Who do YOU Consider as Christians?

[the_bob_delusion]

Go

[i-need-a-martini]

lol.

[the_bob_delusion]

Jesus' real name is Yeshua. 

[azureline**]

Are you the real bob?

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@**bob_is_good** wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

Read Richard Carrier. A well respected scholar. There're now strong evidence that Jesus might not even have existed.

It would actually be very difficult to produce evidence that someone didn't exist 2000 years ago.

However, the evidence that he did exist is very tenuous.

---

My point is not saying a person called Jesus didn't  exist. It's like saying a person named John never existed. But the quality and attributes and supernatural things are built onto this person call Jesus. 

Saying a person called Jesus never existed isn't the same as saying a person called Jesus who is the son of God and died for your sin never existed. 

---

I am a writer, bob and I think I was just being a bit pedantic. Saying there is strong evidence that someone might not have existed is not the same as saying there is no strong evidence that he did.

My own feeling is similar to yours, that he was 'real' in the same way that Robin Hood was real - an amalgam of several different men embodying all the qualities people would naturally look for in a great leader and - in the case of Jesus - fulfilling the prophecies they had been taught to believe would identify the messiah.

[*pepe]

---

@**bob_is_good** wrote:

---

DO you consider the Westboro Baptist church people CHristians?

---

i don't even consider them human...

[Anonymous]

---

@myoclon1cjerk wrote:
The problem for me is how a guy from Nazareth ended up with a Mexican name. 😄

---

The word Jesus used in the English New Testament comes from the Latin form of the Greek name Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous), a rendition of the Hebrew Yeshua (ישוע), related to the name Joshua  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_%28name%29

there - problem solved 

[icyfroth]

---

@**bob_is_good** wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@**bob_is_good** wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@tasfleur wrote:

I think the person of Jesus was a very nice (and radical) man who wanted to 'change the world' as he knew it and make a difference.

He was most likely very skilled in the healing and lecture circuit arts, charasmatic and therefore easy to follow in terms of most of his teachings.

Whether or not he performed 'miracles' such as walking on water, or changing water into wine, rising up from the dead (?) etc is all up to the interpreters of the authors over the centuries.  Then again, the human condition in many cases, not all, desperately desires such man made history to be true.   Perhaps that is what some people need to get through their lives.

---

It's also very interesting to research the topic of The Bible being the latest plagiarism of tales told for centuries prior to the advent of Christianity.

So many, many similarities with so many other tales, it's too much of a coincidence to be a coincidence!

But as Bob said, perhaps I've just 'taken it out of context'!

---

I'm actually looking at modern scholarship. It's interesting to find around Jesus' time, there're several  risen Mesiah stories spreading around.  A lot of these predate Jesus. If I said to you born on the 25th, had 12 disiples , turn water into wine, died and risen 3 days later, born of a virgin etc etc, these all came from other pagan or greek myths atributed to other people before Jesus.

Read Richard Carrier. A well respected scholar. There're now strong evidence that Jesus might not even have existed. 

---

There's even stronger evidence that he did. The Romans were renowned for their record-keeping. On every campaign they had their scribes with them.

You just have to read Tacitus to understand how meticulous they were.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

There's no valid reason to claim Jesus Christ didn't exist.

He may have been deified to suit the nefarious purposes of those wishing to enslave the northern ppl via religion. But I'm sure he was a real flesh and blood human being,

---

Tacitus was written about 100 years later from my memory. He did not even mention Jesus' name. There're really no valuable information from Tacitus to prove anything. 

I didn't say Tacitus was a contemporary of Jesus Christ. I used him as and example of the type of record keeping the Romans kept of their campaigns.

If the Romans were reknowned for their record keeping. Why was there NO contemporanous record of Jesus what so ever. Zippo.  This is accepted by ALL historian. How could you possibly forget to write down that God visited. Supposely 9/11 happened and none of the newspaper covered it. 

Jesus Christ was never God. His followers believed him to be the son of God. The other Jews considered him to be nothing but a rabble-rouser and a troublemaker.

My suspicision is a prominent Rabbi existed and with the story of Risen Messiah a common place then and with everyone trying to find that person. Different attributes from myths are incorporated into Jesus.The legend grew over time. Even John the Baptist was considered the Messiah for awhile.

Your suspicions? Wow that's a great start for a historical debate, lol.

My opinion is that Jesus Christ the man challenged the Jews that had departed from what he felt were the true teachings of their religion (moneylenders in the temple etc.), and they wanted to get rid of him so they denounced him to the Romans who crucified him in the manner that they dealt with all criminals.

His followers declared him to be a miracle worker and the son of god.

Later when the Christians followed the occupiers to Rome and astonished the Romans by peacefully letting themselves be eaten by lions, they thought that would be a good state of mind to teach the northern barbarians and get them to submit to Rome.

Of course the barbarians weren't going to accept that sort of thinking without a fight, so the missionaries had to weave some of the existing elements of the old religions into the new make it acceptable. That, and kill everyone off that refused, of course.

---

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@**bob_is_good** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

rabbit

Agree with you, but you all bite so well to the bait he throws out.

If no one responded, the thread would die which is the opposite of what he wants.

And I might add, if a topic is going to upset you, don't read it and certainly don't post in it.

 No, Bob's threads do not upset me and he will NEVER change my beliefs. I read them so I can reinforce my beliefs / opinions of him and the many others who get pleasure out of BAGGING other people's beliefs.

---

Do you consider yourself closed minded if you believe there's nothing that will change your mind? 

---

No, I am not closed minded - I question / investigate everything - that's why I know that the mainline churches have it wrong. They ALL seem more interested in following / teaching their particular Church 's TRADITION that in the word of God.

Tell you what Bob -  come up with something concrete to make me  'change my mind' - and not with the piffle that you've come up with so far about 'talking snakes and donkeys' and virgin birth being impossible - just let me know.