[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 46 KB, 340x450, sacred-heart-of-jesus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR] No.3657480 [Reply] [Original]

Religion aside was he a real man?

>> No.3657495

There have been many men named Jesus but all of them I know of were Mexican.

>> No.3657505

>>3657480
A real god, yes.

>> No.3657634

Kind of.

Currently the evidence indicates that the story was based on several men named Jeshua (warped into Jesus by translator errors) who lived during that time. Some were clerics, some were rebels and some were workers.

Then the stories got mixed up with a lot of others, from Allollonius through Moses to Horus.

>> No.3657735

There's more evidence of Jesus existing than almost any other historical figure of that time period

>> No.3657741

>>3657735
yeah, apart from say, romans.

There are fewer credible sources for jesus than many figures from that period.

>> No.3657743

>>3657634
>Then the stories got mixed up with a lot of others, from Allollonius through Moses to Horus.
Zeitgeist bullshit detected.

>> No.3657757

Nope. He's about as well documented as Socrates, but this is still nowhere near the level of an Alexander or a Mohammed. Not that he is entirely apocryphal, just that he is likely based on a number of real people, with a large dose of simple hearsay and legend being incorporated into the stories before it was actually written down.

And we have no writings at all from contemporaries, no writings from unbiased sources, and so no confirmation or verification is possible, given the level of documentary evidence we have.

>> No.3657760
File: 211 KB, 1024x682, Leopard_Seal.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3657735
Not really. What evidence there is, is mostly anecdotal.
And there's a lot more documentation of many other people living near that time.

Some christians just like to repeat that falsehood without actually checking whether it's true or not.

My religious studies teacher fortunately had checked and told the class.

>> No.3657763

>>3657757
> he is likely based on a number of real people
>implying you don't believe that Socrates was a single person

>> No.3657765

A good rule of thumb is that if it's mentioned in the Bible, there's probably not one shred of independent evidence that it ever happened or existed.

It's literally nothing other then a bunch of desert savages being jelly that everyone was better then them, so they wrote their own book where they won and all the people that kicked sand in their faces got what was coming to them.

>> No.3657767

>>3657480

Depends where you draw the line between "Jesus" and "some Jewish prophet".

I'm almost certain there was no crucifixion. That punishment was reserved for treason and piracy, whereas according to the gospel we had a mad prophet, a thief, and some other guy? They were probably killed by some other means. So, you know. Stop wearing those fucking crosses.

>> No.3657772

>>3657763

I don't believe that it's a particularly important issue. He is a character, with only a single, sparse, biased source, and a few weak confirmations.

And, of course, Socrates doesn't need to be anything but a character. If we think he's great, it's because great words are attributed to him, not the other way around. And, besides, I don't think we'll find anything more solid to go on at this stage.

So my answer to whether Socrates really existed or not is the same as to whether Jesus really existed or not. We don't really know.

>> No.3657775

>>3657743
Not really. I've never watched the Zeitgeist movie.

If you can be bothered, you can do the research yourself and see the similarities between the ancient egyptian Purging of The Sin and the ten commandments. The quite honestly glaring similarities between the stories of Horus, Thoth, Mithras, Moses and Jesus. Allollonius even lived near the time as Jesus was said to have.

>> No.3657780

>>3657763

There are three contemporary sources for Socrates. Not so much for Jesus.

Pythagoras, on the other hand, is mostly hearsay. A religious leader of that name probably existed, but I suspect he didn't actually do any mathematics.

>> No.3657788

>>3657780

Plato, and...? Aristotle? Who's the third?

>> No.3657800

>>3657788

Plato, Xenophon and Aristophanes. Aristotle is not a contemporary.

>> No.3657811

>>3657788 here

Plato, Aristophenes and Xenophon. And none of them claimed he ever did anything but say some smart things. Plenty of evidence that they are talking about someone from that time and place; though if they claimed he could fly and shoot lasers from his eyes it would call the whole thing into question, especially if ONLY three sources noted such a thing.

>> No.3657813

>>3657800
>>3657811 here

Yep. Duh, google is my friend.

>> No.3657816

>>3657775
>Horus, Thoth, Mithras, Moses and Jesus
Protip: Horus was not born on the 24th, did not have 12 disciples, was not crucified and resurrected etc.
Neither was Thoth.
Mithras was born on the 24th of December, but that's it.
I'm very curious about those similarities between Jesus and Moses.

>> No.3657831
File: 6 KB, 228x221, nooooo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3657735

>> No.3657835

>>3657816

Jews.

>> No.3657841

>>3657816
Congrats, you found some of the differences.

I didn't say the stories were identical, no one is saying that. But parts of older religions have been recycled into new ones.

>> No.3657850

>>3657841
>But parts of older religions have been recycled into new ones.
Naturally. I'm still curious about all these glaring similarities. Care to list a few? And please don't list sun deities being called the light as a similarity.

>> No.3657876
File: 46 KB, 500x333, donttroll.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3657765

Nothing mentioned in the bible happened? Egypt? Rome?

It's actually a pretty solid piece of recorded history for the period and region.

>> No.3657880

>>3657850

Does being born of a virgin not mean something? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miraculous_births

Or coming back from the dead? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-death-rebirth_deity


And besides, showing that the Jesus stories have certain similarities or differences from earlier or contemporary stories is besides the point. Considering the sources we have, Jesus is not a historical figure in the same way that Augustus or Tiberius were historical figures.

>> No.3657881

>>3657765

You fucking tard.

>> No.3657882

>>3657765
I know man, just like the "records" of the Holocaust.

>> No.3657883

>>3657876
There is absolutely no archaeological evidence of Jewish enslavement in Egypt.
So yeah, Egypt happened, just not how the Bible claims it did.

>> No.3657887
File: 844 KB, 1500x1050, 1308236157776.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3657876

>> No.3657893

>>3657876

Such as when the Jews were never slaves in Egypt?

Besides, the old testament isn't really the problem. It's that the books of the new testament is written by people who lived half a century after the subject supposedly lived and died, they are the only, heavily biased, mentions of this person on record, and they can't even agree with one another on the details of his life and death.

>> No.3657894

>>3657850
Both did some similar miracles, chose 12 disciples/governors, rebelled against the established order, both were threatened by the rulers as children, knew their times of death, died on hills and so on and so forth.

If you really do want to learn more, google it. I have three hours to sleep before continuing with my work.

>> No.3657896

>>3657883

That is not the only aspect of Egypt mentioned in the bible.

I actually find it very neat that historical figures, whom we know existed, are mentioned in the bible and play major roles. People from Egyptian Pharohs, to Babylonian Kings to Roman leaders.

>> No.3657904

>>3657894
You've just described nearly every prophet ever. And I was hoping you would have something substantial
herp they both died on hills
Marvelous.
>>3657896
Wut, the Pharaoh is never mentioned by name in the Bible. We don't know who he is supposed to represent.

>> No.3657906
File: 5 KB, 250x248, ISHYGDDTwott.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>3657887

>2011
>Only posting reaction images.

>> No.3657926

>>3657896

But still, the bible is totally wrong about the exodus and everything earlier than that. Nobody is saying it's not a useful historical document, just that nothing in it could really be taken as evidence that magic happened. It's a book of jewish folklore, with all the embellishments and biases and mythology one would expect from such a book. It's only problem is that some people take it too seriously, so actual study of it is made difficult.

The problem with the new testament is that it's just fan fiction. If it were written by contemporaries, or there were some record of it's events in other sources, or even if it agreed with itself, then maybe we could say something solid about the man described in it. But as it stands we can just say that there was a holy man in Palestine who went by the name of Jesus that a few people thought was the messiah. Which was hardly an uncommon occurrence at that time and at that place.

>> No.3657925

>>3657906
sorry i have trouble taking a book seriously that talks about men fitting 2 of every species on a boat.

>> No.3657942

>>3657925
>Implying the old testament has anything to do with Jesus.

>> No.3657973

>>3657942

>implying the old testament isn't a setup for the coming of Jesus

>> No.3657985

>>3657973

It really isn't. That's just how Christians try to frame it.

>> No.3658004 [DELETED] 

>mfw /sci/ fails to apply it's own evidential standards to itself


This, by far, is the most frustrating thing that comes with the you idiots.

>> No.3658011

>>3657985

It really is. That's how the Bible frames it.

>> No.3658015

>>3658011

And who was the Bible assembled by?

It's not a monolithic text. It's a collection of Hebrew scrolls, carefully arranged to support the Christian interpretation. There is no reason to believe that the Old Testament prophets were speaking about Jesus, especially seeing how Jesus did not liberate Israel.

>> No.3658016

pontius pilate was mentioned in the bible. if pilate existed and was documented outside the bible, then it is possible to trace jesus from there.

>> No.3658019

Anyone seen The Man From Earth?

You'll have your answer

>> No.3658024

the old testament (Joseph) was just a prototype of Jesus
> 12 apostles
> 12 tribes
etc etc..
seriously, watch zeitgeist.

>> No.3658026

>>3658016

We know that Pilate was the prefect of Judea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_Stone..

But that's all we know of him.

>> No.3658032

Of course he wasn't real

How many mythical archetypes do you need repeated before you understand it's not literal

>> No.3658044

>>3658032
Of course, I'm not saying the people who wrote the stories didn't believe it

Of course they believed it

>> No.3658045

>>3658015

Derp Christians text has nothing to do with Christ Herp because christians compiled it to have everything to do with Christ.

>> No.3658055

>>3658045

Except the old testament is a Jewish text. You're claiming scrolls written hundreds of years before Jesus have everything to do with Jesus because some Christian told you so. Ask a Rabbi's opinion. It's their holy text.

>> No.3658067
File: 131 KB, 419x919, Ohsnap.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

Jesus was gay

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jegay.htm

>> No.3658087

>>3658055

>It's a collection of Hebrew scrolls, carefully arranged to support the Christian interpretation.
>Except the old testament is a Jewish text.

Make up your mind, quit contradicting yourself, and you won't look like such a faggot.

>> No.3658101
File: 111 KB, 1600x941, The School of Athens by Raphael 1509- Zoroaster left, with star-studded globe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

Let's get some Zoroaster in here.
Only one of the big four started by a white dude.

>> No.3658102

>>3658087

>Hebrew scrolls
>Jewish text

No contradiction. Or are you an English major who thinks that collating someone else's writing and adding commentary makes you an artist?

>> No.3658118

>>3658101
There is no big four. There is a big two.

>> No.3658120

>>3658102

No, but it makes it two different texts unless you are the type of faggot who thinks an original Jewish text is the same thing as a text carefully arranged to support Christian interpretation?

Also, since you are the simple minded type who needs to be spoonfed information or you will fuck it up when repeating, the contradiction is that you said the OT was made to support a christian interpretation, but it doesn't support a christian interpretation.

>> No.3658126

No. Not really.

>> No.3658133

>>3658118
???
Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam

>> No.3658139

>>3658101
Technically, the priest class in Hinduism can also at some point have been said to have been white dudes.

>> No.3658140

People writing detailed descriptions about a guy 300 years after the guy supposedly died isn't really, like...reliable.

>> No.3658156

He was probably inspired by a number of real men, but no, probably not one man.

>> No.3658168

>>3658120

So if you rearrange Kafka's short stories to support your stance on anal sex, does that make it your text?

No, faggot. You haven't written a word of it, because you have no talent. There is no contradiction in saying that this is Kafka's work, but carefully arranged by you to support your faggotry.

>> No.3658176

>>3658139

>Jews = not white
>Indians = white

Ah, racist logic.

>> No.3658188

>>3658176

wtf???

i'm pointing out the existence of indo-aryans as the upper castes in ancient asiatic societies.

also, jews are not racist?

>> No.3658198

>>3658176
Moses, Jesus, and Muhammed were semitic.
It has nothing to do with your modern racial affinities.

>> No.3658202

>>3658168

That still makes you the faggot claiming that "my" arrangement of Kafka's work to support "my" stance on anal sex does not support "my" stance on anal sex.