20 3

Jesus, historical figure behind the legend or straight legend? Your feed back would be greatly appreciated.

Godless1981 3 Feb 11

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


Most of historians would say that:
Probably one of the many Jewish reformists that were many on that time was named YSH, no vowels in jewish traditional writing so feel free to play and discover how many biblical names are actually the same.
This reformist was popular and the Arthur effect happened with him.
This effect happens when a hero become popular and his name starts to aggregate stories from other people or even legends that never happened, Arthur that was never king (we have the documents of the kings on that region at that time), was probably a military leader from the celts against the saxons, but his legend starts to aggregate elements from christianity, and other tales. It is simply easier to make a story alive associating it with a popular name.

Probably some of the deeds were his own, probably lots of histories on the bible happened with other people but in a time of illiteracy, they simply shifted to the more popular guy. The oldest gospels were written decades after the supposed events, so imagine that today with all documents, photos, videos, high literacy we still doubt things 30 or 40 years ago, can you really trust when all the sources are someone that says that it happened?

Even some speeches attributed to him can be traced from older texts or referencing them.

Also he has a lot of characteristics of a Solar god that were high in fashion on those days:
He is born on the solstice, he beats the darkness on the spring break, he has 12 constelations around him, he is the life bringer, he is invincible etc etc etc.

So, yes, there was a guy with a name close to Jesus, that tried to reform judaism. He was not the only one, and probably the figure we know know is a frankenstein of many reformists of the same time plus some phantasy, legend, misticism, trickery and plain lies caused by misinformation, illiteracy and historical phenomenons well known.


We can not know. There is also almost 2000 years of Christianity that does not care. Mythology cares not for history.


I am sure that over the years there have been men and women like Jesus, with out turning the wine into water, etc, etc. But you know it is like Chinese whispers. It all gets out of proportion after a while.


i will add to my previous comment that when i speculated that he may have lived (no proof or even evidence of that) i did not mean that any of the magic crap attached to him had a chance in hell of being real. virgin birth, walking on water, water into wine, feh, not a chance. everything i mentioned in my comment was in the realm of real, human activities. whether he existed or, if he existed, performed thos human activities is another story.



many elements of the "Jesus story" already existed in other older middle eastern cultures such as born of a virgin, mother impregnated by a god, special stars announcing his birth, rising from the dead, having 12 loyal companions/followers etc etc etc.


Almost everything attributed to the biblical Jesus is plagiarism or a composite of other Jesus' contemporary to him.
There may have been been a Carpenter of Nazareth but not at the time stated in the bible since the town was not built until 35 CE and was in a valley not on a cliff as stated in the Testaments.
There is far more evidence for the Existence of John the Baptist, but not as a herald of Christ Jesus, but as the prophet of the Anointed God known in Greek as Jesus, probably the same ethereal god spoken of in the epistles of paul.


I think irrelevant but historic records say didn't exist.
The thing is we have to deal with his followers, which is very real.


Heavily mythologized actual person

Orbit Level 7 Feb 11, 2019

Have a look at Tacitus on Christ and see what you think:



fun to discuss but really what is there to learn? There's no proof he ever lived, and plenty of alternative sources of each part of the legend in earlier cults. Which anyone can research ad infinitum.


There is absolutely zero evidence, archeological or otherwise, that the historical figure known as Jesus ever actually existed.

The oddest thing to me is that this person supposedly had 12 adult men following him around for most of his adult life, yet none of them ever wrote anything down. Also, the figure himself, Jesus, also never wrote anything down. It's not like it can be argued that all relics were destroyed in some instance, because they supposedly traveled around following him.

I don't get why almost all stories and accounts of this figure presuppose that this was a real person. It's alsmost as though historians and governments have been complicit in keeping the scam going. Im sure they'd never do that, right? Sure.

that is manifestly untrue. There is evidence that he existed as a man. Indeed most academics in the field, not religious but non religious academics, acknowledge that.
The debate to be had is what he did or did not do? These same academics don't believe he rose again or performed miracles etc.

are you assuming they could all read/write?


You say untrue, yet you fail to produce or even mention even a single shred of said evidence.

Cool story, bro.


Are you assuming that they even existed?

@BryanLV no, most unlikely, but if they did I doubt 95% were literate!


It's possible he was real but I would assume he was a nut job like that guy in Waco a few decades back.

More than likely he was a christianized mix of other demi gods. Fake and plagiarized


Composite of guys telling tall tales and trying to out do each other.


Nearly all historians, ancient and modern, religious, agnostic or atheist, acknowledge the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. I think it's drawing a long bow to argue he never existed. However, the miracles and resurrection ascribed to him are altogether another matter.

None of them have any hard evidence, however.

@maturin1919 Using the normal methods of secular historical method and enquiry, their conclusion that Jesus of Nazareth existed is sound. Where the real debate is not his existence, but what he did and did not do.

Not according to the Romans who were very efficient record keepers.

@powder Tacitus and Lucian were both Roman writers.

@powder To my knowledge there is not one full Professor of Ancient History, or Classics in an accredited university somewhere in the world (there are thousands of names to choose from) who thinks Jesus never lived.
Again, the debate is more about what he did and didn't do. That's where the mythology begins

@Doubting for a man who had such a profound impact, it took a generation+ to record for prosperity about it.
Regardless, irrelevant to us here now. Followers we have to deal with.

@powder Yes, you want to take on followers, but it doesn't help if the arguments put to them have errors in them. I am genuinely now very doubtful but I must say that some arguments posited on this site are weak- many contain non sequitors or beg the question.
I'm not suggesting you do; I"m just making the point that assertions made here should not contain errors.

@Doubting there is a debate whether a prophet Jesus ever existed. Buddha 2563 years ago (according to Thai's) is very well documented. Mohammed, well documented. Jesus, not so much so.

@Doubting Sure thing.

You'll find that the opinion on this by those same groups of people is starting to swing towards not having existed.

@Doubting Neither Tacitus nor Lucian were contemporaries for this Jesus.

Why did Pliny the Elder, who would have been a contemporary and wrote about everyone of note, not mention this Jesus at all?

@maturin1919 I haven't noticed any sign of that in academic papers. Are you able to cite some? I'd be interested.


He told me he was fake. I believe him. He would not lie to me.


we'll never know. i, for one, don't care. if he existed, he was jewish and his gospels were not his; they were written by people who never met him (and there are those who say even the originals were forgeries; there are plenty of books of the christian bible that were suppressed by emperors and popes). most of what i have heard he said was just the standard judaism of his time. even the wine and wafer bit is just standard seder stuff, except for his saying it's his body and blood and all that. on the other hand, if he never existed, what changes? christianity is still weird.



I don't believe anyone named Jesus Christ ever existed in reality.
There is absolutely no credible, verifiable proof of his existence.
No mention in any Roman census.
And, as far as everything Josephus may have said about him, it's ALL
been proved false.

So, no Jesus. Christianity is just another useless cult. Just like every other


Watch this series.

Watched part 1 and the final comment makes 100% sense to me in that resurrection of an already dead, decaying , which begins within minutes/hours of actual death btw, has all the probabilities of finding free flowing water in the core of the Sun.
Take, for example, the biblical myth of Lazarus, in the climate in which it was SUPPOSED to have occurred the body would have been almost ' walking' around on the burial slab within hours of being laid on it due to putrefaction and the infestation of fly larvae and other dead flesh eating insects, etc, the stench emanating from the rotting corpse would have been easily smelled from metres away, a very pungent and unmistakable smell to say the very least.
Plus, given that a human being, whether a 'Son of God' or not can only walk at an approx. NORMAL speed of between 7 and 14 Kilometres per hour and the "Jesus" was some hours, if not days away, then putrefaction would have been well under way which ever way one chooses to look at it.
Ergo, the only thing to be 'raised' in reality would be the bile in the stomachs of those standing around the tomb, otherwise the contents ( body) would possibly have been already leaking out its contents, etc, all over the slab and the floor of the tomb and most definitely NOT a pretty sight to behold at all.

@Triphid The entire series is worth watching. TruthSurge also has a lot of good comedy.

@NoMagicCookie None better comedy, in my honest opinion, than religion/s themselves though.

@Triphid TruthSurge is also fun. . .

@NoMagicCookie Absolutely Brilliant, wish I knew how to copy that one to my own music files, I listened to it twice.

@Triphid You are overlooking the obvious here. Jebus is supposedly god, and god can do ANYTHING and is not restricted to normal, natural, functions. It could easily reverse all that you have stated instantaneously. We are talking about god, the creator of the universe and all that is in it from NOTHING.
Disclaimer, If you believe that nonsense.

@jlynn37 Sorry but I overlooked nothing since having a ThD and being a Life-Long Atheist whilst studying for it I looked at EVERYTHING with a completely open, critical and scientifically based mind, unlike most of my fellow scholars at the time, thankfully the studies were done via University and NOT a Seminary but 3 others and myself DID encounter far more than our 'fair' share of what, we now refer to as, Religiotard Flak for our troubles both from the Student body and some of the Faculty as well.
There was even a signed petition to the Dean of the University literally DEMANDING that we FOUR should be EXPELLED from the course of Theology and Comparative Modern Religions immediately.
Thankfully the Dean was NOT one to be swayed by 'hysteria,' as he put it, and rejected the petition outright.
However, those seeking to DISCLAIM/Ridicule, etc, what I posted previously WOULD need to furnish PROOF empirical that their erroneous claims are FACTUAL, something that CANNOT and NEVER will be done, of that I am assured 110%.

@Triphid It is easy to download videos from YouTube and save as either mp4 or mp3. Use an extension to save the desired video. I use VideoDownloadHelper but there are many others. To convert mp4 video to mp3 audio, you just copy the URL address, open, paste the URL into the convert window and select convert. VOILA


It is obvious to me that Jesus is a fictitious, or mythical, character. He may have been BASED on a real person, but the fictitious character goes WAY beyond anything the real person ever did.

I often wonder if he's not a composite of several men, old testament prophecies, and myths from older religions.

@JimG Nearly every ancient religion has all the same stories. The virgin birth, the flood, the resurrection, etc.
Some based in limited understanding of the natural world, like floods.
Others, just myths created to explain what the ancient didn't understand.
It's all bullshit.

@KKGator Yes, it's funny, but I picture guys from different villages sitting around in an inn each bragging about the miracles that their village messiah has performed. Of course, the tales get taller and taller starting with, "he fed ten people with two fish." to " My guy did that, but it was forty people." and finally led to "Well the dude from Nazareth brought a man back from the dead."

You know how gossip goes, and throw in a little local pride; and soon the tales are outlandish. There's evidence of this in the gospels. Perhaps eventually all the local miracles were credited to the same guy. Of course, the tales had to much the existing prophecies too.

Okay, I know this is a a real stretch of the imagination, but it's just one possible way I've pictured the origins of the New Testament and christianity.

@JimG I agree. And I think "fulfilling" ancient prophecy was a major factor in sculpting the fairy tale of Jesus.

And why does an omnipotent being need prophesy and only speak through prophets?
Seems like direct communication with each individual would be possible and more effective

@JimG And there are always those who need recognition that will say, "I know what I am talking about. I ran with the jebus gang".

@JimG, @Haemish1 That is, in my opinion, evidence that god is man created. If god is real, it would not need (nor want) anyone interceding on it's behalf. If god is man created, it REQUIRES that man intercede on it's behalf as that is the only way it can exist.

@jlynn37 Exactly!

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:287191
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.