It has come to my attention that there are some people in this forum that believe that Jesus never lived. I'm am very curious about their answers and opinions to these following questions:

- If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)

- Even if Jesus never lived, isn't the message what is important?

- Could anyone point out a negative, propagandist, inflammatory, or otherwise ill-conceived quote of Jesus in the bible? (I don't mean quotes from New Testament, or any testament for that matter, I mean Jesus' words)

It has come to my attention that there are some people in this forum that believe that Jesus never lived. I'm am very curious about their answers and opinions to these following questions

I don't believe or disbelieve that he lived. I don't really care.

- If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)

That he may not have existed doesn't mean the catholic church made him up. Perhaps they wrote down their folk tales which they took as skeptically real, but the skepticism was lost in faith. Perhaps they weren't skeptics at all, hence they believed the folk tales as true. The year zero wasn't exactly the golden age of communications, so I wonder if it's really more likely that he in fact didn't exist. If he did, it's remarkable that such (widely held as totally accurate) details somehow all found their way into print.

- Even if Jesus never lived, isn't the message what is important?

If Jesus never lived then he never lived. His "message" is another issue alltogether.

- Could anyone point out a negative, propagandist, inflammatory, or otherwise ill-conceived quote of Jesus in the bible? (I don't mean quotes from New Testament, or any testament for that matter, I mean Jesus' words)

I'm not exactly a bible scholar, but didn't he supposedly say something to the effect of "I am the light, I am the way."? If so, I'd say that brings his sanity into question.

Points seen and taken. Thank you, wesmorris. By the way, I apologize for being so vague; what I really tried to say in "Lived", I meant lived as the bible said he lived. I tried to bind his life and his message. Again, sorry about that.

You're welcome and no problem. I'm the vaguest bastard around.

it doesn't matter if he lived. It matters if he was the son of god.

Which I do not think to be an accurate description of this man.

well if he did, would he want someone to think he meant he was the son of god more than anyone else? if so, then what does that say about him? if not, then isn't the whole "son of god thing" pretty much a non-issue?

maybe he meant it metaphorically? maybe he meant "god is the abstract metaphor for that which affirms life, I feel intrinsically connected to that metaphor." but people take it all literally, then say it's not literal but still take it literally. then people invest in the bible? WHY? did jesus? was he an old testament thumper, given that the bible didn't exist yet? meh. whatever.

people do what they know and the momentum of the idea as passed through families, along with the true "salvation" that "jesus" offers people to distract them from focusing on the negative bullshit they are might otherwise focus on... that makes it somehow worthwile, but it's still a big cult.

It has come to my attention that there are some people in this forum that believe that Jesus never lived.
CottonMouth, you might benefit from Kirby's Historical Jesus Theories (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html).

It has come to my attention that there are some people in this forum that believe that Jesus never lived.
If you mean lived like the bible said he did then it is doubtful, walking on water after all isnt possible. Jesus is more widely thought of as a poor carpenter though who couldnt do anything like what the bible says, personally until i see some form of proof from roughly that time period to confirm his existance i wont believe, and religious texts arnt proof he existed.
- If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)
I always felt somebody else invented him and everyone got swept along with the idea.
- Even if Jesus never lived, isn't the message what is important?
In a way yes, but it depends what part you mean and most people live their lives in what is deemed a good way without a belief in god etc in the same way many religious people ignore any good message completely. Also the phrase 'isnt it the message thats important' is the religious(and general) cop out when a mistake is made/found.
- Could anyone point out a negative, propagandist, inflammatory, or otherwise ill-conceived quote of Jesus in the bible? (I don't mean quotes from New Testament, or any testament for that matter, I mean Jesus' words)
Most People believe the bible is gods word, so it is irrelevent where the quote comes from within the bible, and it only takes one quote that contradicts something else or is hateful or scientifically wrong in there to bring the whole thing tumbling down.

supposedly they found some other weird record entry thing that says that a Jesus did exsist in the time frame appointed to him by the bible.
the thing people probably debate upon is the 'he was the son of god' thing.
even if he didnt exsist, it just doesnt matter now. if the church was to come out and say that he didnt exsist, there would be confusion and doubt but people who have been religious all their lives and people who think its all just a metaphorical 'guide to life' will continue to 'believe'.

Of course, i dont mean to imply its important, or that the majority dont simply debate the son of god thing, i just havnt seen any evidence of his existance other than the bible which can of course be completely fictional like any book, i've heard of several bits of evidence but never seen one or even a copy, also of course i'd be willing to accept his existance with evidence and that would lead me to the theory that the bible was fabricated around his actual life, as just because one parts true doesnt make it all true.

i havent seen this third party evidence either (or is it second..... hmmm)
anyways its probably by one of them....... *storm clouds gather* creationist scientists.....
also see:
- basically your saying there wont be enough evidence ever. what if i get god to paint a message in the sky? o no thats right, HE DOESNT EXSIST.
*walks out and closes door*

It has come to my attention that there are some people in this forum that believe that Jesus never lived. I'm am very curious about their answers and opinions to these following questions:)

the bible was written by man, and therefore it's whole content suspicious.

- If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)) the best way to sell something or get people to believe, is to condemn yourself/it in the third person,because this is the nature of the (human)beast.

- Even if Jesus never lived, isn't the message what is important?) the morals in the bible are great if followed, however it's all down to whoever's doing the interpretation.

- Could anyone point out a negative, propagandist, inflammatory, or otherwise ill-conceived quote of Jesus in the bible? (I don't mean quotes from New Testament, or any testament for that matter, I mean Jesus' words)
How could any body know what jesus said what was aledgedly said is pure hearsay. however if that what you mean then I cant think of any. I let you know at a later date if there is any.

If you mean lived like the bible said he did then it is doubtful, walking on water after all isnt possible...
it could be,if you knew where the rocks are! ;) ;)

If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)

my guess would be, they didnt expect anyone to question their story.
after all isnt that a first rule of Christian faith to never question,just blindly follow ;)

way back then when people didnt know jack about science and what makes the world go around it was easy to control people with silly fairytales,
now its just unfuckingbelievable that anyone can still take the six day creation and the rest of the stupid stories and bible contradictions seriously :rolleyes:
www.skepticsannotatedbible.com
on Jesus
www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/index.html

Wow, seems like I've got a little homework thnx to you guys. Well, thanks a lot for the answers, thankfully all coherent and civil. See ya later.

Hi CottonMouth,

- If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)That was a time of widespread superstition and ignorance so it didn’t take long for most to actually believe the stories were true.

- Even if Jesus never lived, isn't the message what is important?If so then the message was derived by men, so why not attribute the message to our own natural creativity and compassion rather than try to hide it in mythology or attribute it to imaginary super beings?

Kat

another thing for you cotton mouth. jesus was a real person, but he was also married to mary magdalene. ever wonder about the missing years of jesus' life as per the bible? dead see scrolls found a few years back address things like the Gospel according to Mary (magdalene) and so on. there were many gospels that were written down but never made the cut for the Bible, which was put together in the Constantine empire.. or whatever the part of Roman empire with Constantinople as its capital was called.

one more thing. the divinity of jesus (wheater or not he was the son of god) was voted on by the catholic church at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD, oh and it did not pass by a unanimous vote either. just something to consider ;)

CottonMouth, you might benefit from Kirby's Historical Jesus Theories (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html).
*************
M*W: While I was looking for that July post you referred to, I found your reference to Kirby's, and I thought it was a very good reference for some of the newcomers.

another thing for you cotton mouth. jesus was a real person, but he was also married to mary magdalene. ever wonder about the missing years of jesus' life as per the bible? dead see scrolls found a few years back address things like the Gospel according to Mary (magdalene) and so on.

Got a link for that -- Im pretty sure the name "Jesus" was never found in any of the dead sea scrolls?? Am I wrong ?

Got a link for that -- Im pretty sure the name "Jesus" was never found in any of the dead sea scrolls?? Am I wrong ?
*************
M*W: OliverJ, look upward on this thread to ConsequentAtheist's post. He provides the link. There are some references in the "other" gospels of Thomas, Philip, Thecla and Mary Magdalene, that were not included when the NT was compiled. Remember, these people who claimed to have known Jesus were Jews who followed Jesus and the Torah and Tanakh. Paul who wrote most of the NT and commissioned the gospels to be written by M, M, & L, with the possible exception of John, never knew Jesus. There are also some recent scholarly theories that "John" who allegedly wrote the gospel and Revelations, was possibly the "beloved disciple" Mary Magdalene. When deciphering Revelations, a lot of arrows point to her.

*************
M*W: OliverJ, look upward on this thread to ConsequentAtheist's post. He provides the link. There are some references in the "other" gospels of Thomas, Philip, Thecla and Mary Magdalene, that were not included when the NT was compiled. Remember, these people who claimed to have known Jesus were Jews who followed Jesus and the Torah and Tanakh. Paul who wrote most of the NT and commissioned the gospels to be written by M, M, & L, with the possible exception of John, never knew Jesus. There are also some recent scholarly theories that "John" who allegedly wrote the gospel and Revelations, was possibly the "beloved disciple" Mary Magdalene. When deciphering Revelations, a lot of arrows point to her.

Yes , but the name Jesus was never discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls right ?

I'm not exactly a bible scholar, but didn't he supposedly say something to the effect of "I am the light, I am the way."? If so, I'd say that brings his sanity into question.
i think its 22:13 revelations; "i am the alpha and the omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." sounds awesome, unless you actually say it. :D

as far as walking on water goes, maybe he was standing on a sandbar one morning, and some apostle woke up, saw him, and thought he was actually walking on water. ;)

so why not attribute the message to our own natural creativity and compassion rather than try to hide it in mythology or attribute it to imaginary super beings?
because then it is just another jackass telling you how to live your life. but if it's god, then wow...i mean, it's god. it must be the right way mustn't it? see, it's a matter of legitimacy. :cool:

It has come to my attention that there are some people in this forum that believe that Jesus never lived. I'm am very curious about their answers and opinions to these following questions:

Well it all comes down to evidence I guess. In this instance all we have to go by are several texts and "letters" written in one book and one book only. How can it be that a 'miracle maker' and mini-god is not abundant in all manner of other writing from that time?

Even if he did exist, I think modern day folk are overly biased about whether he was god or not. Christians often talk to me about these people being "wtinesses", and yet completely ignore the majority of would be witnesses who quite distinctly did not agree that Jesus was anything special. People argue that Paul and his buddies were there and would not lie yada yada, but then why not trust the other witnesses who disagree and quite clearly outnumber the witnesses who were for Jesus?

- If the Catholic Church invented Jesus to further their own agenda, why would they publish a lie that condemns their actions? (As in the inquisition and the cruzades)

There wouldn't have been a 'catholic church' at the very moment of the invention of jesus. Look at it from a political standpoint.. The jews had their very own god, who protected them, killed their enemies, and so on. In all essence, at that time god would have been a trademark of the jewish people.

What better political move to completely disrupt the jews than to create a 'new god' that ended up no longer being a god of the jews because those jews were portrayed as the killer of their very own god - and as such get doomed to hellfire for it?

Personally I think it's brilliant. "Hey look, they have their very own god - let's make a mini-version of it, then have them kill him and be abandoned by their very own god".

Bloody superb.

Once the "lie" formed into a religious culture, the churches, (those in power), could do and say anything to justify their actions. You could argue with them that the bible says "do not kill", but then they'd just point out another passage that says its ok as long as god's in charge.

- Even if Jesus never lived, isn't the message what is important?

No more so than any other important message made in the entire history of mankind. We can even go so far back as the Code of Hammurabi, which vastly predates the bible and is seen as the origins of the "rules" shown in Exodus, Leviticus etc. Ever since the dawn of mankind, there have been important messages such as thou shalt not kill.. jesus was no different.


- Could anyone point out a negative, propagandist, inflammatory, or otherwise ill-conceived quote of Jesus in the bible? (I don't mean quotes from New Testament, or any testament for that matter, I mean Jesus' words)

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother..." (Matthew 10:34)

or "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

Yes , but the name Jesus was never discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls right ?

umm....the name Jesus isn't mentioned in old testament at all. That's why.

The name wasn't, but the person he was is.

Yes , but the name Jesus was never discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls right ?
*************
M*W: Honestly, dear, I'm not that familiar with the DSS. I have skimmed through the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, and she does mention Jesus as does Peter. The question I have, was The G of MM found with the DSS? Ollie, you might be interested in the website concerning Jesus & MM at www.rennes-le-chateau.com
~ One in Spirit ~ M*W

Real person, stories and his life is made up and no one can answer on his virgin mother birth to him for whatever reason heck she coulda been raped and kept it a secret :P

Real person, stories and his life is made up and no one can answer on his virgin mother birth to him for whatever reason heck she coulda been raped and kept it a secret :P
*************
M*W: Welcome, rel, and thanks for your post. I agree with you. I believe there was a Rabbi Jesus or Yeshua as he was probably called. But whatever happened to Immanuel? I've been reading some non-Catholic books about Mary and the "virgin birth." There's certainly more about it than what the NT says. I've learned more about Jesus by reading outside the Bible. There are two schools of thought -- he either existed or he was just a myth. Funny that none of his contemporaries ever mentioned him in their writings! That dying demigod savior myth was popular long before the time of Jesus. When Jesus lived, he wasn't anyone special. In fact, I don't believe he died on the cross. That was pure myth about a simple Rabbi.