Did Jesus Exist?

Did Jesus exist? is it widely agreed through historical text that he existed?

read the bible user

Short answer, yes.

Long answer, he did.

>Long answer, he did.

so did he speak the truth? or is he just a mad man

i mean if it's widely accepted that he existed, surely there is some truth to the bible

The Bible has lots of true parts and true-ish parts when it comes to history. It's not controversial to think Jesus existed, preached, and was crucified.
Madman, prophet, or god? Dunno. Everyone has their pet theories.

Everyone who is an actual expert in the field agrees that Jesus existed, there are even a few sources outside the bible mentioning him I think, plus archaeological evidence indicating Christianity starting around when the bible said it did.

What has been debated for thousands of years is his divinity. Some say he was just a man, a great man, but a man nonetheless. Others think he was God himself, and there are dozens of variations in-between.

and false parts

but doesnt mean a guy existed that was anything like christianity's jesus.

>i mean if it's widely accepted that he existed, surely there is some truth to the bible
That's not really a logical conclusion, at least if you're talking about spiritual/religious truth.

All you can really conclude is that he existed and had followers. But so did lots of other apocalyptic preachers from the same time period, some of whom were also venerated after death. His existence doesn't necessitate the Bible's accuracy unless you think it does.

he IS the truth.

He did and he was a Jewish carpenter who traveled to India for a time and spoke of very different things than what people currently know him for. His name and his words were warped by cults in order to cause revolution and indoctrinate. No one today really lives in the way that he teached, and the church CERTAINLY doesn't — he had rebelled against the Jewish church of his time. He was not in favor of any church other than the temple of nature itself.

Actually, the bible is translated from original manuscripts. Thousands of them.

>Did Jesus exist
Yes, probably yes.

>Is everything they say about him true?
Probably not, altought he might have done something people could consider as a "miracle" back then he was probably just an ordinary guy.

It doesn't matter either way. The myth of Jesus is more important than the man could ever be

And there's no verification that they were all compiled accurately or when Jesus was alive.

There's in fact good reason to think a good portion of them weren't. When you can read the Gospel of Thomas and grasp the message it becomes more obvious.

No, actually, thousands of people were present during his miracles, especially when he fed them. He healed many, raised people from the dead, and even explained in simple terms how this was possible.

The gospel of Thomas is a fabrication. The other gospels are written by his followers, in fact, there is overlap between what his followers catalogued, you can find this all over the bible.

>there are even a few sources outside the bible mentioning him I think

"Jesus" wasn't an uncommon name. The chances of a random non-biblical source mentioning the name "Jesus" being a reference to the same character in the bible of that name is similar to the chances of a random piece of paper with the name "Chris" on it being a reference to a specific guy named Chris you know from work.

Yes.

Anyone who claims otherwise is baiting.

>The other gospels are written by his followers, in fact, there is overlap between what his followers catalogued, you can find this all over the bible.
You can also find a lot of inconsistencies, philosophical in nature. The philosophy of the Bible is a mess because it comes from so many different sources, some of which are most likely not during Jesus's time, or at least that's really the only rational explanation for why that is.

And if you're a Christian, which you seem to be, I don't trust your insight into this situation one bit. Because Christianity and Catholicism has managed to misinterpret the most fundamental thing that Jesus said, which was that the kingdom of god is already here (within you, in the midst of you — the message of both is that it is already here) yet you all see it as a destination yet to come. That is such a fundamental misjudgment, there is no reason to think any of you have any damn clue what's being said by him.

Jesus is the most sure 100% thing of antiquity.

He has more evidence than any other figure of ancient times.

Alexander/Caesar/Hannibal are less likely to exist than Jesus.

JIDF detected. The eternal hellfire waits for you and all the ass-spawn of Moses, Yid.

>Alexander/Caesar/Hannibal are less likely to exist than Jesus.

You're conflating reliability of a text with truth value of a text. A text can be both highly reliable and fictional.

I'm not Jewish. They're fucked in their own ways. I like Jesus's message, the actual one, which flung shit at Judaism proper. Christianity was just another abortive enhancement of Judaism in the end that missed the point.

That's literally fucking wrong. Contemporaries wrote about Alexander, Caesar and Hannibal. Nobody wrote about Jesus until after he died.

First of all, if you associated Catholicism with Christianity at all, you definitely aren't addressing Christianity. One thing has got nothing to do with the other.

And they didn't misinterpret anything, it's simply different people writing down the exact same thing. Only some of those people wrote a more articulate account of the same thing.

"I know men and I tell you that Jesus Christ is no mere man. Between Him and every other person in the world there is no possible term of comparison. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I have founded empires. But on what did we rest the creation of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him."

- Napoleon Bonaparte

Name one

Theudas.

No

Yes.

He is even mentioned by Tacitus, who is one of the most respected Latin historians from Antiquity. That doesn't mean shit for whether he was the son of God or not.

>People with coins, statues, inscriptions, memoirs etc.

>less likely to exist in than a guy mentioned in a religious propaganda book

>The other gospels are written by his followers,

All ~thirty of them? So why are only four of them considered canon, then?

>He is even mentioned by Tacitus

... in a book written EIGHTY YEARS after the time of Jesus. All that proves is that Christians existed ~100AD.

>Contemporaries wrote about Alexander, Caesar and Hannibal. Nobody wrote about Jesus until after he died.

Who wrote about them when they were alive?

>Alexander

Callisthenes, Ptolemy, Nearchus, Aristobulus, Onescritus.

>Caesar

Caesar himself, for starters, Cicero, Sallust, that prescription decree from the Roman Senate.

>Hannibal

I don't know him as well, but probably whomever Polybius drew his sources from.

ty.

>Did Jesus exist?

Hard to say. We have no evidence outside the Gospels for his existence. At most, a historical Yeshua existed, who was the basis and template for the mythological Christ character of Christianity.

However, even if the historical Yeshua did exist, it doesn't mean the Jesus Christ of Christianity was real.

>there are even a few sources outside the bible

No there aren't. There are some sources describing that a group of cultists believed in a figure called "Christ", but no actual eyewitness accounts. Furthermore, the account in the writings of Josephus is universally held by researchers to have been an interpolation by a later Christian scribe/