ForumsWEPR[concluded] Was Jesus real?

453 74713
holt24
offline
holt24
1,133 posts
Nomad

This is not about whether or not he was the son of God but whether he actually existed.Most atheists agree that he did live but there are some who don't so what are you're thoughts?

  • 453 Replies
ShatterGlass
offline
ShatterGlass
97 posts
Nomad

Jesus, a Male that apparently never had sexual intercourse and hung around with a bunch of dudes all day. He may have been real, but..........at least we know why he has no descendants.

Sonatavarius
offline
Sonatavarius
1,322 posts
Farmer

Jesus, a Male that apparently never had sexual intercourse and hung around with a bunch of dudes all day. He may have been real, but..........at least we know why he has no descendants.


I don't see any valid point other than trolling here. be respectful of other people whether you agree with their faith or not. if you want to debate a topic regarding faith then have at it... but this is not doing so... He hung out with women at the same time. there are other myths out there that state that there might just be a descendant of Christ (or that there was at one point in time...). Have you ever heard of the Holy Grail?
djfinalmix
offline
djfinalmix
196 posts
Nomad

at least we know why he has no descendants.


It's more than that.
At that time, when Jesus was 'hanging around' he was preaching the word of god. Jesus was Gods only begotten son, and god sent Jesus to Earth to teach people about god and to turn away from their wrongdoing.
Jesus was destined to be crucified on the cross because mankind has done many sins, and that Jesus has no sins. So, to put this simply, a man with no sins was crucified for all people who have sins to be forgiven.
wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,437 posts
Farmer

Jesus, a Male that apparently never had sexual intercourse and hung around with a bunch of dudes all day. He may have been real, but..........at least we know why he has no descendants.


If we look at the historical figure (different from the biblical one) then it is most likely that the harlot Mary Magdelen was his wife. Should we look at the biblical deffinition of marriage this makes perfect sense as well if we are under the assumption Mary was indeed a harlot. Jesus of Nazareth was indeed Jewish and as such would have followed a more literal version of Judasim back then.
djfinalmix
offline
djfinalmix
196 posts
Nomad

So, given all the evidence, I think that Jesus was likely to be real.

Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

Certainly, it's likely that some guy named Jesus existed. However, he wasn't the son of God, that's just silly.

wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,437 posts
Farmer

So, given all the evidence, I think that Jesus was likely to be real.


There's actually very little evidence. True we have the bible, but we have to place that in a historical context, we also have some minor archeological evidence, but that's about it. We have no true picture of the historical figure, though chances are he was a schizophrenic
djfinalmix
offline
djfinalmix
196 posts
Nomad

Hey, did you know that BC stands for Before Christ, and that AD stands for Anno Domini, which I like to remember as After Death?

wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,437 posts
Farmer

Yes, however that's been changed to BCE which means Before the Common Era AD still needs to be updated...

Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

And what's your point? We all knew that. Just because Christianity became dominant and people decided to use BC and AD as the dominant system for marking how long ago something was doesn't mean that it's correct. The dominant teaching about the sun used to be that one of a multitude of Gods was directing it across the sky.

Sonatavarius
offline
Sonatavarius
1,322 posts
Farmer

i'm pretty sure AD was updated alongside BCE. even if it were to have stayed the same abbreviaiton it no longer, by definition of whoever decided, means year of our lord. any book that i've seen that uses BCE also uses another version for AD... i just don't remember it right now... i think it might be CE

Moegreche
offline
Moegreche
3,826 posts
Duke

any book that i've seen that uses BCE also uses another version for AD... i just don't remember it right now... i think it might be CE


Yep, BCE and CE are the standardly accepted terms in academia. The stand for Before the Common Era and the Common Era, respectively.
djfinalmix
offline
djfinalmix
196 posts
Nomad

What about Thomas Edison? And Albert Einstein? And those Egyptian dudes who built those pyramids...

You'd believe they exist, right?

Now, just because Jesus' proof came from an some sort of ancient text doesn't say that he wouldn't have existed. Why is that so? Is it because He was gods son which is preposterous and he can heal people and all that stuff, and there's no such thing as magic and the supernatural.

delossantosj
offline
delossantosj
6,672 posts
Nomad

no its fact that he was real but its your choice to believe wether he was the messiah or not

valkery
offline
valkery
1,255 posts
Nomad

Ssssoooo, if I go back to the OP then this thread is finished, since it says in the OP that...

This is not about whether or not he was the son of God but whether he actually existed.


We are all in agreement that he was a real person, so this thread can now be formally shut down.
Showing 61-75 of 453