Did Jesus exist? Who was the actual historical Jesus?

And he's relevant because?

Lol there aren't contemporary references to him

Canna-profit.

why would there be? Even taken at face value, Jesus primarily taught for a short period (3 years) in Galilea where much of the population was illiterate and what could have been written down destroyed by time and natural disasters

You mean like was there ever a Jew in the Middle East who really liked Buddhism? Yeah, certainly. Could that guy also do some mostly mediocre street magic? I mean, sure probably there was at least one such guy.

>the historical Jesus

kek checking the talk is all you need to notice how "unbiased" it is. Tacitus is the key reference needed and it's very much not commonly accepted among historians as anything else but fabricated Christian propaganda.

That won't work. The redditors who post those images do it precisely because 99% of people hate it. Unlike frogposters who are desperate to fit in at the cost of 88% of people hating them, feelsposters are basically a swarm of insects here to raid against the site.

>I believe it because it is absurd
>that's bullshit, but I believe it

>A failed 19th century general is a valid source on the history of the 1st century
Nice meme

>All the gospels, written by completely different people, don't count as contemporary sources

>Who
some black dude

Best we have is 1st century roman historian josephus as a source, but its somewhat close enough to merit credit on a historical jesus instead of it being complete 2nd & 3rd century bullshit.
Bible is an edited volume, and as such, cannot be treated as a source.

Then what about all the non-canonical gospels? Are they unedited enough?

I'm interested in reading contemporary Jewish sources about Jesus. What did they think of him while he was around? Why most of them didn't see him as the messiah? I'm a Christian but want to read from the other side.

There were thousands of people like Jesus, many of them literally called "Jesus". He was nothing special, just another magician peddling his salvation rhetoric to the gullible just like countless hucksters before him, only difference is that some guy who literally never even met him decided "hey, this guy is probably god or something!", wrote a bunch of cringey letters explaining his view, and somehow started a religion.

>Best we have is 1st century roman historian josephus as a source, but its somewhat close enough to merit credit on a historical jesus instead of it being complete 2nd & 3rd century bullshit.
Yeah, no. Josephus never mentioned Jesus, despite being interested in religious kooks and despite being a Jew himself. It;s almost like Jesus wasn't important enough for him to even know he existed. The passage attributed to Josephus, a sincere and lifelong follower of Judaism, that talks about Jesus being christ and the messiah is so obviously forged it's frankly pathetic that christians still try to wheel it out.

No, they are not unedited enough, but the fact that they exist is enough information to discredit them for proper historical accuracy.

There's more historical firsthand evidence for Jesus Nazarene than there is for Socrates.

youtu.be/9PNkmXuUqus

>Did Jesus exist?
Yes
>Who was the actual historical Jesus?
A Jewish apocalyptic prophet, he was born in Nazareth, was baptized by John the baptist, spent some time as a disciple of his before breaking off and doing his own thing. Was crucified by the Romans for claiming to be the Messiah.

TACITUS
JOSEPHUS
PLINY THE YOUNGER
THE TALMUD
LUCIAN
MARA BAR-SERAPION
SEUTONIUS
THE ALEXAMENOS GRAFFITO

>Did Jesus exist? Who was the actual historical Jesus?

Yes. He was Jesus.

Gittin 57A of the Talmud:

>Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy. Onkelos said to him: Who is most important in that world where you are now? Jesus said to him: The Jewish people. Onkelos asked him: Should I then attach myself to them in this world? Jesus said to him: Their welfare you shall seek, their misfortune you shall not seek, for anyone who touches them is regarded as if he were touching the apple of his eye (see Zechariah 2:12).

>Onkelos said to him: What is the punishment of that man, a euphemism for Jesus himself, in the next world? Jesus said to him: He is punished with boiling excrement. As the Master said: Anyone who mocks the words of the Sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement. And this was his sin, as he mocked the words of the Sages. The Gemara comments: Come and see the difference between the sinners of Israel and the prophets of the nations of the world. As Balaam, who was a prophet, wished Israel harm, whereas Jesus the Nazarene, who was an Jewish sinner, sought their well-being.

His explaining of mathew's 5-6 is laughable. He has 0 understanding/knowledge of how Christians explain it. I can't tell if he's ignorant or being a liar.

his real name was Gizmo he had a robot hand

>I'm interested in reading contemporary Jewish sources about Jesus.
There aren't any.
>Why most of them didn't see him as the messiah?
Probably because he didn't fulfill the prophecies of the messiah.

According to Tacitus:

"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind."