did Jesus exist and does it matter?

by zen nudist 49 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Not to mention Paul's involvement in the stoning of one of the first seven deacons of this new and disorganised religion.

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    Saint Satan,

    I agree with you that the original followers of Jesus were called the Way, but I disagree that it was Paul's group that was first called Christian. That makes its sound like Paul found the group. Actually, the Church at Antioch was already in existence by the time Paul appears there. The church in Jerusalem sent Barnabas to the group there when they heard of their conversions. Then Barnabas went to find Paul at Tarsus and brought him back to Antioch, where they preached for one year. And, true, it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called Christians. But it is not clear whether this appellation was by their enemies or a name they chose themselves. See Acts 11:19-26.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    I think Jesus existed but is practically unrelated to the "Christ" character we usually associate him with.

    To me, the best evidence of Jesus' existence is to be found -- ironically -- in Paul's letters. Ironically, because Paul couldn't care less about who Jesus was and what he taught. But the fact is that Paul's epistles, already in the 40's, presuppose a tradition about Jesus as a crucified Savior in some fringes of the Hellenistic diaspora judaism. It will be Paul's work to manipulate the groups of people associated with this belief against mainstream Judaism AND against the Palestinian Nazorean movement, associated with James the brother of Jesus, which was the very origin of the Hellenistic Jesus' belief though.

    Does it matter? IMO, not so much. For the "Christ" character which is central to the Christian religion has very little to do with the historical Jesus. The synoptic Gospels are essentially a feedback from the Hellenistic tradition, implying many "pagan" motives. The Gospel of John adds to this its distinctive protognostic trend, which is probably alien to the historical Jesus too. The historical Jesus, as Schweitzer already concluded one century ago, has very little interest for us. And the "Christ" who became central to our culture is basically a literary character.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Sorry I didn't read the previous two posts before sending mine.

    The texts referred to by Kenneson in the authentic Pauline letters (in which I would not include Ephesians) are clearly centered on Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection. One could add the "Last Supper" tradition in 1 Corinthians 11, which is directed linked to the Passion story.

    Just to be clear, I consider the Acts a very late pseudo-historical synthesis of the Hellenistic and Pauline traditions with very few and distorted elements from the Nazorean and Johannine circles (see the current "Josephus-Luke connection" thread).

  • Aztec
    Aztec

    My personal belief is that someone, possibly a very charismatic leader, existed around the time of "Jesus". As to whether or not he was divine, I doubt it as I doubt the accuracy of most of what is written about him in the Bible. Does it matter? To those who ascribe a faith in him it does. To me, it's more of a curiousity than anything else.

    ~Aztec

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    Did Jesus exist and does it matter?

    I'm the wrong person to ask that....trust me!

    J.C.

  • seven006
    seven006

    JCannon,

    We do trust you. You're the wrong person to ask about anything unless you've had your lithium. Even then, one needs to bring candles, a crystal ball, a grain of salt, a great big shovel, and an Ouija board.

    I don't know why Scooby and Shaggy still hang out with you.

    Dave

  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    Very interesting. The biggest thing I got out of the article is that the Josephus quote so often referred to by the Society, appears to be bunk. If that is the case, then, does that mean that there are no direct references to Jesus outside of Christian literature?

    SNG

  • seven006
    seven006

    SNG,

    You got it!

    There was another know historian of the same time frame who also never said anything about the existence of Jesus. It kinda makes Elvis and the Beatles look more significant in history.

    Makes ya think doesn't it?

    Dave

  • gumby
    gumby
    If Jesus Christ was not a historical figure, than who is responsible for the origin of Christianity?

    If Santa Clause wasn't really a big fatman with a gray beard beard who lives in the north pole and travels by reindeer........then who's responsible for Santa Clause? Who's responsible for Hercules, and Attis, and Dionysus?

    People who start stories and convince others......that's who. Mohammad, and Buddah, made some claims and had a few followers too. Should you follow them?

    There was no time in history in which historians did such a fine job at accuracy in recording, as in the first century......check it out if you don't believe me. If this was so.......then aside from Christian writers.......it would seem that a man who performed the feats that Jesus did, and that all the boys in Jesus region were put to death at two years of age and under......would have surely been recorded by a historian of Jesus day.

    The only ones christians can come up with, is supposed quotes that were obviously interpolated into said writings of historians that have been proved to be such......interpolated.

    No mention of Josephus supposed words about Jesus, are found in his early documents, nor were they refered to by very early church fathers.......which they WOULD have used in their defence for a historical jesus.

    I also agree that a man of great chracter could have existed as the man Jesus........however the gospel accounts that speak of him have more holes in them than my damn undershorts

    Gumby

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit