Did Jesus really exist?

by slimboyfat 97 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Simon

  I just wrote a short story which includes a reference to President Obama and The United States so you know it is 100% legit and authentic and cannot be questioned at all.

  It turns out (in my story) that Jesus was in fact real (ha, that was a surprising plot twist you didn't see coming!) and he comes back but decides he's going to become a NY taxi driver instead of the Messiah again because, well, he was under a lot of pressure and for some reason he always wanted to give it a go.

  Anyway, he told me to tell everyone else that I'm now the messiah and you all have to give me your money. Nope, I'm not making this shit up. It's got Obama and the USA in it, it must be real, duh!!

  Henceforth this topic will be known as the first book of Simon, the prophet. No, the rich prophet. Oooh yeah.

  Should have got in on this Religion mlarkey a long time ago. I smell gold in them there fools !
• 

  tec

  Jam, I'm just catching the tail end of this discussion... but the similarites of Christ to those 'Christ-like' characters you mention are false. They're contrived to make Christ look like a copy-cat, but these things have been debunked; the findings fabricated or based on faulty research.

  Your first clue to the shoddy research or dishonesty of the people making the claims is that they link all these characters to Christ, with the Dec. 25th b-day. Christ was not born on Dec 25th, and everyone here knows it (or should from their jw background)... and those 'christ-myth characters' were not born on that date either, as it turns out.

  Just so you know the truth of that particular matter.

  Peace to you,

  tammy
• 

  WTWizard

  I believe Jesus is false. As is original sin. Jesus was invented to make us give up human nature, not develop our souls, and open the door for mass human enslavement. It was as genuine as the toilet paper bill you have in your pocket is a genuine dollar--as the toilet paper bill has no intrinsic value but is based on debt, Jesus has no intrinsic value but is based on debt. In the toilet paper case, the debt is owed to whoever printed it and lent it at interest. With Jesus, you owe your whole soul to that thing that is against sexual fulfillment but has a forgiving attitude toward those who want you enslaved.

  Just enough was preserved to connect Jesus with numerous pagan gods so the Gentiles would fall for Christi-SCAM-ity. They had to incorporate Jesus being born on December 25 (or conceived on that date), baptism at age 30, dying at 33 1/2 years old, being dead for 3 days and then resurrected, and ascending to heaven in order to get Gentiles (used to pagan gods with these traits) to fall for the scam. In fact, they are all allegories that reference the SUN! Yes, the sun. The sun is born on December 25 (in the northern hemisphere, at least) every year. The number 33 is how many vertebrae there are. The sun saves us from darkness. The sun dies on December 21, stays dead for 3 days, and is raised on December 25 in that it stops moving south on December 21 and starts visibly moving north on December 25. Of course, they had to incorporate other features having nothing to do with the sun to prevent us from figuring it out, so it does nothing but tie in with communism.

  The whole scam is intended for your enslavement. It also ties in with "polital correctness", which is also designed for your enslavement. They say that it is not politically correct to deny Jesus, joke-hova, or allah--or to deride them. That way, it is not politically correct to fight for your freedom, either. This is what kept the scam going so long, and what caused our teachings to be based on Jesus being fact. As Jesus is false, remember once people thought of it as politically incorrect to think of the earth as anything but a disc that one could fall from, at the center of the universe, stationary, and that everything revolved around the earth. People were burned at the stake so we could have the privilege of exploring the other side of the earth, long before satellites proved that the flat-earth at the center of the universe rubbish was false. We do not need more people burned at the stake to disprove the other "flat earth" scam--Jesus. Let alone a Jesus that is necessary to save us from damnation.
• 

  never a jw

  Raymond Franz,

  The guys you mention don't talk about Jesus, they talk about Christians. Quite a difference. None of them were witnesses of Jesus deeds or sayings. The only people who talk about Jesus are the apostles. The gospel writers wrote at least three decades after his death. Their stories, even though are to some extent copies of each other (Mrk Luke and Matthew), they still have several conflicting accounts. Jesus may have existed, but no way he is "more historical" than Alexander the Great. You are dead wrong on that one.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Maybe there was a person at that time in history, but he was no more the messiah than you and I are.

  Today there are 52 people in the USA named "Clark Kent." None of them are Superman.
• 

  DeWandelaar

  There are two things we need to take seperately:

  1. Did Jesus Exist?

  2. Was Jesus the (son of) God?

  1. Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, [1] [2] [3] [4] while expressing a wide spectrum of opinions on how accurately the views of the historical Jesus are reflected in the picture presented by the early Christian movement.

  Geoffrey Blainey notes that a few scholars have argued that Jesus did not exist, but writes that Jesus' life was in fact "astonishingly documented" by the standards of the time - more so than any of his contemporaries - with numerous books, stories and memoirs written about him. The problem for the historian, wrote Blainey, is not therefore, determining whether Jesus actually existed, but rather in considering the "sheer multitude of detail and its inconsistencies and contradictions"

  (quote from this article in wikipedia).

  2. The problem is that we just have no evidence or proof. In my opinion it is quite unfair that I, as a human, should believe in something (at the cost of losing eternal life mind!) that can not be consistently backed up. In my opinion a book like the bible is not consistent, it has a lot of flaws and can therefore not be a usefull guide to know if he was/is the son of God. Also texts of Flavius Josephus can be flawed and exhagerated. Yes... we know Jeruzalem was attacked by the Romans and we also know that it is found in the Gospels but it may be also usefull to know when the gospels were written and by whom:

  Matthew: written between 80-90 AD

  Mark: written between 66-73 AD

  Luke: written between 60-130 AD

  John: written around 90 AD

  Also note that the book of revelation is written around 70

  So... what worth is a prophecy if it is probably all written down WHILE or AFTER the events are taking place?! Also note that of all the Gospels there were not really many eyewitnesses of the life of Christ. Only John can be seen as one and even this is questioned because only sources of the second century are saying he wrote it and these sources are questionable... Matthew is probably not even written by Matthew himself and has probably the same source as Mark. So... even though the gospels are nice reads and have a lot of nice teachings it is hardly a source we can 100% rely on.

  I am planning to study the gospels verse by verse and this time marking events that can not have occured because of the lack of witnesses.

  For example: The record of the prayer of Jesus is probably impossible since everyone was asleep. Also... when Jesus is with Pilatus he is speaking well known words like that he is a witness of the truth and that everyone who listens to his voice will know the truth. But who could have recorded this? There was no disciple in the room at that moment now was there?

  The ONLY explanation is this one: this must have been given by Holy Spirit to the apostles or disciples. But... we ... do... not... know! It is frustrating isn't it?
• 

  yadda yadda 2

  Not another 'did Jesus really exist?" thread. How many of these have we had over the years on here? As much as you can justifiably reject the NT and its miracles, it's a no-brainer that there was a man 2,000 years ago called Jesus who walked the hills of Palestine, whatever you make of him. No creditable historian denies it anymore than they deny that Siddartha Gautama (Buddha) was real or Confucious or Mohammed.
• 

  dozy

  I guess we are all looking at this subject tainted or influenced in one way or another by our JW upbringing.

  Trying to look at it objectively - I ask myself - (1) Did Mohammmed exist? (2) If so are all the miraculous events surrounding him true?

  My gut reaction to these questions are - (1) probably , and (2) no.

  But certainly a subject for plenty of research & study.
• 

  smiddy

  If Jesus was the son of God , then surely he was more important than the prophets who came before him .The prophets who came before him put pen to paper so to speak , writing down ,what was to become the inspired word of God. THE BIBLE .

  The BIBLE is considered, as the inspired word of GOD by millions of people worldwide .

  The Jesus of the bible never put pen to paper of anything he ever said or did .And Much of what he said and did was never validated.

  It was said that many of the things he said would fill volumes

  The really only thing we have about Jesus is what other people are saying about him , as he never recorded anything about himself or the Almighty at all ?

  smiddy
• 

  designs

  yadda- I doubt there was a man named 'Jesus' 2000 years ago. If you yelled out JESUS in a Jewish town back then no one would turn around. Try Spain maybe.