Jesus

[Ratio]

I wonder what you people think of those who assert that Jesus Christ never actually existed (as a historical person). Among those people even bible scholars such as Prof. Robert Price. (link deleted)

How do you deal with the fact that there is no evidence of Jesus.

What do you say about accusations, that the Jesus of the Gospels bears a striking resemblance to other ancient heroes and the figureheads of pagan savior cults?

The early founders of Christianity seem wholly unaware of the idea of a human Jesus?

.

.

.

Edited January 23, 2006 by IslandRose

[WISDOM]

Hello Ratio:

First I'd like to say that there is PLENTY of evidence that JESUS CHRIST existed. My question for you is have you personally ever done an open minded research about HIM to see if your perceived facts hold up? I can tell you this....if you accept the challenge of doing so you will find that it is harder NOT to believe if HE existed and was who HE claimed to be, than to believe! Now I noted that you quoted one source. Have you maintained a balanced historical check of both those sources who don't believe and those who do? Where are your facts to substantiate your claim?

Edited January 23, 2006 by WISDOM

[Leonard]

You would be VERY hard-pressed to find a single legitimate scholar who seriously believes Jesus never existed. By the normal standards historians use to judge whether an event actually occured or not, the resurrection of Jesus is the best attested fact of the ancient world..........

[Ratio]

The Jews aknowlege that Jesus existed, only their view is that he was a good teacher who went off of the deep end and got what he deserved.

Roman history confirms that the Jews delivered a man to them to be crucified and that Pilate gave in to the mob in spite of his better judgment.

[WISDOM]

Then explain away the RESURRECTION for me....historically speaking. Why were the Jewish and Roman authorities never able to produce a so-called "stolen" body?

[WISDOM]

The question is for either of you BA or Ratio. Please explain.

Edited January 23, 2006 by WISDOM

[WISDOM]

Give me a better answer than that BA. You're reaching for straws now. Again, I ask....what happened to the body??

[Leonard]

You would be VERY hard-pressed to find a single legitimate scholar who seriously believes Jesus never existed. By the normal standards historians use to judge whether an event actually occured or not, the resurrection of Jesus is the best attested fact of the ancient world..........

This whole thread should ask directly where everyone's bias is placed from the onset.

As far as "a single legitimate scholar" existing that doesn't beleive Jesus didn't exist....well they are easy to find if you decide to look for them, very easy, not hard pressed.

Personally? I don't think he was anymore divine than Mithras, Oedipus, and any of the other fabricated God-like heroes mentioned and BELIEVED before this time. Did he exist? It's inconsequintial at that point except for how people treat the name like it is divine.

Even then, there are two different Jesus figures. One that existed and was crucified at the time the Christians proclaim. Another that lived and was crucified 100 years before that. Which is the fabrication?

It's the problem with reading one book and believing it so whole-heartedly. You can't look outside of it even when you do. You read something else and say it contradicts the "one truth" and you place bias and quit actually listening from there. It's an amazing aspect of life.

matt

"Reading one book"? Of all the presumption! You have not a clue as to my education. Pray cite these many legitimate scholars of history who deny Jesus existed. Almost all you'll find are laughable hacks, who are pooh-poohed in academia.

Scholars might disagree over the MEANING of Christ's resurrection (or even over whether Jesus should be called 'Christ', or whether His resurrection means anything), but very, very few historians are prepared to say the resurrection did not occur. A 'theologian' is much more likely to say that than is an historian.

[WISDOM]

One thing I've always found interesting in an apologetics forum. If you going to come into it with an unloaded gun, you should expect to get "shot down". There should never be any intent to disrespect or gun down the opinion of another, however, if you make a debatable topic in which you're in favor of one side, you should always have substantiating facts to back up what you claim. That is what makes the apologetics so thought provoking......

**1 Peter 3:15**

[WISDOM]

Ok BA....I saw where you "editted" in your response to my question about what happened to the body of someone who Ratio may think never existed. So, let's talk a little here. Since the Jews historically had a physical concept of resurrection, one of the things they would do was to keep the bones of their deceased, and put them in storage to be preserved until the resurrection (granted the Saduccees didn't believe this) when The LORD would raise up the righteous dead of their nation of people and bring them together in the final kingdom.

Now, if CHRIST didn't exist, YET HE had all of those followers even BEFORE the Church was established, and HE was the righteous person all claimed HIM to be, wouldn't you honestly find it kind of strange that under the so called tight security provided around HIS grave that there were NO BONES ever found to be preserved? Incidently....no well known academic authorities today assert that the body was stolen (graverobbers or not). They've dismissed that form of thinking. So then that brings us back full circle to this....where is the body?

Edited January 23, 2006 by WISDOM