Selsaral

I voted maybe, leaning towards no, but i don't claim any sort of expertise on the issue, I'm an amateur.

My main perspective is culture and history. It appears to be human nature to invent just this type of thing. We've got a whole bunch of purely mythical gods, half-gods, and other variants in the history of humanity. Jesus looks an awful lot like them to me.

When it comes time then to take a look at the biblical studies to help examine the issue, my amateur understanding is that there is very little historicity to find, with plenty of known forgeries, errors, political manipulation, anonymous authors, etc. And again, from the cultural/historical perspective, the bible has all the earmarks of other mythical/fictional/religious texts. The NT is obviously more sophisticated (and from a different culture and time) than the Gilgamesh-type myths of the OT, but I am having trouble concluding that it is more likely to be historical. But I give solid weight to the opinions of biblical experts who believe a Jesus did exist, and I am no expert.

aa5874

But, what if you found out that most biblical "experts" are themselves Christians or Christian apologist, expecting to be with Jesus in heaven and rewarded with the gift of eternal life, would that matter to you? I don't think many CHRISTians would claim that Jesus never existed, whether as a god, man or both.

arnoldo

Actually the Book of Daniel gives a specific prophecy that a Messiah will arrive and be "cut off" approximately 32 A.D. Perhaps this is why the book of Daniel is one of the most controversial books in the bible

spin

Why are inerrantists hopeless at mathematics? Cyrus's proclamation for the return was in 539 BCE (see Ezra 1:2ff). 470 years (see Dan 9:24ff) after that is 69 BCE.

Oh wait, inerrantists have been told about their math problems so they have to shift the proclamation. 470 - 30 = 440, so the proclamation must have happened in 440 BCE. Now let's see, that's the reign of Artaxerxes I, so let's find a proclamation for him... umm, look, Ezra 7:13ff. That's a proclamation, so we can ignore the proclamation of Cyrus to go and build the temple.

(Don't expect arnoldo to be able to read all this post.)


spin

aa5874

Well, according to Josephus, Suetonius and Tacitus, the Jews interpreted the sciptures and believed the Messiah would arrive at around 70 CE, not 32 CE. And this prediction caused the Jewish people to be more determined in fighting the War.

angelo

Tom Harpur's book ''The Pagan Christ'' Claims that long before the advent of christ, the Egyptians and other ancient societies believed in the coming of a messiah, in a Madonna and her child, a virgin birth and the incarnation of spirit made flesh.
Civilisations as diverse as the Persians and the Aztects shared the same religious doctrine as christian churches today, long before the testaments were purportedly recorded as ''history''.
The early christians church adopted these ancient truths as the tenets of christianity and set about covering up all attempts to reveal any element of the bible as myth.

Toto

Sorry, Tom Harpur is not a reliable source. Please check the link I added.

angelo

Freke and Gandy are also a touch suspect, as is the author of ''The Passover Plot''. Schonfield was it? They are all tying to interpret the story of Jesus by referencing the gospels. I believe that is a mistake. They have to look outside the gospels to find any evidence of his existence or otherwise. F and G do just that, and maybe are the closest to the historical Jesus if he had any existence. John Shelby Spong is also trying to interpret the gospels according to the latest scholarship, thereby denying any miracles but still holding on to an historical Jesus whom people saw god in his character. But it must be remembered where he is coming from. A retired bishop of Newark.
There have been many attempts to find an historical Jesus by some scholars who have dedicated a good portion of their lives for the quest for the historical man behind the myth. A good portion of them have come away doubting his existence at all. The ones who insist on a man existing named Jesus actually having lived, I feel still have their childhood indoctrination within themselves, perhaps unconsciously.

aa5874

What credible non-apologetic source do Freke and Gandy use to support their historical Jesus?

The stories of Jesus of the NT do not support an actual man. And in addition, there are no credible non-apologetic source for Jesus the Christ of Nazareth.

For example, John the Baptist is mentioned in Josephus as an actual human being, without any supernatural or magical characteristics, and there are no other contradicting or inconsistent report about John the Baptist either from Josephus himself, or any other credible source. I find it reasonable to assume John the Baptist existed until further evidence show otherwise.

However, Jesus the Christ, although mentioned in Josephus, is depicted with magical or supernatural qualities, being able to raise himself from the dead, and Joseph himself claimed the Messiah would arrive at around 70 CE and other credible sources, Suetonius and Tacitus, agree with Josephus.

I find it reasonable to assume Jesus the Christ was not an actual human being, since the only information we have are magical or supernatural and full of errors.

reniaa

and thats the point without the magical claims people would have no problem believing in jesus it's that he's an all or nothing figure, you have to be in the he doesn't exist position to validate it, so lesser supernatural figures like john the baptist are okay because they don't do the miracles :s