wiki: Virtually all modern scholars agree that Jesus existed

DriftingByTheStorm

Byrnzie wrote:

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Jesus' crucifixion is described in all four Canonical gospels, attested to by other ancient sources, and is firmly established as an historical event confirmed by non-Christian sources.

Such as?

Hey Byrnzie.
I removed all the source footnotes from those quotes to keep them clean.
They were all trailed by 3 or 4 source notes a piece.

Feel free to check out the source links i left in the OP and browse them yourself.
That wasn't my statement. Those were from wikipedia pages. I can't speak for the sources' validity.
I just thought it was really interesting.
I know wiki is publicly editable,
but i've seen plenty of contested\debated pages, and they are usually marked "the neutrality [or accuracy] of this page is in dispute, click here to read the dialogue" or some such.
I REALLY thought, with such "wild" claims, these two jesus pages would have those notes up top, but they dont.
Weird?

THE LOOK

I believe !

Smellyman

lots of people with lots of names existed back then.

JimmyV

I say Jesus why you look like a shark?

http://youtu.be/J3W0Jesk8iE

DriftingByTheStorm

THE LOOK wrote:

I believe !

... in coyotes, and time as an abstract?

Cosmo

I don't think there are many people who don't think Jesus existed. The part about Him rising from the dead and being the Saviour is another story.
In my opinion, what we should be doing is following His teachings, rather than worshiping Him as a god. I believe that Jesus wanted us to have a personal relationship with God (the God of Abraham), instead of having to go through the conduit of a church.
Jesus was promoted to Christ by His deciples... namely, Paul and Peter.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

the supposed teachings of the man/myth that is Jesus is no different than that of those of any decent human being with a brain and without prejudice/hate.

if he existed, he was a good man, no different than most. lots of dudes were crucified. NEXT.

Prince Of Dorkness

To be fair... Santa Claus is also based on a real person. But Santa Claus isn't real.

Just like Christmas.... Santa is just invented.

And just like Santa Claus... Jesus is a folk hero based on a real person... Maybe.

DriftingByTheStorm

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

the supposed teachings of the man/myth that is Jesus is no different than that of those of any decent human being with a brain and without prejudice/hate.

if he existed, he was a good man, no different than most. lots of dudes were crucified. NEXT.

See. I have to disagree here, having done as much reading around the bible and also around esoteric traditions as I have. It is rather plainly apparent that Jesus was entirely different from all that proceeded him in one massively important aspect.

In fact the world can rather be divided distinctly between two periods:
a. That period before the PUBLIC teachings of Jesus, and
b. that period AFTER the public teachings of Jesus.

Why?
Why is it that a man, as you claim - Hugh, who did nothing more than have decent teaching of morality without prejudice and hate, divided the world in to two distinct periods?
Because what you are picking up on as his only accomplishment is ONLY THE OUTER GARB of his teachings.

Jesus in Mark 4 wrote:

'The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those who do not know the secret, everything remains in parables, so that, seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand lest haply they should turn again, and it should be forgiven them.'

JESUS WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO PUBLICLY DISSEMINATE THE FUNDAMENTAL PRECEPTS OF "THE MYSTERIES". Certainly he did not reveal "everything", and what he did reveal was either in parables, or by way of parables enacted ("miracles") ... but anyone with eyes to see or ears to hear would have been at least capable of picking up on these truths.

You are probably rolling your eyes, wondering what the fuck I'm on about. But here it is:
For thousands of years certain "truths" regarding the human soul, its function, and its relation to the cosmos were known by INITIATES, and ONLY by "initiates". These SECRETS were kept JUST THAT by said initiates. Passed orally from one to the other, after LONG periods of trials (7 to 14 years was not uncommon on in to the classical period for a candidate's training prior to initiation) and then kept inviolably secret, with BLOOD OATHS being sworn.

What the Message of Jesus REALLY TAUGHT (if you had ears to hear and eyes to see) was THE SECRETS OF THE AGES. It was the message of the existence of your soul, how to access it, the path that must be traveled, and the kernels of truth that would bring a man to the BEGINNING of that Journey.

We can come to the truth of what I am saying directly by way of Clement of Alexandria (in response to "the Secret Gospel of Mark") here:

Clement wrote:

As for Mark, then, during Peter's stay in Rome he wrote an account of the Lord's doings, not, however, declaring all of them, nor yet hinting at the secret ones, but selecting what he thought most useful for increasing the faith of those who were being instructed. But when Peter died a martyr, Mark came over to Alexandria, bringing both his own notes and those of Peter, from which he transferred to his former book the things suitable to whatever makes for progress toward knowledge. Thus he composed a more spiritual Gospel for the use of those who were being perfected. Nevertheless, he yet did not divulge the things not to be uttered, nor did he write down the hierophantic teaching of the Lord, but to the stories already written he added yet others and, moreover, brought in certain sayings of which he knew the interpretation would, as a mystagogue, lead the hearers into the innermost sanctuary of that truth hidden by seven veils. Thus, in sum, he prepared matters, neither grudgingly nor incautiously, in my opinion, and, dying, he left his composition to the church in Alexandria, where it even yet is most carefully guarded, being read only to those who are being initiated into the great mysteries.

See?
Teaching to the un-initiated only that which would be helpful to bring them closer to knowledge, but revealing not that which would put him in violation of the Oaths of the Mysteries. Of course this practice was used not just by Jesus himself, but adopted by his true disciples as well. All shielding what needed shielding, but revealing that which it was now time to be revealed. The outer moral teachings -- which is the only thing that so many pick up on -- is what THEY need. One must be lead by whatever means to a knowledge of his own soul. Yes, sometimes the good inner work must be proceeded by the good outer work (sometimes it is the opposite, it just depends on a mans composition, and the state of his soul, i suppose) ... so these outer teachings of morality were meant to prepare the lay people for the more advanced studies -- to help cleanse their outer functioning selves, so that eventually they would be in a place to cleanse their inner functioning selves, and hopefully to one day lead the entire world to "gnosis" (where all would truly be "initiates" or at least "at the door of initiation") and to bring about by that task (revelation to all) "the kingdom of heaven on earth".

Here is a whole page on Esoteric Christianity and how it differs in large parts from "modern" christianity. What its actual message is, and what Jesus was actually on about:

Esoteric Christianity

Hugh Freaking Dillon

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

the supposed teachings of the man/myth that is Jesus is no different than that of those of any decent human being with a brain and without prejudice/hate.

if he existed, he was a good man, no different than most. lots of dudes were crucified. NEXT.

See. I have to disagree here, having done as much reading around the bible and also around esoteric traditions as I have. It is rather plainly apparent that Jesus was entirely different from all that proceeded him in one massively important aspect.

In fact the world can rather be divided distinctly between two periods:
a. That period before the PUBLIC teachings of Jesus, and
b. that period AFTER the public teachings of Jesus.

Why?
Why is it that a man, as you claim - Hugh, who did nothing more than have decent teaching of morality without prejudice and hate, divided the world in to two distinct periods?
Because what you are picking up on as his only accomplishment is ONLY THE OUTER GARB of his teachings.

Jesus in Mark 4 wrote:

'The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those who do not know the secret, everything remains in parables, so that, seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand lest haply they should turn again, and it should be forgiven them.'

JESUS WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO PUBLICLY DISSEMINATE THE FUNDAMENTAL PRECEPTS OF "THE MYSTERIES". Certainly he did not reveal "everything", and what he did reveal was either in parables, or by way of parables enacted ("miracles") ... but anyone with eyes to see or ears to hear would have been at least capable of picking up on these truths.

You are probably rolling your eyes, wondering what the fuck I'm on about. But here it is:
For thousands of years certain "truths" regarding the human soul, its function, and its relation to the cosmos were known by INITIATES, and ONLY by "initiates". These SECRETS were kept JUST THAT by said initiates. Passed orally from one to the other, after LONG periods of trials (7 to 14 years was not uncommon on in to the classical period for a candidate's training prior to initiation) and then kept inviolably secret, with BLOOD OATHS being sworn.

What the Message of Jesus REALLY TAUGHT (if you had ears to hear and eyes to see) was THE SECRETS OF THE AGES. It was the message of the existence of your soul, how to access it, the path that must be traveled, and the kernels of truth that would bring a man to the BEGINNING of that Journey.

We can come to the truth of what I am saying directly by way of Clement of Alexandria (in response to "the Secret Gospel of Mark") here:

Clement wrote:

As for Mark, then, during Peter's stay in Rome he wrote an account of the Lord's doings, not, however, declaring all of them, nor yet hinting at the secret ones, but selecting what he thought most useful for increasing the faith of those who were being instructed. But when Peter died a martyr, Mark came over to Alexandria, bringing both his own notes and those of Peter, from which he transferred to his former book the things suitable to whatever makes for progress toward knowledge. Thus he composed a more spiritual Gospel for the use of those who were being perfected. Nevertheless, he yet did not divulge the things not to be uttered, nor did he write down the hierophantic teaching of the Lord, but to the stories already written he added yet others and, moreover, brought in certain sayings of which he knew the interpretation would, as a mystagogue, lead the hearers into the innermost sanctuary of that truth hidden by seven veils. Thus, in sum, he prepared matters, neither grudgingly nor incautiously, in my opinion, and, dying, he left his composition to the church in Alexandria, where it even yet is most carefully guarded, being read only to those who are being initiated into the great mysteries.

See?
Teaching to the un-initiated only that which would be helpful to bring them closer to knowledge, but revealing not that which would put him in violation of the Oaths of the Mysteries. Of course this practice was used not just by Jesus himself, but adopted by his true disciples as well. All shielding what needed shielding, but revealing that which it was now time to be revealed. The outer moral teachings -- which is the only thing that so many pick up on -- is what THEY need. One must be lead by whatever means to a knowledge of his own soul. Yes, sometimes the good inner work must be proceeded by the good outer work (sometimes it is the opposite, it just depends on a mans composition, and the state of his soul, i suppose) ... so these outer teachings of morality were meant to prepare the lay people for the more advanced studies -- to help cleanse their outer functioning selves, so that eventually they would be in a place to cleanse their inner functioning selves, and hopefully to one day lead the entire world to "gnosis" (where all would truly be "initiates" or at least "at the door of initiation") and to bring about by that task (revelation to all) "the kingdom of heaven on earth".

Here is a whole page on Esoteric Christianity and how it differs in large parts from "modern" christianity. What its actual message is, and what Jesus was actually on about:

Esoteric Christianity

I'm not rolling my eyes at all. history fascinates me. but made up history does not. just because 2000 year old writings tell us someone did something, does not make it true. christian writers had an agenda, an extremely strong agenda, which makes everything they have written over time extremely suspect in my eyes.

most experts believing that any given human being existed 2000 years ago means nothing in the grand scheme. proving Jesus was a real human does not prove he did anything of any significant merit. all it proves , and "proves" is a strong word here, is that he was born and was killed. nothing more. I refuse to use christian scripture as any type of historical record.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I'm not rolling my eyes at all. history fascinates me. but made up history does not. just because 2000 year old writings tell us someone did something, does not make it true. christian writers had an agenda, an extremely strong agenda, which makes everything they have written over time extremely suspect in my eyes.

most experts believing that any given human being existed 2000 years ago means nothing in the grand scheme. proving Jesus was a real human does not prove he did anything of any significant merit. all it proves , and "proves" is a strong word here, is that he was born and was killed. nothing more. I refuse to use christian scripture as any type of historical record.

I agree, Hugh. We all know how any story begins to become distorted and exaggerated with time as it moves from one listener to another. Legends grow greater.

The First Nations people speak of many legends that attempt to explain the earth. Many scoff at them, but how are they any different from the more elaborate tales detailed within the bible. Who is to say which is more correct? One group of people believes strongly in one account while another believes just as strongly in a different account.

From what I have gathered... my own opinion has it that Jesus was a philosophical leader who walked the earth and managed to inspire many around him by speaking of and exhibiting all the warm characteristics one should seek to practice in order to be a great human being. His teachings should not be ignored and are very valuable.

Reminds me of Braveheart when William Wallace was reported to be able to consume the English with fireballs from his eyes and bolts of lightning from his arse.

chadwick

"jesus himself has a dislike for pitbulls" - chadwick

catefrances

brianlux wrote:

And any good music fan know Jesus was a Capricorn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCdfYkUPvTs

historically i have clashed with capricorns... explains a lot.

OnTheEdge

I choose to believe in Jesus and the resurrection. Have faith people, you'll be better off in the long run

Hugh Freaking Dillon

OnTheEdge wrote:

I choose to believe in Jesus and the resurrection. Have faith people, you'll be better off in the long run

so you have a "just in case" belief system?

PJ_Soul

I haven't ever heard anyone say that Jesus never existed I don't think. Isn't it common knowledge that he did? What are these people, kind of like holocaust deniers?

Hugh Freaking Dillon

PJ_Soul wrote:

I haven't ever heard anyone say that Jesus never existed I don't think. Isn't it common knowledge that he did? What are these people, kind of like holocaust deniers?

I thought the same thing, but when you research it a bit, there's actually no physical evidence of his existence.

Prince Of Dorkness

PJ_Soul wrote:

I haven't ever heard anyone say that Jesus never existed I don't think. Isn't it common knowledge that he did? What are these people, kind of like holocaust deniers?

Actually... no. A lot of people... myself included... have never believed for one second that he existed. Maybe in a "Johnny Appleseed and Paul Bunyan were based on real people" kind of way. Even with that I'm dubious.

He was just a folk hero and the tall tales and story telling about him turning water into wine and living in the desert for 40 days and walking on water and bringing Lazerous back to life... that's all made up. Same with a "star" that somehow managed to hover in the same place in the sky for a few weeks, a virgin birth, resurrection... it's all made up.

I'm baffled as to how people can be so fucking gullible.

donnaruhl

catefrances wrote:

brianlux wrote:

And any good music fan know Jesus was a Capricorn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCdfYkUPvTs

historically i have clashed with capricorns... explains a lot.

WOW! So Is EDDIE! (Coincidence) LOL.

brianlux

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

I haven't ever heard anyone say that Jesus never existed I don't think. Isn't it common knowledge that he did? What are these people, kind of like holocaust deniers?

Actually... no. A lot of people... myself included... have never believed for one second that he existed. Maybe in a "Johnny Appleseed and Paul Bunyan were based on real people" kind of way. Even with that I'm dubious.

He was just a folk hero and the tall tales and story telling about him turning water into wine and living in the desert for 40 days and walking on water and bringing Lazerous back to life... that's all made up. Same with a "star" that somehow managed to hover in the same place in the sky for a few weeks, a virgin birth, resurrection... it's all made up.

I'm baffled as to how people can be so fucking gullible.

I wouldn't be shocked to learn that Jesus was a folk hero/tall tale but on the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to learn there really was a guy named Jesus and he and his buddies walked around the desert high on peyote or something containing psilocybin.