Atheists, I know you don't believe in any Gods, but historically,?

Question

do you believe Jesus was a real person? (Jewish historian Flavius Josephus and Roman historian Carius Cornelius Tacitus for example have recordings of Jesus) Thanks.

Elevinty, I am aware of that, but thanks for adding the timeline.

Answer 1

i think to deny the existance of a man is just childish. it is possible though to deny the existance of a god. even if the god is a man.

Answer 2

I am not an Atheist but I am not a follower of the god of Abraham either.

Yes, I believe that there was a man that the stories of Jesus are based on.
I believe that he was a Jewish reformer that spoke Aramaic and maybe Hebrew; it is unlikely that he understood much Greek. I do not know if he had any ability to write in any language.

Though he initially approached the people as a Messianic leader, at some point he forsook that and started preaching peace. This was NOT a popular message in pre-war Jerusalem; it may be why Judas betrayed him and the Hebrew leaders were against him.

Though he was very influential among a group of Jews hungry for reform, he had very little impact outside of that group within his lifetime.
After the Roman Jew Wars the peaceful image of Christians as Jewish separatists was very popular with Jews in Jerusalem and abroad.
Often being literate and wise, Jews were a roll model for many common people in the Mediterranean; the new Christian belief appealed to the "Gentiles" and many converted.

Answer 3

No, I don't. Both Josephus and Tacitus have been proven to be highly dubious (outright forgery in the case of Josephus). Also, there's the problem of there being no biological links to anyone related to Jesus. The bible names four brothers and a sister, and says that there were others, but there are no known descendants from any of them. You hear all the time of royal families, wealthy families, English settlers, pioneers, philosophers, etc. You can even trace people back to Muhammad, but none to anyone related to Jesus. Even though the christian bible tells a great story, evidence suggests that it's main character is just that, a character in the story and nothing more.

p.s. Cynthia B, I don't like fireball either, but please refrain from littering other people's questions with your highly offensive outbursts. She does not deserve such treatment, and you do NOT have the right to degrade her in such a manner. You're ruining several posts for everyone. Please stop, and channel your frustration in another way.

Answer 4

There's evidence that the Josephus reference was inserted later by Christians, and the Tacitus version was not original, either, since there are other versions of the text that make no reference whatsoever to Jesus.

There is much evidence to dispute Jesus was a real person, much of which can be gathered from St. Paul himself.

Paul never refers to a single one of Jesus' teaching or acts during life, but instead only his crucifixion and resurrection. This was said to have come to him in a revelation. There are many who say that this is a reference to the mystery religions of the time. Some say that the bread and wine becoming Jesus body & blood are taking the spiritual and making it material without it ever having been a real physical body and blood. In other words, the only material existence of Jesus takes place during the Eucharist.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 5

I'm agnostic on that. I don't think the evidence for his existence is compelling, and i'm convinced that the gospels are Midrash-inspired fiction. However, this doesn't mean that there wasn't a real person behind the legends.

N.B. The passages in Josephus's writing are believed to be forgeries by most scholars, and they know who did it. Tacitus wrote of Christians (whose existence is not in dispute), but he did not write of a Jesus. Neither account is good evidence.

Answer 6

Sure, there was probably someone named Jesus running around the Holy Land 2000 years ago. But he was not the Son of God.

Josephus is a joke of a historian. He was biased and wrote "eyewitness" testimony to events that had occurred prior to his own birth. I wouldnt beleive much from him.

Answer 7

possibly they * shouldn't *. If God rather gave each and every physique loose will, then atheists, for in spite of reason, have wanting to no longer have self theory. As somebody above already stated, "arguing" for God's existence is fairly moot. indoors the genuine, somebody would have self theory with the help of using certainty the Holy Spirit finally convicted them of the certainty. If one does not have self theory indoors the Holy Spirit, i do no longer see that happening. If an atheist is composed of a call their cutting-edge existence does not sense "precise", they're going to seek for for some ingredient else. Do Christians have a "better clever" existence with the help of using certainty of God? analyze out Paul, he grew to grow to be into overwhelmed, whipped and run out of city for his ideals. Christians could say Christianity brings them convenience. An atheist would retort that they decide on no such crutch. Christians could say they sin much less. Ha! Neither has a lock on morality. You stated that we can't use "the afterlife" as a help for why Christianity is larger clever. If one in each and every of those obstacle is placed on the reaction, then we ought to continually stick to comments in this earth. if so, if we shrink our reaction to existence in the worldwide, we would come across that the atheist would * continually * think of of their existence is larger clever as an unbeliever. that's no longer any further till you alter suitable right into a have self theory that your ideas-set ameliorations to incorporate the afterlife. --- better ---- i spotted you stated the two "indoors the long-term" and "pushing aside the afterlife". To a Christian, the two are inseparable.

Answer 8

I would say it's possible, although not necessarily probable. I think that given the popularity of the name and the method of killing him that it's likely someone named Jesus was crucified at some point of the Roman occupation of the area.

That doesn't really matter though, does it? So what if he was alive, preached and was crucified? That doesn't increase the possibility that he was the son of god or in any other way supernatural.

Answer 9

I think it's a likely possibility that there was a Palestinian Jewish rabbi named Yeshua ben Yosef, who preaced his ministry in the first century Roman Empire. The name was extremely common, so it could have been several people even. But the many different documents of his sayings by several different authors lends to the credibility that he was really one man, and he really did preach. Being the son of God is another matter.

Answer 10

Jesus did exist, but the bible was a political work to unite an empire written 30 to 325 years after he died. It has nothing to do with the man or what he said or did.

Answer 11

Yes, I suspect that Jesus Christ may have once been a living breathing human being. Do I imagine He was truly divine? Not a chance.

Was He resurrected after being dead for three days? Utterly impossible! After rigor mortis, all the body's ATP has permanently degraded to ADP. There's no way to jump-start a stopped metabolism and convert the ADP back into ATP. Being resuscitated is one thing; being resurrected is quite another. It is far more likely that Christ didn't actually die on the cross and eventually recovered from his numerous injuries.

Edit: "Cynthia B," shame on you. You have the right to dislike Fireball. You do not have the right to defame her in print. You are commiting libel, unless you can actually prove she literally had sex with a dog. Watch out, she could sue you for everything you'll ever own and she would most likely win! You've crossed the line.....