Jesus—a real, historical person

by Ireneus 25 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • HowTheBibleWasCreated

    Philo celebrated the Passover with Herod in Jerusalem several years in the 30s... like when Jesus was brought before Herod... Philo never heard of Jesus and he was in the same room.... nope.

    There WAS a preacher named Jesus who was a prophet in the Jewish War who died from a rock crushing him... Thats likely the only historical Jesus I will point to.

  • Island Man
    Island Man

    There may have been an actual influential Jewish rabbi named Jesus - but the version portrayed in the gospels is surely highly embellished myth.

  • Phizzy

    I think many, certainly not all, figures that feature in Myth are based upon people who actually lived. King Arthur, Robin Hood perhaps.

    But Myth and Legend grow quickly, just look at what happens around recently dead "celebrities".

    To put faith in the individuals so mythologized, or the words attributed to them, or to use content from the myths and legends about them to "prove" something, is utterly ridiculous, and makes us look very silly.

  • Hairtrigger

    Interesting read on both sides of the forum.

    My point of view is if This miracle worker was really in existence how come no one except a few non-entities were privy to-his magic. Take his resurrecting the dead . Surely a miracle of that magnitude would have the Romans shelving their gods and running to this man. Or making written records of this. Hey how about this Jesus resurrecting some dead Roman and allowing the Romans to watch the show. There would have been Instant Christianity all over the world. No need for him to be nailed on wood. A multi-dimensional man like him - and not a word from the Romans! TutTut!

    A buffet for 5000 on two fish and five loaves. Not a single Roman among those fed. Why not? Here was a man who could solve the hunger problem of the world working inside the greatest empire on both sides of the numberline 2000 years ago and not a mention about him from anyone of note in the Roman Empire except by hearsay!

    Curious that won’t you say!

  • steve2

    Jesus was one of many self-proclaimed "Messiahs" trekking through the Middle East at the same time Jesus was allowed. Hence Jesus words, "Many will come to you saying, "I am He..." Jesus had an excellent PR brigade that ensured his legend would live on.

  • Ireneus

    Hi Phizzy, Hairtrigger

    Whether something belongs to myths or not is not important because stories, scriptures, mythologies, history and even science all revolve around the relationship between cause and consequences. Hence those who take into account the consequences before performing are acting wisely. The principle of cause and consequences suggests that many of the things written about Jesus in the Bible (such as slavery-friendly verses, ransom sacrifice, miracles …) are fictitious, attributed to Jesus, whereas other things are true, principles of humanism (such as Mathew 7:12; 25:31-46 …etc) which would benefit the readers because they are there for our awakening rather than for our education.

  • EverApostate

    Jesus might have been a man who probably might have rebelled and killed pathetically by Romans. Thats it.

    All miracle stuff are Extra fittings to portray him as divine.

    This Jesus Story is written 40 years after his Supposed death, took another 200 years to compile it and took another 1500 years to spread to the world, after the invention of the Printing press.

    Too sloppy, if this was really God's plan.

  • doubtfull1799

    I'm sorry, but I don't see how either of your two points are demonstrably "historical facts." But even if they were, neither proves that Jesus was an historical person. Just because someone uses a person or identity for their own agenda does not make that person real. You'll have to make a stronger case for your assertion and show why you believe that it follows Jesus was real just because his name was invoked for political reasons.

    Richard Carrier & Robert Price make very good scholarly cases that Jesus was probably not an historical character. The weight of evidence seems (to me at least) to favour the mythicist position.

  • doubtfull1799

    Of course I am talking about the "Christian" Jesus, not the many other people actually called Jesus in the first century who were for example reported on by Josephus....

  • Ireneus

    Hi doubtfull1799,

    If Romans knew Jesus was not a historical person, using his name to market their product of slavery would only backfire on them. If someone makes a counterfeit currency, it shows original currency is more real than the counterfeit currency.

    The historical Jesus was like a sage/prophet who taught the principles of humanism--not a performer of miracles. He lived long enough and died a natural death (

Share this