Was Jesus a real person?

[jason1990]

In another thread, Riddick wrote: "And regarding the birth of Jesus, isn't it widely regarded among our intellectual superiors and other high ranking historian-types, both atheist and not, that Jesus was in fact a real person?"

Is this widely regarded as a fact? If so, by whom? What evidence is there? Should the default assumption, in the absence of evidence, be that he is a fictional/mythical character that actually never existed? Do similarities between the story of Jesus and the stories of other mythical religious figures make it less likely that any of them existed as real people?

[RJT]

J1990,

We have those like phil153 who say he doubts Jesus was a real person. Then we have folk of David S.’s caliber who (I assume) don’t waste their time on such ideas. Use David’s theory about those smarter than you and what they think to arrive at your answer.

RJT

[ QUOTE ]
We have those like phil153 who say he doubts Jesus was a real person

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's what I said:

[ QUOTE ]
I question whether he ever existed. Without the bible, there would not be enough evidence for a historian to consider him a real historical character.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ONLY evidence of his existence is a ancient religious text, appended to another very dubious book (Adam and the apple, people turning into pillars of salt, floods that cover the earth, etc). That's all I'm saying.

While it is unlikely, given the timeframe involved , that Jesus was totally made up, it's definitely possible.

[ QUOTE ]
then we have folk of David S.’s caliber

[/ QUOTE ]
lol

[ QUOTE ]
Use David’s theory about those smarter than you and what they think to arrive at your answer.

[/ QUOTE ]
There's a good chance I'm smarter than Sklansky. Does that mean I'm right?

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
The ONLY evidence of his existence is a ancient religious text

[/ QUOTE ]
This is simply untrue. Jospehus, a Jewish historian, wrote of Jesus' existence in several separate, entirely secular, documents and letters.

I am sure Jesus was a real person and I am an atheist. Yet, I would suspect that there were quite a few Jesus at the time and place. Unfortunately none attributed with the so cherished xtians virtues or qualities.

[ QUOTE ]
This is simply untrue. Jospehus, a Jewish historian, wrote of Jesus' existence in several separate, entirely secular, documents and letters.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please read about this some more, then get back to me.

[SNOWBALL138]

I'd ask you to elaborate but I'm afraid of what you might say.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The ONLY evidence of his existence is a ancient religious text

[/ QUOTE ]
This is simply untrue. Jospehus, a Jewish historian, wrote of Jesus' existence in several separate, entirely secular, documents and letters.

[/ QUOTE ]
First of all, there are not several documents, there is one paragraph - that's all. Second, it's a very dubious paragraph that most scholars (Christian or not) believe has been compromised at one time or another by one or more Chriatian transcribers.

If you've ever read the test in question it's next to impossible to believe that it was written by Josephus. Here it is again (most controvertial parts in bold):

[ QUOTE ]
At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is a great deal of controversy about this quote. The oldest existing manuscrpits we have are copies of copies made by early Christian monks. Secondly, early church fathers who were familiar with Josephus' writings don't mention this quote. Finally, the style of this quote makes no sense from a non-Christian Jew who otherwise had only negative things to say about would be Messiahs and wrote far more about John the Baptist.

The main battle ground is over how much of it was actually written by Josephus. Some say the non-overtly Christan bits are probably his work. Others doubt the whole thing. Only radical fundamentalists even hint that the whole thing is his work.

In one other place Josephus mentions the trial of "James the brother of Jesus". He makes no other mention of any Jesus.

There are no other non-biblical accounts of Jesus of any remotely comparable standing. This is the very best there is - by far. Even so it's terrible.

<font color="red"> Use David’s theory about those smarter than you and what they think to arrive at your answer. </font>

[ QUOTE ]
Phil153: There's a good chance I'm smarter than Sklansky. Does that mean I'm right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anyone else see the irony in this?

[maurile]

Interesting stuff here:

http://www.jesuspuzzle.com/