This is a subject that has cropped up in a couple threads already so I figure why not give it it's own thread.
So the questions Was the Biblical Jesus a real person? If not was there at least a historical Jesus used as a basis for the stories? Could it have been a complete fabrication?
Please provide evidence for or against your argument. If you use the Bible provide external sources to also back up your claim.
Well, these kidn of things going on in the Church all the time, you hear from the missionaries about people coming back from the dead or being brought back to life or whatever and just people believe it. But if your not going to church then you never hear about it, and if your not Christian then you just won't believe it. But it's true!
if it truly had no scientific background
There's a scientific reason to explain whenever it looks like someone was raised from the dead? Thanks German3725, that's the most help you've ever been! You get 100 points for that one, 3825. And here are a couple others for ya!
The doctors say this one or that one is dead, but there not. So did a doctor say the Rabbi was dead? NO! Some Roman guard near his feet!
The guards would normally need an extra day or two to make sure those being crucified were dead, but is was Passover, and the Jews pleaded not to have anyone die then. So these guards went around breaking there legs to kill them before the sunset, but when they came to the Rabbi they saw that he was already dead so they didn't break his legs.
So from the standpoint of 2., we could say just that Jesus didn't have to come back to life to be just a Rabbi cause he didn't actually die, scientifically, because they never broke his legs. The Muslims also believe that he never did actually die either. Anyways, I'm off the trail so I'm going to come back and list what I think are the miracles that could have happened scientifically speaking.
There's a scientific reason to explain whenever it looks like someone was raised from the dead? Thanks German3725, that's the most help you've ever been! You get 100 points for that one, 3825. And here are a couple others for ya!
wow way to completely take something out of context. you know i said that if it were really a miracle, then it would have been an important story on the news, and there wasn't an important story about that on the news around the date which the article was made. --------------------------------------------- first one was able to be done through scientific knowledge and special tools.
second one, eh. not a good article.
also, what are you trying to accomplish for your side by trying to find ways to disprove the 'miracles'?
I think your just not being able to follow a thread but responding to each single post as if there not connected with anything that's ever been said before.
German3815, I'm just gonna start taking points away again, I'm really sorry. I'm not trying to be mean to you, and it's not personal, but you should just see that your saying wrong things and maybe when you decide to answer or post, that maybe you could wait some just to see what other people are thinking about cause you seem to post right after everytime I post, and I'm not trying to talk with you, but with AnaLoGMunky.
I think MGW made a really good thread cause no one ever talks about 2. or 3. they always keep saying 1. or 4. which is just that everything doesn't matter. So I thought it could talk about 2. and then it could talk about 3. and just see how these two compare to the 1. that we all know about, before it gets locked.
1. Jesus was the Christ. 2. Jesus was just a man. 3. Jesus was imaginery.
I wanted to give a bit more detail example for possibilities but true in it's most simplistic for this is correct.
The guards would normally need an extra day or two to make sure those being crucified were dead, but is was Passover, and the Jews pleaded not to have anyone die then. So these guards went around breaking there legs to kill them before the sunset, but when they came to the Rabbi they saw that he was already dead so they didn't break his legs.
A person not actually dieing is quite possible. There are numerous account of mistaken death through out history. The problem was so great that special coffins were made in a vein attempt to to save a person from being buried alive.
I can see number 2 being a posibility, but I just cant accept it. Im being skeptical, and maybe bias. My Cousin mentioned that the name could have been misinterpreted or spelt wrong etc... in other words it could be another interpretation of the father, the son and the holy ghost, all being brought under one name. Its difficult to know the real story.
I accept the fact that I could be wrong, but I believe jesus was not a real person. I feel like a record, sorry.
I'm not insulting you, just trying to help you figure out where your going wrong all the time
Please stop trying to figure out where hes wrong all the time, stop being the devils advocate.
I believe in both faith and science. ---------- ----- ----- ----------
Well, there probably was a jesus, maybe even named christ. there might not have been, but there probably was. people saw him as a profit and worshipped him :P and.. well idk. i believe in heaven, hell, god, and science :P im not sure, nvmd HAPPY THANKSGIVING :P heh... i think i spoke in the wrong thread. idk
I can see number 2 being a posibility, but I just cant accept it. Im being skeptical, and maybe bias.
Well, ok. This isn't a game about making people believe something, it's just to share evidence is all. We don't have to talk about it if there's no one wants to. But if you want any evidence just ask!
I was just about to list the miracles that could have happened scientifically-about healing and being in the right place at the right time, and maybe the two tricks they pulled on him in Temple. The point was just to show that there weren't that many miracles over such a short amount of time to call attention to historians, and that it was possible he got into some trouble with his elders over his preaching, and they had him crucified and he almost died from it but not, and all of that to agree with science.
The second path was just to show how the Rabbi's preachings were a growing part of Judaism, and that he was just like a reformer in that religion, over the orthodox part. If anyone wants to know more I was getting a couple of posts about that part ready for 2.
So the summary for 2. is just that there is lots of different types of evidence showing that there existed a Rabbi Yeshua bar Josef who was the basis of a reformation movement in Judaism that was so liberal it would later start its own religion when it encompassed the Gentiles who would give him the title Jesus Christ, and then call themselves Christians before killing other people who weren't Christians cause they didn't believe that God is Love.
So I guess if no one wants to, then we should talk about 3., since it looks like there will be more new people who want to talk about that part!
@MGW This thread is really amazing. I think that 3. does a lot more good than I thought! At first I was afraid that it might just compare Jesus to the Tooth Fairy and then say, well, maybe there was a Jewish Rabbi that formed the basis but he hardly had an impact on today's Christianity which is just a bunch of nonsense. And then just spoil everything.
But I'm just so glad I decided to look at 2. close so that I could see how 3. really helps! Its like this. Suppose there's this Well in the middle of nothing land. Jesus once delivered the good news that there is water at the bottom of the Well, and he taught how to drink of it. That's 2. But people that are 2.'s are still thirsty, and they are even mad at Jesus but the truth is that there actually just mad at whomever decided to block them from drinking of the Well.
The Blockers are saying to the people who are 1.'s that you need to listen to them if you want to get the water but actually they just keep you thirsty, to make you give power to them while they tell you all the things your doing wrong in your life and how you need to correct them before you'd even be worthy enough to drink out of Jesus's well. And the 1.'s believe them. And the 2.'s hate them, and make a mistake to think the water's not important. So the blockers end up blocking the people who believe them, 1.'s, and even the people who don't, 2.'s
So 3. will tell us is what those blockers are doing, and how not to listen to them so you could drink of the well just like Jesus was trying to teach you how to do in the first place!
there is lots of different types of evidence showing that there existed a Rabbi Yeshua bar Josef who was the basis of a reformation movement in Judaism that was so liberal it would later start its own religion when it encompassed the Gentiles who would give him the title Jesus Christ
Well this would be pretty significant if evidence was available, and I would like to see it. It would infact follow with what mu cousin was saying, that the name jesus christ could be more like a title. But it would still mean that jesus wasnt real, as it would not even be a person. Kinda like saying King is real... but its a title of sorts, or position.
One thing I reckon is that religion is shifting again, so instead of the popular belief being that of scenario 1, we have popular belief being scenario 2. Both of which rely on circumstantial evidence, as does scenario 3 of course. But what I would say aboot scenario 3 is that scenario 1 and 2 need evidence, whereas 3 is stronger thru the lack of verified evidence.
