Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Q: How do we know Jesus ever lived at all?
A: This can be said of anybody or anything. However, I'm sure this is often debated between the opposing factions, one hell bent to prove that He didn't and the other adding fuel to that fire by claiming He did and that He must. What is lost in all of this is the message itself. Does it matter if He existed, if the message on humanity He delivered makes sense? Likewise, does it matter if Buddha existed as long as the messages do?
The only reason, and this is my opinion, is that if he did not exist as described then the alleged lessons derived from him would be shown as not being truly derived at.
In other words, it would put the entire religion in doubt. The followers can not have that.
Q: How do we know Jesus ever lived at all?
A: This can be said of anybody or anything. However, I'm sure this is often debated between the opposing factions, one hell bent to prove that He didn't and the other adding fuel to that fire by claiming He did and that He must. What is lost in all of this is the message itself. Does it matter if He existed, if the message on humanity He delivered makes sense? Likewise, does it matter if Buddha existed as long as the messages do?
This is a good point.
Christianity. One can be saved/ go to heaven because Jesus died on the Cross and rose from the dead.
Buddhism. Buddha explained how to escape from recurring reincarnation (assuming that you'd want to)
The difference is that if Jesus never lived (or that Christ never existed and there was no resurrection) then the whole of the Christianity claim falls to the ground. One might find some value in the social proposals but I'd say it should not be a question of looking mainly in the Bible for them.
With Buddhism it is telling us how Karma works, no matter whether it was worked out by Gotama, Mahavira or (as I rather suspect) a committee of Kshatryas looking to supplant the Brahmins.
It's like TV. It doesn't matter whether it was invented by Tihanyi, Yogi Bair or Herbert Ives, the thing exists and works. If Karmic reincarnation is a fact, then Buddhism would still be valid even if Buddha never existed. It does not rely on him as Christianity relies almost entirely on Jesus Holy Resurrected Christ having existed.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-09-2011 at 09:21 AM..
In other words, it would put the entire religion in doubt. The followers can not have that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
Christianity. One can be saved/ go to heaven because Jesus died on the Cross and rose from the dead.
The difference is that if Jesus never lived (or that Christ never existed and there was no resurrection) then the whole of the Christianity claim falls to the ground. One might find some value in the social proposals but I'd say it should not be a question of looking mainly in the Bible for them.
The assumption here is that Christianity isn't about following Christ's advised path, or being like Him. Those who assume this require that He existed. I mentioned these as the two (opposing) factions that go at it, one making an argument that He did not, the other defending against as if their whole life depended on it.
I don't belong to either group. Perhaps because I grew up going to a church that didn't expect people to simply believe in Christ and preach about him, but to be like him. It is why a sermon at a Dallas area church (perhaps the best I've heard in years) resonated so well with me. It spoke of most Christians following what is easy (believe and preach) but failing at what is the most difficult (being like Christ).
When I think of Christianity, I think of it along the lines of what Jesus stood for, rather than whether He existed or not. Take this verse from Luke, for example:
Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
Those are pretty strong words, and most of us are incapable of practicing what they entail. Now, I don't see a reason why such words must take a backseat to the debate whether Jesus existed or not, or whether He was "God". It is why I couldn't care less when I see the philosophies in Buddhism. Does it matter if Buddha said it, or whether someone else came up with them?
In a way that's quite right. But what I say as an atheist, if it doesn't matter whether Jesus or Buddha said it or whether either of them lived - why on earth does one have to be a Christian or anything else? We can quite reasonably come up with all sorts of sayings and social ideas. Referring to the power of statements ignores the question of whether it makes any sense or not.
Being a 'Christian' in my view just gets in the way of assessing the validity of these statements - too much 'oh what powerful words'. And the other way around: admiring remarks about the power of Jesus quotes is used to validate being a 'Christian' - whatever that means in this context.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-09-2011 at 10:27 AM..
The biggest problem I find in proving Jesus(as) really did exist is the need to undo much "creative history" some Christians resorted to, to prove his existence. I think this rewriting history by the early church, did much to cast doubt upon his existence. I think the best sources to find evidence requires one to step outside of Christianity.
Another problem is there is a strong possibility that early Christians would have done their best to obliterate any historical evidence out of fear it would show Jesus(as) as being Human and not divine. Can you imagine the scene if evidence was found that Jesus(as) had a wife (ala Davinci Code)
On another note the Sabians/Mandeans (Baptisers ie Followers of John the Baptist) seem to totally deny the existence of Jesus(as)
Another difficulty is going to find what name he used and how many lived at that time with the same name. It is very probable he used the name Yeshua or even more probable the Aramaic/Arab Isa (Eesa)
I suspect the best starting point would be to look into the now defunct gnostic religions of the time, such as the Ebionites, which seem to have been the first followers of Jesus(as).
Quote:
2. Ebionites
“Initially a sect of Judaism, Christianity first organized itself in Jerusalem. However, although Jewish Christianity was dominant at first, within 20 years it had moved out into the Gentile (non-Jewish) world.”
"Encyclopedia of New Religions" by Christopher Partridge (2004)1
The first Christians were the Jews who believed that Jesus was the Jewish messiah. They used an early Gospel of Matthew, and their beliefs are in accordance with the earliest reports of the gospels of Luke and Matthew, and with Jewish prophecy. The term Ebionite "was at first [...] a common name for all Christians, as Epiphanius (d. 403) testifies (Adv. Haer., xxix. 1)."2. But Ebionite Christianity did not remain the only form of Christianity, and St Paul preached that the Jewish Law was no longer necessary for salvation. This less strict form of Christianity gained many converts, especially amongst the gentiles (non-Jews), for whom circumcision was distasteful. Christian groups arose who rejected the Jewish foundation of Christianity. Bart Ehrman in "Lost Christianities" provides a detailed description of the history of many early Christian groups.
“We know of Christian groups taking stands on Judaism that were at polar ends of the spectrum, some groups insisting that the Jewish Law was to be followed for salvation and others insisting that the Jewish Law could not be followed if one wanted salvation. All of these groups claimed to be representing the view of Jesus himself.”
"Lost Christianities" by Bart Ehrman (2003)3
The success and popularity of these groups caused the Ebionites to be eclipsed, and the beginnings of the Pauline Christianity as we know it today flourished. This developing Church, and its founders, largely forgot and rejected the Jewish roots of their religion. But, curious Christians later wanted to know things that they did not know, for example when was Jesus born, and when did he die? So they went in search of their past.
Book Cover“Indeed, when in 160 Bishop Melito of Sardis went to Judea to discover what had become of the legendary Jerusalem Church, to his dismay he found not the descendants of the apostles, but instead a small group of [...] Christians, who called themselves the Ebionites or 'Poor Men', [who] had their own Gospel of the Ebionites and also a Gospel of the Hebrews, a Gospel of the Twelve Apostles and a Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these gospels differed significantly from the gospels of the New Testament.”
"The Jesus Mysteries" by Timothy Freke & Peter Gandy (1999) [Book Review]4
This is not the only time that Church elders went in search of their history, only to discover that what they found was not what they expected. They did not realize that over time their religion had changed, the same as with all other religious groups in history. They discovered that the beliefs of the early Ebionite Christians differed from those of their own developing Church.
“The Ebionite Christians [...] believed that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah sent from the Jewish God to the Jewish people in fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures. They also believed that to belong to the people of God, one needed to be Jewish. As a result, they insisted on observing the Sabbath, keeping kosher, and circumcising all males. [...] An early source, Irenaeus, also reports that the Ebionites continued to reverence Jerusalem, evidently by praying in its direction during their daily acts of worship.
Book CoverTheir insistence on staying (or becoming) Jewish should not seem especially peculiar from a historical perspective, since Jesus and his disciples were Jewish. But the Ebionites' Jewishness did not endear them to most other Christians, who believed that Jesus allowed them to bypass the requirements of the Law for salvation. The Ebionites, however, maintained that their views were authorized by the original disciples, especially by Peter and Jesus' own brother, James, head of the Jerusalem church after the resurrection.”
In a way that's quite right. But what I say as an atheist, if it doesn't matter whether Jesus or Buddha said it or whether either of them lived - why on earth does one have to be a Christian or anything else? We can quite reasonably come up with all sorts of sayings and social ideas. Referring to the power of statements ignores the question of whether it makes any sense or not.
Being a 'Christian' in my view just gets in the way of assessing the validity of these statements - too much 'oh what powerful words'. And the other way around: admiring remarks about the power of Jesus quotes is used to validate being a 'Christian' - whatever that means in this context.
I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, it helps. Take Buddhism for example. The Tripitaka wasn't written down as Buddha spoke. The tradition was kept alive (and likely expanded) by those who passed it down thru generations, for centuries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theophane
Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God because He said so.
"John" might be the one to be blamed for their beliefs, now they hold on to it as if their life depended on it
I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, it helps. Take Buddhism for example. The Tripitaka wasn't written down as Buddha spoke. The tradition was kept alive (and likely expanded) by those who passed it down thru generations, for centuries.
Ok, I don't see a lot to disagree about after all. I just think that not signing up to any particular religion gives you some flexibility. But since you don't insist on 'Christ' having existed, that's all needs to be said in the contex of the thread.
Quote:
"John" might be the one to be blamed for their beliefs, now they hold on to it as if their life depended on it
The biggest problem I find in proving Jesus(as) really did exist is the need to undo much "creative history" some Christians resorted to, to prove his existence. I think this rewriting history by the early church, did much to cast doubt upon his existence. I think the best sources to find evidence requires one to step outside of Christianity.
Another problem is there is a strong possibility that early Christians would have done their best to obliterate any historical evidence out of fear it would show Jesus(as) as being Human and not divine. Can you imagine the scene if evidence was found that Jesus(as) had a wife (ala Davinci Code)
On another note the Sabians/Mandeans (Baptisers ie Followers of John the Baptist) seem to totally deny the existence of Jesus(as)
Another difficulty is going to find what name he used and how many lived at that time with the same name. It is very probable he used the name Yeshua or even more probable the Aramaic/Arab Isa (Eesa)
I suspect the best starting point would be to look into the now defunct gnostic religions of the time, such as the Ebionites, which seem to have been the first followers of Jesus(as).
I'm diffident about plugging my own work and as a Muslim your choir don't need preaching to but, since you are so far along the road, you might like to browse over my assessment of the NT.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
