Gotcha, I also, like you, believe that characters from fiction books are real. My extensive critical reading of the Grimm Brother's manuscripts has led me to believe that Hansel and Gretel were absolutely real, that a poor wood cutter was their real father, and the witch was just a man made interpretation of a mad cannibal woman. Now don't get me started on Goldilocks or worse, Red Riding Hood.

@Mofo1953 I believe in history and I believe that the individual referred to as Jesus was an actual person. I believe that the story about him that is most widely circulated is a fabrication. And the last time I checked, I have a right to believe what I believe. I also believe that this site has gone down hill. There is a lot of cruelty and disgusting, moronic and vulgar comments just on this thread alone.

@MyTVC15 are you saying that the Grimm brothers are not part of history? Wow. Maybe something more recent, Harry Potter was is several very popular fiction books that became movies, since nobody denied your "right" to believe what you believe, maybe a little paranoia there, don't you think? Anyway, my extensive personal research out of very critical reading of more than 4 books of the Harry Potter series, has led me to believe that Hermione was a virgin and Voldemort was real, Snape was a pedantic pedophile and Harry was very real, living in his aunt's closet.

@Mofo1953 You sure have a way of saying the same thing over and over again. Thank you for making your point, move on now please.

@MyTVC15 are you in the Agnostic traffic police?

I think it was just the beginnings of knowledge of Eastern philosophy filtering in from trade routes.

@BufftonBeotch I would buy that theory too. Some thing that Jesus studied Buddhism in India and that makes sense to me.

@creative51 The old testament was based on oral tradition, and as they have discovered, some of it was based on old Sumerian tradition (the flood story, for example) , but JC is from the new testament and recorded not as long after the events occurred (or were said to had occurred). They are completely different books and one would argue, they have nothing to do with each other. It has nothing to do with how warm and fussy I feel about it, but my opinion, as stated, is based on a critical reading of the gospels (the ones the patriarchy chose to include) and also from studying the subject from a historical perspective. It is troubling that I should be ridiculed here of all places for believing something that to me is very rational.

@MyTVC15 "They are completely different books and one would argue, they have nothing to do with each other".

Maybe expand your reading and understanding of the new testament, primarily the Gospels.

For many years it was thought that Matthew was written first but now they feel Mark was the first written as it appears to be the most rough and original. When read and compared in greek, Matthew and and Luke for the most part are re-writes/copies of Mark. John was loosely based on the three previous and was the last written. None of them are first hand, eye witnesses of JC and they were all written at least 40 years after JC's supposed death.

Did JC exist? Maybe or not. Maybe what you read about in the Bible are multiple people blended into one to suit the story the catholic church wanted to portray. The early Catholic church did a lot of editing and translations. You have to take into account that they even excluded what is now called the gnostic gospels.

I doubt as many here can probably agree with, one cannot look at the bible as a factual historical document, it can only be thought of as literary work, which then calls into question the existence of the primary character.

@Dougl35534 I agree with everything you said....I do not want to get into the weeds of everything I believe here on a message board, but my opinion is an educated one.

"Reform the existing church? What? The Jesus-bit, was a Jewish cult- that really got out of control, when Constantine got into it; that was 300 years after the mythical event. And the other nonsense, like 'walking on water', was added along the way!

@Mb_Man Yes, but it's one of the MOST NEEDED topics to talk about, especially where young people are concerned. Sex education in the U.S. is pathetic. I've counseled young people with college degrees who don't have a clue.

@Mb_Man What you wrote is not something I ever thought I would read here either. You made the choice to write it and unfortunately I chose to read it.

@mischl And on the other hand, I heard the tale of a young married couple who went to the doctor concerned that she was not yet pregnant after a year.
Turns out they had literally only been "sleeping" together and had no idea that intercourse was required.
I can't even.

@BufftonBeotch I had a fellow counselor a few years ago who had worked with a couple about to get a divorce (because she couldn't conceive). Turned out that when they got married and started having intercourse, it hurt her when he tried to put it in the front. So for years, they were using the backdoor. So she was still a virgin in her early 30's. They got divorced anyway because she thought letting him "use her pee hole" was dirty and sinful.

@Mb_Man Naah, don't. Honesty is okay.

After that you would have to prove that the mother of god was now in heaven with her son and she will plead with him on your behalf so as to grant your requests and wishes.