. Which part of the story was the real jesus? Why would there be not the real jesus's in the story too? Pin the tail on the real jesus - a pointless game theologian's play. Dammed to sure failure IMO. 

 

That's why I voted 100% myth. I'm good with that conclusion. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I'm with @Joshpantera, here.  The prophecy was not originally that messiah would come from Nazareth; but, rather, that he would be a Nazarite, meaning that he would have taken the Nazarite vow.  This was a vow of separation and consecration to god, which included not consuming alcohol (or even grape juice), not getting a haircut, and not touching a dead body for the duration of the vow.  Samson was a Nazarite, though he consistently broke his vow concerning alcohol, killing folk (and thereby touching dead bodies), and ultimately, having his head shaved by that deceitful succubus, Delilah.  Another example of an omniscient god who doesn't understand languages well enough to accurately translate his meaning.  

[pantheory]

 

 

 

 

Jesus was a nice guy with a nice smile. It was easy for him to change water into wine, a miracle proving his dedication to human happiness.  He always carried a leather jug of wine in his purse.

But what is the closest sweet wine today to that created by Jesus?

Manischewitz makes that claim   Manischewitz is also the only kosher wine you can get at almost any liquor store.

 

[pantheory]

Of course Jesus was real. Here is a authentic picture of hm  painted in his own time, commissioned by a well-to-do admirer of Jesus, his disciples, and John.

 

 

 

 

John the Baptist, babtising Jesus 26 AD.

 

This picture is in the Vatican today with other priceless pictures like it.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

I'm not certain (no one can be) but think it is possible he existed among other god men of the era.  See my thread in TESTIMONIALS, called "In Defense of Jesus".

[◊ Weezer ◊]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:19 PM, pantheory said:

Of course Jesus was real. Here is a authentic picture of hm  painted in his own time, commissioned by a well-to-do admirer of Jesus, his disciples, and John.

 

 

 

 

John the Baptist, babtising Jesus 26 AD.

 

This picture is in the Vatican today with other priceless pictures like it.

Hey, that's a fake!  He was baptized by emersion!  

[T_E_Smith]

Pantheory that painting of him being baptized made me laugh out loud

[pantheory]

On 4/23/2022 at 6:51 PM, T_E_Smith said:

Pantheory that painting of him being baptized made me laugh out loud

 

Thanks. T_E_  Weezer explained why the painting must be a fake    btw   welcome to eX-Christ Hope you like it here.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I believe this was prophesied in Ezekial 23:20.