English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-11-22 20:47:30 · 40 answers · asked by Callumaniac 4 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

C.L Richardson, then i must be a figment of your imagination, woooo

2007-11-22 20:50:14 · update #1

40 answers

Have you seen this video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4136610474021109864&q=rawlings


I take it from the thumbs down that someone is afraid you might see this video.

2007-11-22 20:51:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 7

The question is not whether or not he lived. The question is did he do all the things the bible claimed that he did? Or if he was who he claimed to be. If he was anything more than a leader and teacher. Personally, I think he was a great figure of history. A philosopher, leader, teacher, and caring individual. What I don't think is that he was the son of a god being. I believe that the people of the time raised him to god-like status because they needed something to believe in with all the problems the people in that region were facing at the time (much like the legend of Arthur came to be). It really just depends on what you see in the stories and legends. Remember, every story has a basis in truth somewhere, but the stories, by the time they reach you and me, are so distorted from their original forms that it's impossible to tell what's true and what's not anymore.

2007-11-22 20:55:10 · answer #2 · answered by lupinesidhe 7 · 0 0

Well, there's never been any debate that a guy named Jesus got crucified on a hilltop on orders from the roman governor, Pilate, at the time, so I don't understand the question.
I understand that you don't believe in the rest, but Jesus was a real person who left real records behind.
His cousin James (called his brother, because there is no word for cousin in sanscrit, apparently) was later in life noted for his relation to Jesus, the infamous political figure from the generation before, to the point where his own (James', now) remains were labeled for his relation to his famous cousin, and not his father, which was the usual way.

2007-11-22 21:06:11 · answer #3 · answered by benthic_man 6 · 0 0

Sure. It seems a simpler explanation than "figment of Paul's imagination". Both Matthew and Luke have to figure out a way to get a Nazarene into Bethlehem. Why not just make him a Bethlehemite?

2007-11-22 21:00:56 · answer #4 · answered by Doc Occam 7 · 0 0

Jesus was real, there is historic record of it. Those that don't believe that don't believe in history. What is debatable is whether he was the son of God, or just some guy babbling about stuff. Personally I believe he was and is the son of God.


"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about him: I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon and you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
C. S. Lewis

2007-11-22 20:53:31 · answer #5 · answered by evil_kandykid 5 · 1 2

Jesus was a real historical figure. Whether you want to believe he was a prophet (like the muslims and Jews do) or that he was the Messiah (as the Christians and some messianic Jews do) is up to you. Refer to Josephus, a roman historian (who was Jew) during that time, he was impartial and was considered a traitor by the Jews because he worked for the Romans. Just as we can't doubt that Alexander the Great was real, or Ceaser, we can't doubt that Jesus was real because we have more than enough evidence to prove he walked the earth.

2007-11-22 20:51:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

You may be right, and if you are, then you might not have been an atheist if you will have believed that Jesus existed, and it turned out that He was God in the flesh after all. I'm glad you are thinking about this now.

2007-11-22 21:21:04 · answer #7 · answered by Wassa! 4 · 0 0

Jesus was real, do not be so skeptic. But what you know about Jesus can be wrong. Jesus was not a God, he was just a human and the prophet of the God. Search for the trues.

2007-11-22 21:08:03 · answer #8 · answered by tewoos 2 · 0 0

There might be a carpenter that turn preacher and really piss of the religious big shot in ancient time...... however, he was given god hood only when Emperor Constantine wanted a divine figure head to fight the pagans....... therefore, we can safely say Emperor Constantine is the god maker.

2007-11-22 21:15:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yeah, Jesus was most likely real, and definitely human. I would say that he saw what the Roman occupation was doing to his homeland and spoke against it, became a populist figure - and got crucified for it. The divinity angle was an early form of spin-doctoring :)

2007-11-22 20:51:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

You are the kind of atheist I have respect for.To say the least Jesus is a historical figure.I have never found atheists denying the existence of Mohammed. Why?

2007-11-22 21:06:11 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers