None of the later writings about him(hearsay) are provable and there are no indisputable facts verifying his existence. So is he an imaginary icon created to fulfill human needs? Or, like King Arthur and Hercules, was there a strong likelihood that he actually existed and the stories about him grew to mythical proportion?
Plus, many of the beliefs about him actually came from the Mystery Religions - ISIS or MITHRA
2006-07-29 09:59:04 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Mythology & Folklore
THE BIBLE IS FOUND INSIDE THE DEAD SEA CAVE..IT IS SOMEONES JUNK COLLECTION AND IT TURNED INTO A BIBLE!
2006-07-29 17:41:49 · answer #1 · answered by +++++ SPOOK ++++ 4 · 2⤊ 5⤋
You appear to be confusing the mythical dimension of Christian biographies of Jesus with the historical Jesus. While of course belief in the cosmic Christ is dependent on whether one is of the Christian faith or not, belief in the historical Jesus on purely evidentiary grounds is well-justified regardless of one's faith perspective.
Flavius Josephus, who was no friend to the Christian sect of Judaism at that time, seems pretty sure that the historical Jesus existed. From his and other documents of the period, the evidence for the historical Jesus is fairly well-established--better established in fact, than the historical Romanized Briton guerilla fighter who became Arthur. Hercules, the Olympianized form of the much older celestial consort/son to the pre-Hellenistic Mycenaen mother goddess Hera (originally Heracles, glory of Hera), was more likely never a single historical figure, but rather a god-concept projected on a series of divinely anointed ceremonial kings.
The resonances of the Mithraic cult, of Osirianism, and of Dionysus/Adonis/Tammuz cults and their Orphic successors, and early Christian understandings of the sacrificed god-king are clear. But the idea of the sacrificed king/god is so deeply ingrained in the Mediterranean Basin/North African religious complex that this is unsurprising and hardly a new revelation (remember Frazer's Golden Bough, which carefully and discreetly raised precisely the idea of Jesus as vegetation-god more than a century ago?).
2006-07-29 14:57:05 · answer #2 · answered by snowbaal 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suppose you would also argue that George Washington never REALLY existed either huh? You should perhaps look into learning more about historical evidences and how we use them to determine what happened, might have happened, what could have happened, and what did not happen. Furthermore, your last statement of many beliefs coming from the Mystery Reliogions is totally unfounded.
Most rational and even irrational people belief in and acknowledge the existance of Jesus. Whether Jesus existed or not is not the question. The real question is "Was Jesus who he said he was? and if Jesus was not that makes him a liar, or a lunatic, but if Jesus was who he says he was then you have to ask what are the ramifications of that.
2006-07-29 10:21:05 · answer #3 · answered by theua_s 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Logically, there is no good proof one way or the other--Christians often discount other religious figures being alive even though they have books written about them but say that the Bible is proof that Jesus lived. Um, no. But, logic is not truth. Just because you can't prove something one way or the other, it doesn't mean it's true (or false.) That's one of the reasons why myths endure--they aren't bound by the laws of logic. You couldn't prove Christ's existence in a court of law without evidence, but that's not to say that he's real or fake. You'd just get your case thrown out.
Try reading The Jesus Mysteries, by Timothy Freke and Thomas Gandy (I think those are their names.) Its theory is that Jesus is a Jewish version of a popular Pagan dying-and-resurrected god-man. Like Mithra, Osiris, Dionysus, etc. It's a good read.
2006-07-29 10:07:30 · answer #4 · answered by SlowClap 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He exists. There could be all the proof you want and then where would there be room for faith? God wants you to believe and if you have proof there is no need to believe. the fact that there is no concrete proof leaves the question eternally open for people to make their choices and believe or not according to their own free will. It's the apple all over again only each person gets to make the choice for themsleves
2006-07-29 17:43:12 · answer #5 · answered by digimutt 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that there is historical proof that the man we call Jesus Christ did exist at one time. I don't know if anything the Bible says of him is true except for the fact that he was an inflentual rabbi, though.
2006-07-29 17:02:34 · answer #6 · answered by Isis-sama 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
2006 years from now will there be any 'proof' that you existed, or will the memory of who you were be passed on from generation to generation?
Isn't the MESSAGE sometimes more important than the MESSENGER? Wasn't that the whole point of the messenger dying?
2006-07-29 10:32:19 · answer #7 · answered by arvecar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
like all historical figures we are simply believing what we are told because the only proof we have of anything is writen by someone at sometime and none of it can be proved as u say as definite proof they are all beliefs and if you believe you can if you dont that i up to u
2006-07-29 12:12:47 · answer #8 · answered by ksneon66 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Christ is mentioned in many Roman records, these documents are known to be accurate.
2006-07-29 10:04:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you look in Roman history there are records of his Crucifixion. There are also mentions of him in Roman history because he did spend time their. Look it up
2006-07-29 13:55:47 · answer #10 · answered by ~daTexasPrincess~ 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
apparently his body is in India. They've made a shrine to it. It's like visiting Lenin's bomb
2006-07-29 12:37:56 · answer #11 · answered by bOb 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋