Historical Reference around Jesus

[JayKeeley]

I was listening to the radio on the way home last night and I found some low-key AM radio station broadcasting a session by someone called Bob Lassiter. Anyone know of this personality? I think he's in Florida.

Anyway, he had a call in session to discuss the historical reference around Jesus, and his debating argument was that it's only religious scriptures that even discuss his existence. The people who called in (from the bible belt) were telling him he was going to burn in hell for his agnostic beliefs etc. It was pretty funny.

Without sparking debate, although it probably will, what are your thoughts? Regardless of your religous beliefs (if any), do you think Jesus as a person actually existed? Have you ever found any historical reference outside of the Bible or Koran that mentions him?

 

[NAD]

I have always wanted a religion topic to pop up here, but never wanted to start it. This baby is all your doing...

The only historical reference that I have heard of (not verified by myself) was that there was indeed a Joseph registered in Bethlehem around the time of the alleged birth. If it's true, it's probably coincidence, but who knows. I think Jebus probably did exist, but the lack of historical significance is a bit odd, and also the fact that the earliest art regarding him is dated at 500 AD.

As far as my personal religious beliefs, note my signature.

 

[Weapon X]

One can only speculate, and never be a 100% sure.

I believe that he isn't the son of Christ, that he was just a preacher and spokesperson, something like Martin Luther King. I believe ppl that wanted power and to validate their religion used Christ for their means.

But there is always that thing that says that it's all BS, cause the bible ain't nothin but make-believe.

 

[JayKeeley]

I have always wanted a religion topic to pop up here, but never wanted to start it. This baby is all your doing...

Well, the thread is not really about religion (although it's difficult to avoid) - I was just curious as to whether agnostic or aetheists believed in whether 'Jesus of Nazareth' actually existed or not (just as a human being).

I take it for granted that you do believe in Jesus if you're religious, obviously.

Other characters from the bible, such as King Herod, and I think Pilot (sp?) are referenced in non-religous scriptures - just not Jesus himself, from my understanding.

The art reference of him from 500AD is probably due to the fact that the bible wasn't written I don't think until 400AD. Or at least this pertains to the New Testament.

I'm also sure that there would have been hundreds of Joseph's in Bethlehem. Back then, and right now too. It's a common Jewish and Arabic name.

 

[NAD]

This comes from a link at the bottom of this page, too funny not to share:

THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS JEWISH
He went into his father's business
He lived at home until he was 33
He was sure his Mother was a virgin, and his Mother was sure he was God


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS IRISH
He never got married
He was always telling stories
He loved green pastures


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS PUERTO RICAN
His first name was Jesus
He was bilingual
He was always being harassed by the authorities


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS ITALIAN
He talked with his hands
He had wine with every meal
He worked in the building trades


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS BLACK
He called everybody "brother"
He liked Gospel
He couldn't get a fair trial


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS A CALIFORNIAN
He never cut his hair
He walked around barefoot
He started a new religion


THREE PROOFS THAT JESUS WAS A WOMAN
He had to feed a crowd at a moment's notice, when there was no food
He kept trying to get the message across to a bunch of men who just didn't get it
Even when he was dead, he had to get up because there was more work for him to do

 

[Erik]

I believe that he isn't the son of Christ

That's OK, neither do the Christians.

 

[Weapon X]

Originally Posted by Weapon X
I believe that he isn't the son of Christ That's OK, neither do the Christians.

Hahaha, I was in a rush, Son of God

 

[Papa Josh]

Well, considering the bible is considered by many to be essentially an old history book, I say that Jesus is mentioned in history books, i.e. the Bible.

There's not a whole lot of mention of anything from that period outside of the Bible...

Now before I get hit, let me just say that I have never associated myself with what's considered "Christianity." I do believe Jesus existed. I believe in a higher power (too many things have been going on as of late in my personal life, that I can just no longer deny and say, "oh it's a coincidence") but it's something that I will spend the rest of my life trying to unravel and figure out.

Personal religion is an ultra "personal" topic in my opinion and I don't get into it too much. Now if you wanna talk about the idiocy of evangelists, that's a whole 'nother topic.

I choose to stick with politics

 

[Ayeka]

I believe Jesus was real...they had some interesting material in my science magazines some time back which helped back this up - a coffin that was supposed to have contained his brother, I think. It's noteworthy because it had "Dude, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" enscribed on it, and back in those days they only took the time to do this is the relatives were uber-important.

Having said that, he's still just a Jewish madman to me. People in those days believed that the sky was help up by four giants, why wouldn't they believe this guy's crap also?

 

[Brainstorm]

There was the historical Jesus - trying to liberate the jews from the romans - re-establishing the true kingdom of God (i.e. with a jewish king .. decending from David)
And there was the mythical created Jesus of Paul. A Jesus acceptable to the romans.
The chisma between Paul and the people who knew Jesus is well known. Even if the church/romans did everything in their power to vipe out the traces of the real man.
The New testament as we know it was collected from written material produced (if my memory serves me well...) in the period AD 70 to AD 200. The church removed a lot they did not longer like.
Even though, .. the traces of this chisma can still be found in the bible.
The group of Jerusalem (including at least one brother of Jesus and other diciples,if not all) did not believe Jesus to be the son of God.
Thats why the diciples are given such a rough deal in the testament: they did not understand a damned shit -- not until Paul came along.

 

[Brainstorm]

One God???

The jews did not believe that, only that they had their (own) god, who of course was "the best one".
You should not worship "the others", but stay with your own kind.
The One and Only - is a later development created by the church and the muslims.

 

[Brainstorm]

Crap.

I believe Jesus to be an inspiring and deep thinking teacher. Something happened in Palestine that kicked off a lot of developments in peoples lives.
This is not different from similar developments around other teachers (Ken Keasy, de Sade, Shakespeare, Socrates, .. and on and on and on).
The traces of this is evident in a lot of scriptures and traditions othet than the bible.
What the new testament is transmitting is (mostly) crap though, especially since it is taken out of context, not part of a living tradition, not to be discussed, true for all, and so on. Stinking bullshit really. (As would the teachings of any other teacher getting the backing of this kind of universal "church".)
And I'm just speaking about the "teachings" here, not the fairytale parts. And not the later revisions: son of god, eternal life, and so on

 

[ChiefB]

I never believed in Jesus until I was watching the Formula 1 racing at Silverstone (TV on Sunday). On lap 12, out of nowhere this robed man walks out onto the race track - dressed like Jesus and waving his hands in the air. It was a fucking miracle, because the cars were racing around the corner at 200mph and were miraculously avoiding him - that is a true miracle!

On a serious note though, Jesus was most probably a very spriritually enlightened person, who was able to impart a unique and peacfull way of living. He was no God, no miracle worker but a humble mere mortal.

I think all these so called prophets did actually exist and imparted their knowledge to their religious clan. The problem we see today, is a complete bastardisation of the religion as it tries unsuccessfully to keep up with technological / scientific advances.

A classic example is the study of other cultures - you may learn that some tribe in the Yucatan Peninsula pray to a Sun God. The western religious folk, will simply balk at the concept of such a thing. But if they only just sit and think that their own religion is based on the same principles as all the others. You cannot disprove their religion because your own belief system becomes affected.

Religion is simply a club that creates divisions within humanity.

As for my thoughts - I don't believe in a concept of a God - A selfish God that creates a being, in which the beings sole purpose is to pray to its creator, or suffer eternal damnation. Does not make any sense to me.

Chief B

 

[J.]

Yes, I believe Jesus was real. Whether he was the Son of God, no one will ever know. At least, no living human being.

Like PapaJosh said, your personal beliefs are just that, personal. It's grates on my nerves that people constantly bash the concept of a God or Higher Being. It bothers me even more that individuals love to pick on Jesus. Even atheists believe Jesus was an enlightened man, but Jesus probably receives more flack than any "dead" person ever has. No one dares mock JFK, MLK Jr., etc, but Jesus, he must be prime fooder for people with nothing better to do than to pick on one of the most important people in history. Rest in Peace? Sorry Jesus, you made too much of a difference.

As for my personal beliefs, yes I believe in God. I believe we have a fate/destiny. However, I do not support the Church, since it has become nothing but a corporation. And the mere fact that some churches preach that God blesses only those who tithe, is ludicrous and hypocritical. Money is the worst corrupter ever conceived. Just ask In Flames. (sorry, couldn't resist). Seriously, money makes a wonderful servant, and a horrible master.

God bless.

 

[JayKeeley]

Even atheists believe Jesus was an enlightened man, but Jesus probably receives more flack than any "dead" person ever has.

There are obviously different types of atheists - those who can accept that the biblical characters existed as mortals, and those who think the whole thing is just made up through incessant needs to have the 'unexplained' explained. I guess being 'agnostic' is the 'get out of jail free' card where you can swing either way.

The biggest contradition is the concept of evolution, and I'm not sure whether the discussion of Adam & Eve is even relevant anymore. I can't imagine not raising my child to believe in evolution, fossils, dinosaurs etc. The hasidic jews in our neighborhood believe fossils to be part of some bigger conspiracy, dinosaurs never roamed the land, and that the Book of Genesis is pretty much the be all end all.

It is personal though whether people can commit to the beliefs. There are atheists who believe science explains all, and then in certain situations those same people will pray to God for help (e.g. near death experience, the terminal illness of a child etc).

I knew an atheist who recently got married in a church, by a priest, and the vows were laced with blessings from God! Then again, tradition seems to blur the personal belief system, and 99% of tradition is based on religion.

On a slight side note, does anyone know what atheists do for funeral processions? They obviously have no last rites called, and neither would they choose to be buried in a cemetary of sorts. Do they just opt for cremation with a simple goodbye from friends and family? Has anyone been to a funeral for an atheist?

 

[lizard]

it's obvious enough that despite its omissions and embellishments, the Bible is based on historical occurences. Archaeology uncovers much to bolster the bible as a historical document every year.

As for Jesus, at the very least, he kicked off a revolution amongst his people, initiating a major world religion. the bible admonishes against false prophets, and that to me indicates there were bunches of them prowling about, just as there are today. Somehow, out of all of them, Jesus's message transcended the others, and it was off to the races.

 

[NAD]

There are obviously different types of atheists - those who can accept that the biblical characters existed as mortals, and those who think the whole thing is just made up through incessant needs to have the 'unexplained' explained. I guess being 'agnostic' is the 'get out of jail free' card where you can swing either way.

George Smith (author who writes excessively about atheism) says that there are two types of agnostics: agnostic atheists and agnostic theists. In other words, you can admit to saying that you don't know (remaining neutral), but the fact remains that you still either believe in a higher power or you don't. Eliminates the wild card aspect of agnosticism.

Adam and Eve are just as relevant (or irrelavent, depending on your beliefs) as any other lesson, tale, fable, etc. in the bible. Also there is a way to squeeze in dinosaurs into the bible, the whole "on the first day..." bit is being translated to millions of years now (conflicts with the "earth is only 6000 years old" argument, what do you know another contradiction:Smug: ). So don't be too surprised if some think that humans began with Adam and Eve and went through evolution afterwards.

I find placing science into religion a little foolish and unnecessary, apples and oranges. Science is based on facts, religion is based on beliefs. I understand the conflicts that arise obviously, but so many are unnecessary. If you are looking for fact in religion you're missing the point.

 

[Brainstorm]

Atheist funeral.

I've been to one. The former rector of our university died some months after leaving office. The seremony took place in the big hall of our main builing, corpse in a coffin in the middle of the floor.
A lot of people spoke (wife, friends, officials), some just gave short statements. No-one mentioned any god. Just his life, aims, work, humor, kindness.
I thought this would be a bit contrived, but it worked fine. Better than ANY christian funeral I've ever attended. It showed the guy some respect.

Afterwards the coffin was carried out, driven to the furnace and wife given the ashes to do with as she pleases.

 

[haddsie]

On a slight side note, does anyone know what atheists do for funeral processions? They obviously have no last rites called, and neither would they choose to be buried in a cemetary of sorts. Do they just opt for cremation with a simple goodbye from friends and family? Has anyone been to a funeral for an atheist?

I'm thinking, this might be just as easy as a non-religion-based wedding. I don't know what the details would be.... especially if you are being buried rather than cremated... but I suppose you could just do some kind of "rememberance" ceremony and be done with it. And just as there are people (like Justices of the Peace in the U.S.) who will lead non-religious weddings, you could probably find someone similar to proceed over a non-religious funeral. The difference is, funerals are never about the dead person, they're about the people who are left living. And among the surviving family, I would guess that there's usually at least a couple of religious people who would be horrified and offended if an atheist ceremony was done. I bet a lot of atheists have been given religious funerals in order not to piss anyone off.

 

[MadeInNewJersey]

Well, considering the bible is considered by many to be essentially an old history book, I say that Jesus is mentioned in history books, i.e. the Bible.

The bible history? Um, not so much. More like fiction. And rather far-fetched fiction at that.

As for the topic, I'm tend to believe that a Jesus of Nazareth did indeed exist, though I'm far too skeptical to believe the miracles, etc, etc. He was as someone else guessed, most likely a reverant man who certainly had some followers and was perhaps even quite persuasive, but a god? Ha.