What if Jesus wasn't a white dude?

[iwillhunt]

I didn't realize there was any debate as to whether or not Jesus actually existed anymore. I'm no historical scholar, but those who are don't debate his existence, they debate whether or not he was the way the Bible depicts him.

[h0lmes]

I didn't realize there was any debate as to whether or not Jesus actually existed anymore. I'm no historical scholar, but those who are don't debate his existence, they debate whether or not he was the way the Bible depicts him.

I am no scholar either, but as far as I know there is no evidence of Jesus outside of the Bible. Some people may see this as evidence, I don't see how it possibly could be considering the glaring contradictions. Jesus is also strikingly similar to central figures of other religions dating thousands of years before he is said to have existed. I think, at the very most, the name Jesus may vaguely refer to someone that actually existed but all claims beyond that are most likely just complete horseshit.

As for the shroud, it is definitely not evidence for the existence of Jesus as it has been carbon dated to the middle ages.

[iwillhunt]

Oh, well if you're looking for evidence outside of the Bible, there is an absolute glut of it. Josephus, Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Suetonius, Thallus, Lucian, Celsus are all ancient historians who wrote of Jesus. Obviously with any ancient figure we could argue that their title "may vaguely refer to someone that actually existed", but doing so is extremely cynical and perhaps even ridiculous. Of course, that is simply my opinion, you have the right to be as cynical as you wish regarding ancient history (or life in general).

[ragged325]

Josephus, Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Suetonius, Thallus, Lucian, Celsus are all ancient historians who wrote of Jesus.

None of those people were even born when Jesus was to have lived. There is no record or evidence from the time of Jesus' life that provides proof of his existence.

These talk about Josephus and the rest and why their quotes are not considered credible.





It seems like you could devote your life to investigating this stuff and not reach a definitive answer. The problem is that no one you know has done this. None of the people who have taught you about Christianity (your parents, preachers, priests, etc.) have bothered to research this stuff. They've told you what their parents and their preachers told them.

You are not going to hear this stuff in the main stream media in a country where the majority of people claim to be Christians.

[h0lmes]

Oh, well if you're looking for evidence outside of the Bible, there is an absolute glut of it. Josephus, Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Suetonius, Thallus, Lucian, Celsus are all ancient historians who wrote of Jesus. Obviously with any ancient figure we could argue that their title "may vaguely refer to someone that actually existed", but doing so is extremely cynical and perhaps even ridiculous. Of course, that is simply my opinion, you have the right to be as cynical as you wish regarding ancient history (or life in general).

Actually the word you are looking for is not cynical, it is skeptical. And yes, I am a skeptic. It is important for everybody to be skeptical to ensure that people don't start believing in things without adequate evidence i.e. unicorns, Santa Clause, God, etc. Skepticism is anything but ridiculous.

The vast majority of info that is known about Jesus is from the gospels. Considering the Gospels are vague in and of themselves and biblical scholars can't agree on specifics, it is doubtful that Josephus, Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Suetonius, Thallus, Lucian and Celsus spoke in detail of Jesus. The most likely explanation is that they were all talking about the same vague concepts that have been passed down for thousands of years.

Anybody that tells you that there is conclusive evidence that Jesus existed and detailed information on his life is known, is a liar.

[Collin]

jesus did 9/11

qft

[iwillhunt]

None of those people were even born when Jesus was to have lived. There is no record or evidence from the time of Jesus' life that provides proof of his existence.

These talk about Josephus and the rest and why their quotes are not considered credible.

It seems like you could devote your life to investigating this stuff and not reach a definitive answer. The problem is that no one you know has done this. None of the people who have taught you about Christianity (your parents, preachers, priests, etc.) have bothered to research this stuff. They've told you what their parents and their preachers told them.

You are not going to hear this stuff in the main stream media in a country where the majority of people claim to be Christians.

First of all, you have no clue how I have learned what I have about Christianity , nor do you have any idea of whether or not I have researched it for myself. And as far as "not hearing this stuff", I've heard a ton of it. Ever heard of a guy name Bart Ehrman?

I don't have time to watch the videos right now, but I will. I am aware, however, that the historians I mentioned came after Jesus' time.

Furthermore, I believe I have approached all facets of this discussion from a logical standpoint thus far, and I find it highly insulting that you're suggesting I am simply regurgitating religious bullshit that has been passed down from generation to generation. If I am wrong about Josephus, etc, I will take it to heart, admit it, and consider the repercussions of that on the validity of Jesus' existence. I'm not a closed-minded religious freak, and I don't think I have exhibited that kind of attitude in my posts thus far.

Actually the word you are looking for is not cynical, it is skeptical. And yes, I am a skeptic. It is important for everybody to be skeptical to ensure that people don't start believing in things without adequate evidence i.e. unicorns, Santa Clause, God, etc. Skepticism is anything but ridiculous.

You make a very good point.

[h0lmes]

First of all, you have no clue how I have learned what I have about Christianity , nor do you have any idea of whether or not I have researched it for myself. And as far as "not hearing this stuff", I've heard a ton of it. Ever heard of a guy name Bart Ehrman?

I don't have time to watch the videos right now, but I will. I am aware, however, that the historians I mentioned came after Jesus' time.

Furthermore, I believe I have approached all facets of this discussion from a logical standpoint thus far, and I find it highly insulting that you're suggesting I am simply regurgitating religious bullshit that has been passed down from generation to generation. If I am wrong about Josephus, etc, I will take it to heart, admit it, and consider the repercussions of that on the validity of Jesus' existence. I'm not a closed-minded religious freak, and I don't think I have exhibited that kind of attitude in my posts thus far.

Meh, don't waste your time on those vids.

[Beastolizer]

i wanna see you tell that to his FACE when he comes back. u r gonna b in so much trble.

LOL. made me giggle.

[mooseheadm5]

Oddly, this is one of the most civil and well thought out religious discussions I have seen on the net. Continue on.

[Farbin Kaiber]

ITT, and Not gonna post anything relevant.

[h0lmes]

ITT, and Not gonna post anything relevant.

...as usual.

[fiercee30]

Jesus is BLACK in of story

[Farbin Kaiber]

...as usual.

Fuck you asshat. You can look back and see my stand on religous issues. This thread is not worth the time to formulate a real, meaningful response, as no one really cares.

There is a bunch of stupid fuck sheep that are regurgitating BS instead of looking into historical texts to verify a probable answer to the question.

I could teach a class in here about the truth of "Ishtar" Easter.

[Danny]

I like to have pancakes for dinner.