Do you believe that Jesus existed, and do you believe there is real proof?

[benburch]

Poll question: Do you believe that Jesus existed, and do you believe there is real proof?

Just in time for Easter - Where do you sit on the Jesus story?

[troubleinwinter]

1. Why do you ask?

[benburch]

6. Pure curiousity.

I wonder how many people think as I do.

[troubleinwinter]

10. And you think.............

[benburch]

That he possibly existed, but there is no real proof. nt

[troubleinwinter]

27. I'll go with that.

I think lack of proof and evidence is part of the importance of it.

If there were a physical artifact, people might worship the item, rather than contemplating and weighing the message.

It all may or may not be a conglomeration of human cultural thinking, story telling, myth, or he may have been a man who spoke a message, I dunno.

Archaeological proof of the man is not proof of the message. The legitimacy of the message is for each individual to weigh for him/herself, with or without physical proof.

[benburch]

34. IMNSHO, Most of the message stands as valid...

...whether or not you believe he was the Son of God.

[troubleinwinter]

40. Well, there ya go...

It is an interesting question.

Even IF there were irrefutable archaeological proof of Jesus (the human man), it does not answer the question one way or another as to whether he was the Christ (God's message), or if there's a God or any of that.

I deem your question MOOT! :rofl:

[benburch]

51. LOL!

Not quite moot, because I still wondered how others think.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

2. ooooh! Someone picked the first one!

Lay it out here, I'm open-minded...


:popcorn:


on edit: dangit, the mods are awake tonight :(

and PS: the bible doesn't count as proof.

[Igel]

3. Indeed.

I picked the second one. I wonder what the "real historical proof" is.

I mean, there's no "real historical proof" for Eurypides or Plato, either, under some construals.

[troubleinwinter]

5. I'm only one of em, but I fucked up...

I hit the wrong button (and even confirmed my vote?!!!???&%$#*!?)

I think the man likely existed, but there is no historical proof, and never will be.

[TomInTib]

20. My oldest son was taken to Vacation Bible School by his..

great grandmother back in the mid 80s. First Baptist Church of Tomball, Texas.

She took him to the Church office to sign him in (his first visit, ever, to a church).

He pointed to the standard picture of Jesus and said, "Look, MomMom, Willie Nelson!".

Leave it to the children.

[troubleinwinter]

28. My daughter thought Dan Rather was the president.

[TomInTib]

35. Well, you have to admit that that frequency/Kenneth thing was

pretty metaphysical....

[TomInTib]

4. Don't want to sit and talk about Jesus, just want to see his face

M. Jagger, K. Richard

[ugarte]

7. He's mentioned by the 1st century historian Josephus...

...just a line or two, but he is mentioned.

[Schema Thing]

15. I believe most scholars believe those passages to be additions

[Zhade]

18. Sorry, biblical scholars agree, that's a later-added forgery.

NT!

[benburch]

24. That is nearly universally conceeded to be a later addition.

http://skeptically.org/chxbible/id12.html

[Llewlladdwr]

8. Other.

You can't even 'prove' the world existed last week. How can you say anything about events purported to have taken place a couple of millenia ago?

On edit: Speeling

[Inland]

9. "Real proof" as opposed to evidence?

Whether there's evidence to be believed is different from "proof". Not much that happened in a backwater portion of the roman empire two thousand years ago is "proven".

[SPKrazy]

11. How About "It Doesn't Matter If Jesus Existed Or Not"

the story about Jesus is the story about God's love for mankind.

it is a story about the fact that God could have wiped the slate clean, killed everyone in one fail swoop for killing Jesus.

Instead, God chose to forgive mankind for this, and all sins.

Now that is some AWESOME forgiveness. And some unfathomable love.

Now if you don't believe in any God, fine. But the truth of the Jesus story really shouldn't matter as much as the lesson.

Personally I believe that Jesus existed. I don't know if he was fully cognizant of who he was in God.

I believe that the gospels are not to be taken literally as they are stories about a man, who performed miracles, preached a new way of looking at spirituality, and died ultimately for the sins of mankind.

Peace

[DesertRat]

17. Amen n/t

[Zhade]

19. "story about the fact that God could have wiped the slate clean"

Considering that it's not a proven FACT that there are any gods, how could your belief quoted above possibly be 'fact'?

[SPKrazy]

59. Ummm,

so you believe that in the beginning, there was the big bang, and WHAT exactly set the "BANG" into motion?

I believe it to have been a higher power.

You believe in electricity. Yet, have you ever seen an electron?

Yet you believe it to be fact I imagine.

Can you prove it?

[Journeyman]

22. A fine presentation of your views. . .

well said.

[bbinacan]

29. Well said,

I may get flamed for agreeing with you. So be it.

[Patchuli]

32. Thank you Southpawkicker

for the eloquence and beauty of your words. "Not that is some AWESOME forgiveness. And some unfathomable love."

It's about faith, always was and always will be. Jesus told us whosoever would believe in him would live forever. Folks will either get the message or they won't. I hope they all do. But meanwhile, we all just live and let live those who believe differently, as we were told. Thank you for your post although some gospel I do believe to be *gospel!*

[trotsky]

47. Doesn't God love all his children equally, including Jesus?

Why would SOME people killing Jesus make him want to kill EVERYONE? Punishing the whole human race for the actions of a tiny few? Why would that even cross his mind?

I don't see forgiveness or love or anything in that story. I'm disgusted and disturbed that people would want to worship such a monster.

[SPKrazy]

60. Well, If Jesus Was Who The Bible Says He Was

then he was in fact God.

So God could have killed everyone.

Why wouldn't a human want to kill someone who tried to kill them or their son.

But instead God forgave them.

And in addition forgave mankind for all of its sins.

And you call that a "monster"

Go worship Trotsky

I'll stick with God

[evermind]

12. A light semantic quibble: "arguable proof"? If it's arguable then...

.. it's not proof!

"Evidence" is probably the word you're looking for.

[benburch]

14. Correct you are

[Inland]

31. I don't think it's light.

I think it goes right to the essence of any discussion. Here's another gem:

"Considering that it's not a proven FACT that there are any gods, how could your belief quoted above possibly be 'fact'?"

It's a waste of time to point out that even something that is not "a proven fact" may still be a "fact", that is, not proven merely means not proven, not non existent.

[Zhade]

13. Gotta go with #4.

Can't say for sure, but I can say this: THE JOSEPHUS THING IS A FORGERY. Look it up.

(That's preemptive, since uninformed people always bring up that debunked nonsense all the time.)

[mike_c]

16. I have insufficient data to form an opinion....

SOMEONE inspired the Jesus character in the christian bible, but I don't know whether that was a real person or a fiction-- the only real evidence I'm aware of is the bible itself. One might just as well ask "Do you believe that Spider Jerusalem existed, and is there real proof."

[Erika]

21. It's a matter of faith not facts

Just all in the interpretation.

[saltpoint]

23. A very perceptive man of that time and place likely named that name

is plausible. No clinical proof exists, but second- and third-hand accounts suggest a ministry of maybe 3 years around the Sea of Galilee.

I imagine a charismatic and intense man like that could have inspired common anglers and others to follow him. Poverty is arguably the most visible aspect of this ministry.

I imagine also that the local authorities of the then-Roman Empire (it was no longer a Republic) were NOT amused by yet another uprising in Palestine, and by one way or another -- blame Judas if you like, but again, there's no hard proof Judas did anything at all -- the local authorities nailed the poor man to a board. Accounts of his burial remain tangled.

Some generations later, Paulist Christianity took hold in the Mediterranean and despite Julian's noble efforts to restore pagan beliefs, Christianity won the day. The Bishops vehemently denied that there were any competing versions of the early gospels while secretly dispatching thugs throughout the region to burn those very books. Fragments survived, however, putting the lie to the bishops' raw power play. If there was a Jesus, the bishops had abandoned him almost from the git-go.

Institutional Christianity, sadly, became too much like the early bishops and not nearly enough like the later St. Francis of Assissi. I honor the good heart in any tradition trying to bring peace and round the edges of an often horrifying world. But the keeper of the keys is not always the humble heart's friend. And the rabid proselytizers should be boiled in oil.

I buy the Jesus of compassion and inclusion and bravery against Empire, but none of the trans-human hocus pocus. As I've said on DU before, I like Christianity when Bill Moyers represents it insteaed of when Jim Dobson perverts it.

[PublicWrath]

37. You mean a man who just happened to be named "savior" (Yeshu)?

A common enough name at the time, but surely you don't insist on it?

[saltpoint]

39. I did not insist on any name. I said 'plausible,' and as you indicate,

'Yeshu" was indeed a common name of that time and place.

Mexican families sometimes name their children 'Jesus.' I don't prescribe to those children messianic properties or powers.

If there was no 'Jesus' of the Gospels, that's fine with me, except that Western History would be quite dull without him and so would all the jokes my older cousin told me when I was 13.

Or, if there was a 'Jesus' of the Gospels, my guess is that his reputation has been obscured if not disgraced by later interpolations of generations of first Catholic monks and later Protestant sycophants to such a point that the message, if there ever was one, is entirely lost.

I think THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST gets to 'Jesus' better than just about any scholarly text, with A.N. Wilson's JESUS: A LIFE a respectable second.

[havocmom]

25. Did he historically exist? Well, several people claimed the title

so, yeah, probably. Son of God? No more so than anyone, if there is God and if God created all. Savior? Not to my way of thinking. Only I can save me by the way I live my life.

Wonderful teacher? Probably. Hyped, edited, and used to exploit others politically after his death? Oh yeah.

edit: typo, momma's tired

[IselaB]

26. I've always felt the strongest evidence that Jesus really existed

was from the Gospels themselves, and how they had to create several elaborate, unlikely stories to explain how a man from Nazareth in Galilee was the messiah, when everybody knew the messiah had to come from Bethlehem.

So there must have been a real, historic Jesus. And, unfortunately, everybody knew he was a Galilean. But everybody also knew the prophecies said the messiah would be born in David's home town of Bethlehem, far to the south of Galilee. So the stories about Jesus' birth are designed to reconcile this conflict.

If Jesus were a purely fictional character, they simply would have said he was born and raised in Bethlehem, and that would have been the end of it. But they obviously had to reconcile a real, historical person with a real personal history with the prophecies. I find that very compelling evidence he was a real person.

[muriel_volestrangler]

48. A good point - I also don't think they'd pick a date within living memory

because then they'd run the risk of someone saying "I was in Jerusalem then, and I don't remember any such trial or crucifixion". If they had some teachings, and they wanted to put them in the mouth of someone else (and you have to wonder why they would do that, rather than say they thought of them themselves, or were directly inspired), why would they pick a scenario that people could contradict directly? Having said that, it is 'evidence' rather than 'proof'. It's possible there were objections, but they've been lost or suppressed.

[zeemike]

30. Well there is evidence

But naturally it is all disputed by those that think not.
And the evidence is easy to through out because it comes from a time long ago. And it is easy to assume that evidence that long ago was manufactured by people that wanted to create some mythology for there own porpoise.
And when good evidence comes about like the Dead Sea Scrolls which confirmed the accuracy of many parts of the bible (one of the criticisms of the bible was that it had changed over time by the re-writing of the monks)The parts found on the Dead Sea Scrolls were word for word the same as we have now. But of course it is not Proof that all of it is accurate and so there is no Proof, only evidence.

[Daphne08]

33. I believe Jesus was real, and that he was a very enlightened

human being who was ahead of his time. He was the son of God in the same way that we all are children of God.

I also believe his message has been twisted and somewhat perverted by religion.

[dave502d]

36. Yes and a good Dem he was. n/t

[PublicWrath]

38. No, I don't believe there was a Jesus. There's no proof he never existed

but it is also true that no proof would convince believers otherwise, anyway. There is NO trustworthy biographical info in the NT. But what's really so telling against the legend, is that there are really no loose ends, either. Virtually all the events in the story most important to Christians are clearly echoes (deliberate echoes) of themes and events in other mythology. Christians of the time found this very persuasive evidence of divinity. More modern thinkers would wince if they were confronted with all the correspondences.

Of course Jesus didn't exist. It is an artificial tale. To fetch any old wandering preacher (there were many) out of the mists and try to apply some aspects of the story to him will leave you with an empty robe.

[Patchuli]

43. It's faith

and you have it or you don't. When you have it, physical proof is not necessary. But you cannot definitely say that my Lord Savior did not exist, either.

Try some specific historical documentation debunking Jesus.

[meti57b]

41. Jesus probably existed. There were hundreds of itinerant preachers .....

in ancient Israel... so why wouldn't Jesus have existed. The Romans probably crucified him, as crucifixion was the Romans favorite method of executing Jews, (of which they executed a couple 100,000 by crucifixion) especially Jews, who instigated political uprisings.

[PublicWrath]

42. Because crucifixion itself was a necessary mythic touch to the analogue.

they were constructing.

Lots of Jews crucified, many with a religious bent. That's one of the problems. How would you ever tell them apart and call one Jesus?

[Patchuli]

44. You think that crucifixion was a "mythic touch?!"

And how you would "tell them apart and call one Jesus" is what I'm trying to tell you. You are a believer and you aren't. You have no definitive proof that what some of us believe is a "myth."
Please provide your physical proof that we are incorrect.

[PublicWrath]

45. As a matter of fact I said there is NO proof Jesus never existed in the

first line of my post. And I can assure I am not a believer. What I mean to say is that picking out some wandering preacher and saying he's the basis for the story will leave you with absolutely nothing. It's like saying, "sure there have been queens in England, therefore Queen Guinevere really existed".

[Patchuli]

53. Correction: There is no proof that

*you* choose to see. For Christians, there is undeniable proof.

[trotsky]

54. Just like for Mormons, there is undeniable proof that the plates were real

Or for Muslims, undeniable proof that Mohammed went to heaven on his horse.

Etc.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

62. Precisely.

[mzteris]

50. goes with the rest of the

mythology that Paul foisted on the story of Jesus.

Read about Tammuz and Mithra. And don't forget that Tarsus was a center of those cults.

The stories are REMARKABLY similar, don't you agree?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

63. They are similar

but perhaps it is because these are central themes to humanity, period.

To me the fact that there are similar myths is not proof that the historical Jesus did not exist.

[DanCa]

46. I dont need to prove or force my belief system on others.

Thank you mom and dad for teaching me that I dont have to prove people wrong because I think I may be right. And thank you for teaching me that in America other people are allowed to think differently than me. If we all went on the same color light we would have one hell of a car wreck after all.

[Redbear]

55. very nicely stated.

I hope my children will be able to say the same thing someday.

[mzteris]

49. Other:

Well - yes to this: *Jesus might have existed, but there is no real historical proof* - BUT

If "Jesus" did exist, he didn't exist as defined by Paul nor the later insertions of assertions of his "deified" status in the "Gospels".

"Jesus" - if he existed as a single entity and not a compilation of several peoples - was probably a pretty smart guy who said a lot of great things and had a pretty good philosophy. The same as the Buddha and Mohammed and plenty of other really smart guys with a good philosophy. He didn't "poof", "God" didn't miraculously impregnate some poor village girl, He didn't "die and wasn't resurrected".

Thomas Jefferson stripped ALL reference to Jesus being "like GOD" from his New Testament - the version is called the Jefferson Bible. It retains the philosophy of Jesus, but takes out the hocus-pocus.

[BurtWorm]

52. My position doesn't seem represented in your poll.

Jesus almost certainly never existed as a real "human being" (let alone demigod) and this is the most reasobable conclusion because there is no evidence that he was anything more than a mythological figure in a mystery cult.

I can't see anything in your poll that reflects that position.

[moobu2]

56. Jesus probably existed

But there is no God, so he was nothing like the Character in the Christian Bible.

[Nihil]

57. Jesus existed but his tale has been twisted through the years

There was a man named Jesus (or Joshua or any of the alternative
transliterations) who was senior in the Essene sect/cult/community
at Qumran. He had a brother James. He had been a follower of John
the Baptist and had a following of his own after John's death
(along with a number of dissenters over his approach to leadership).

There is a serious disconnect between Jesus "the teacher" and the
man portrayed in most Bibles, almost completely due to the actions
of politically/financially/"earthly"-minded people in the years
since that time. These later revisionists were the ones who added
the mythical overtones, the melding of various religions with the
known history to produce a "supergod" that meant that their little
brand of religion was better than the competition's.

This editing should not detract from the useful lessons to be
learned and should also provide a further hint regarding trusting
people who have an agenda.

[TRYPHO]

75. Apolgoies for the delay in the reply but....

There was a man named Jesus (or Joshua or any of the alternative
transliterations) who was senior in the Essene sect/cult/community at Qumran. He had a brother James. He had been a follower of John the Baptist and had a following of his own after John's death (along with a number of dissenters over his approach to leadership).

If he had been in the Essense community at Qumran, or elsewhere, he would have been mentioned. He's not mentioned because he wasn't Essene.

There is a serious disconnect between Jesus "the teacher" and the man portrayed in most Bibles...snip...
This editing should not detract from the useful lessons to be learned and should also provide a further hint regarding trusting people who have an agenda.

This nicely proves how backwards your understanding is. The Essene's were extremist ascetic ultra-orthodox Jews. Their rabbonim would never have said the stuff that Jesus was written as saying, so the New Testament entries referring to Jesus' comments about "don't obey the laws of the Old testament" these are the edited lessons, of people with other agenda's, with their message of Non-Judaism and Non-Extremism.

Either you should believe what the Essene's at Qumran had to say about G-d and religion, or you need to consider a different historical placement for your Jesus.

TRYPHO

[opiate69]

58. Jesus never existed..

His story is an amalgam of many other pre-existing messiah stories.. I think the guy in "The God who Wasn't There" put it best:
(paraphrasing)
"It's kind of like saying 'Superman, Spiderman, the Green lantern.. those are all fiction, but Batman, that's historic fact"

[Anarcho-Socialist]

61. Other: Jesus was in fact a cyborg...

...sent back in time by ComplexAlgorithm the Primary, Leader of the Earthican Robotocracy in the Year 3224 CE.

This explains how Jesus was able to survive after being nailed to the cross. After the Romans had left, he shut-down his CPU and rebooted later. He launched instructions from his 'escape' program into main memory and rocketed off into the sky, as seen by onlookers who believed him to have gone to heaven.

Jesus' polyxenoskelelton gave him buoyancy which allowed him to walk on water. He was also equipped with molecular re-calibrators which allowed him to alter the attributes of matter at the molecular level, thereby changing water into wine and other tricks.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

64. Won't we all be astonished

if we die and find out there is something to this?

After all, don't the Mormons think God is a space being? And if you watch enough Star Trek, you can see their point.

[cyborg_jim]

76. When humans die nothing happens

I however am a cyborg. I'll know.

[beam me up scottie]

65. Robotocracy !

:spray:
That explains everything!

That's the funniest damn explanation I've ever heard!

:rofl:

[saltpoint]

66. If Jesus does NOT exist, who is it that talks to Pat Robertson all the

time?

I think this should be looked into.

[Meshuga]

67. There is a chance Jesus existed

But there is no concrete proof of a historical Jesus. Saying that there is proof is wishful thinking. I'm amazed by the number of votes for the "there is proof" option.

[bananas]

68. Who resurrected this poll?

Benburch was tombstoned a long time ago.

[saltpoint]

69. I did. The question is a good one. It's up to us to respect each

other as we try to answer it.

[raccoon]

70. "Jesus never existed, but there can be no absolute proof that he never did."

Because you can't prove a negative.

There probably were people similar to Jesus at the time, itinerant preachers.

I think it's like the Robin Hood legend. There were probably outlaws with their bands who were somewhat similar to Robin Hood. But over the years and with ballads being added to and invented, the bells and whistles were added and the legend as we know it is vastly different from those outlaws.

[cyborg_jim]

74. And one should remember that the time period for Robin Hood

Is considerably more recent.

As it is indeed for Arthurian legend.

[Dorian Gray]

71. I know that the proof is debatable

but I believe that the New Testament and the Gospels are proof. And yes, I do believe.

[PhilipShore]

72. Jesus existed, and there is real historical proof.

[struggle4progress]

73. Other: (1) exists (not existed) and (2) proof? schmoof!

[EvolveOrConvolve]

77. Wow, someone's been gravedigging.