JoeWallack

JW:
I voted "Maybe" because even though my guess is that there was a HJ, there is no Quality evidence for that position. Plus, as other correspondents have observed on these holy Boards, for all Practical purposes GJ (Gospel Jesus) is a different person than HJ.

For me the best evidence for HJ is that the two best pieces of evidence, Paul and "Mark", agree in that they are both Negative Reactions to Historical witness for Jesus. Both emphasize the Death of Jesus as opposed to the Life of Jesus promoted by Historical witness. This Reaction than is the best existing evidence for HJ. But it is ------------------------------------------------------------------a long distance from what would be good evidence for HJ.



Joseph

Sheshbazzar

On most "christian" forums the result would be close to 100% yes, barring any significant resistance votes originating from non-christians or atheists.
Their Moderators are set in place specifically to "weed out" any posts, objections, or observations that might upset their "feel good" apple cart.

"People from everyday life"? depends on where you take your survey, my many years of studying the bible have made it profoundly evident to me that most "people from everyday life" tend to be extremely ignorant of the actual contents of their bible's, even the church-going christians being content to sit back and be spoon fed on their particular denominations dogmatic sound-bites, which being all they have heard, and all that they know of, is all that they are able to parrot.
I now live in the so called "Bible Belt" and daily I am confronted by how ignorant of the contents of the bible most of these "bible believing" christians really are.
That is why, even as a long time bible "believer", I was first drawn to these forums where there was far more substance and thought involved than that which is provided by just another "halleluia! and amen brother!" .

schilling.klaus

no, it just means that mankind is credulous and naive beyond any measure,
and only a very small elite is able to look behind the HJ deception.

Klaus Schilling

aa5874

"Yes" in this poll may mean that Jesus was not the son of a God and that Mary's Son, Jesus, was from an affair with another man mistakenly called the Holy Ghost, and "Maybe" can also mean "Maybe not".

mountainman

Well said AAbe - this essentially sums up
the constituency and nature of the prevailing
"christian hegemon".

The poll results indicate those who are not so
tenured to this emotional baggage of the HJ
are free to consider a non existent man.

One might be tempted to say a Docetic Jesus.
Do you differentiate a Docetic Jesus from the pack?


Best wishes,


Pete Brown

angelo

The maybe's in my case is a manner of speech. I do not think for a moment that Jesus had any historical existence. Not as described in the gospels anyway.

angelo

[QUOTE=ApostateAbe;5131681]Yes, but the name Jesus was very popular in those days. You could stand in the town square and call 'Jesus' and at least 10 out of 100 men would answer you.
So which Jesus are we talking about here. The one in the gospels had no existence at all.

reniaa

[QUOTE=angelo atheist;5132895]intersting point and so maybe the poll should have been more specific in it's details.

jonasaberg

[QUOTE=angelo atheist;5132895]This is exactly my view as well.
When we say "Jesus", exactly who are we talking about? Strip away the mythology and we are left with practically nothing.
It was a common name.
There were many many prophets/wonderworkers/whatever in those days
Many people were crucified

Is it possible that a guy named Jesus existed, who was also a "prophet" or teacher or something AND was crucified? It's probable but how could one possibly prove that it was THAT Jesus who founded christianity?

angelo

Actually, the name Jesus is still quite popular in the Latin world, only because it's in the gospels. Just as Muhammad is popular in the muslim world, because of the followers of islam and the koran. I wonder why there's not to many people named Confucius or Buddha.