CreateDebate


Debate Info

343
350
Real historical figure Mythological Fiction
Debate Score:693
Arguments:175
Total Votes:1070
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Real historical figure (97)
 
 Mythological Fiction (76)

Debate Creator

sparsely(495) pic



Jesus Christ: Fact or Fiction?

Real historical figure

Side Score: 343
VS.

Mythological Fiction

Side Score: 350
16 points

There are actually several secular sources believed to be reliable documentation that someone known as "Christ" did exist. The writers that refer to a figure known as Christ outside of any Biblical context include (but aren't limited to) Plinius/Pliny The Younger - Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (A.D. 112), A Roman historian named Suetonius (A.D. 120) and a historian from the first century named Phlegon.

Given the fact that there are secular references to Jesus's existence, Jesus Christ was a real person.

However, whether or not Jesus was a miracle worker or the Son of God remains has not been proven scientifically or historically.

Side: Real historical figure
juju(2) Disputed
5 points

Someone writing about Jesus nearly 100 years after the fact is hardly first-hand knowledge. Anyone that would have known Jesus (if he existed) would have been long dead, and anything the author wrote would have been hearsay at that point.

Side: Mythological Fiction
jtopolnak(158) Disputed
1 point

When you are a person who has been seen in front of millions of people for his time even a hundred years later those records of him are not gone. They had record keeping back in that day. When millions of people whether it is today or 2,000 years ago have personally witnessed you it's hard to say that he was just a made up person.

Side: Real historical figure
sparsely(495) Disputed
3 points

"Christ" or "Anointed one" or "messiah" was a common claim (just like people today sometimes claim or think themselves to be Jesus). So, in other words, there are no historical references which verify the existence of this guy who was born in a stable in Bethlehem (or Nazareth), who came to do and say all these things which are claimed.

Side: Mythological Fiction
jesuscake(1) Disputed
3 points

You call those good sources?

Books that were written thousands of years ago, all of them over a hundred years after Christ's death of which there are NO originals still in existence and the fact that most of those were translated from Greek to Arabic to Latin to English. Talk about lost in translation.

Sounds like some shaky "evidence" there brother...

Side: Mythological Fiction
Uspwns101(443) Disputed
1 point

If they weren't written thousands of years ago then they wouldn't be proof at all. Translation does not mean "Lost in Translation."

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

Akiva and Josephus, from opposite sides of the religio-political divide (Akiva was a leading light in rabbinical Judaism around AD 75; Josephus a historian under Rome at the time of the sack of Jerusalem in AD 70), acknowledge a number of contemporary sources that identify Jesus as a historical person. Roman records also show the evidence of the execution of several of this man's disciples. The writings of Akiva and Gamaliel in particular deserve mention here: they were both Jews and rabbis. They were opposed to the Christian sect which had grown out of the Judaic split and would have certainly trumpeted the falsity of the existence of Jesus if in fact that existence was false. That they admit the existence of Jesus of Nazareth is powerful evidence for the historical reality; remember that disciples who claimed to be close to Jesus lived up through the end of the first century AD (John the Revelator was imprisoned at Patmos until then).

I note, however, that all three of the sources I mention either carefully avoid the claims of Messiahship (in the case of Gamaliel) or throw cold water on the claim. What I believe, in this case, is of no moment; the evidence is strong to support a factual man named Jesus of Nazareth.

Side: Real historical figure
Mahollinder(893) Disputed
2 points

Pliny the Younger was talking, specifically, about the beliefs of Christians of his time and was asking Trajan for advice on what to do with them. His letter to Trajan does not provide any evidence for the historicity of Jesus. In Suetonius we see a reference to the "instigation of Chrestus", which cannot be a reference to Jesus since he had been supposedly dead for nearly 50 years with respect to the reference and couldn't have been "instigating" anything. There are two likely references here: the Jewish-Christian proclamation that Jesus was god, or a person named Chrestus (a formal name at the time) antagonizing, playing a role in Claudius' edict. AND, Suetonius never, ever mentions "Christus". That's a pretty big deal if he's talking about "Christ". And Phlegon is largely cited as an interpolation.

Given the fact that there are secular references to Jesus's existence, Jesus Christ was a real person.

When you look at the supposed secular sources and place them in their proper context, neither Josephus, Pliny, Soutonius or any other secular source becomes legitimate. At best, they are questionable.

Side: Mythological Fiction
Flame(52) Disputed
2 points

Mahollinder, I agree with you that "Pliny the Younger was talking, specifically, about the beliefs of Christians of his time and was asking Trajan for advice on what to do with them". Yet, it was common knowledge concerning Jesus of Nazareth. Pliny's close friends, Tacitus and Suetonius had common knowledge concerning Him. They were of the same generation of Romans. Robert L. Wilken, is William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor of the History of Christianity at the University of Virginia and a former American Academy of Religion, argued that, "Tacitus knew the letters of Pliny and may have read the letter on the Christians before writing his Annales". He also argues that, "The Annales was written within five, at most ten, years of Pliny's encounter with the Christians in Bithynia. "Their originator, Christ, " writes Tacitus, "had been executed in Tiberius's reign by the governer of Judea, Pontius Pilatus (Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them, 49).

Side: Real historical figure
taskeinc(3) Disputed
2 points

The literature of the world is filled with invented characters; and the imaginary lives of the splendid men and women of fiction will forever arrest the interest of the mind and hold the heart enthralled. But how account for Christianity if Christ did not live? Let me ask another question. How account for the Renaissance, for the Reformation, for the French Revolution, or for Socialism? Not one of these movements was created by an individual. They grew. Christianity grew. The Christian church is older than the oldest Christian writings. Christ did not produce the church. The church produced the story of Christ. "The Greatest Story Ever Told."

Side: Mythological Fiction
Whiteson(8) Disputed
1 point

there is need to be specific about those secular sources in terms of who wrote what; when was it wrtten; where was it wrtten etc. Otherwise even secular sources could have written based on the gospels....why not?

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

There is so much evidence that the rest of the Bible is real, take Exodus 14... when Moses parted the Red Sea. We have found evidence of that. Why would we add a little lie amidst all of the righteous truth?

Supporting Evidence: Exodus 14 evedince (www.wnd.com)
Side: Real historical figure
johncunningh(1) Disputed
0 points

there was no alphabet 2000 years ago that had the symbols to produce the sounds of any of the names in the bible or book of mormon. We do not change or translate names in history. our alphabet of english is less then 500 years old sense 1630. see missing letter J part one & two. most likey shakespear wrote it. there is no item or situation of the bible that was available during that time period. same with the book of mormon. the camels are from austraila, the donkeys are from new mexico they were taken to the middle east in 1583. We do not or should not need the bible or Jesus or the name christ which is not 2000 years old to get an education and treat others well if they deserve it. thank you John cunningham [email protected]

Side: Debunking mistakes
3 points

Ah yes! This question. Well, there are dozens of scholars who debate this very topic fiercely in academic and theological circles, so I fear my lowly research wouldn't do this argument justice.

I do however want to share a quote from Christopher Hitchens on the veracity of Jesus of Nazareth as a historical figure:

"The jumbled 'Old' Testament prophecies indicate that the messiah will be born in ... Bethlehem. However, Jesus's parents were apparently from Nazareth and if they had a child he was most probably delivered in that town. Thus a huge amount of fabrication - concerning Augustus, Herod, and Quirinius - is involved in confecting the census tale and moving the nativity scene to Bethlehem.

But why do this at all, since a much easier fabrication would have had him born in Bethlehem in the first place ... The very attempts to bend and stretch the story may be inverse proof that someone of later significance was indeed born, so that in retrospect, and to fulfill the prophecies, the evidence had to be massaged to some extent."

So are you refering to Jesus of Nazareth, or Jesus the messiah (or Christ)?

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

That's an intersting contention; one that I'm unaware of and would like to investigate more thoroughly. However, for the sake of simplification (and because this would only be circumstantial evidence at best), I think it would be better to view them as one and the same, and save splitting that hair for another debate.

Side: Mythological Fiction
4 points

Well, if we stick to the modern mythical version of Jesus, then this blindness-curing, demon-casting, fish-multiplying, half-man half-deity would require an extraordinary amount of corroborating evidence to support his historical existence; evidence which does not exist, as we all know.

Side: Mythological Fiction
2 points

The first century Jewish historian Josephus also talked about Jesus. Here is one version of his testimony found at http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/josephus-jesus.html

"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon their loyalty to him. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive. Accordingly they believed that he was the Messiah, concerning whom the Prophets have recounted wonders."

This debate asks if Jesus was a real historical figure, not if he was the Son of God.

History tells us he was a real historical figure.

Only personal belief can answer the question whether he was something more.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

For 2,000 years, billions of people have lived according to the teachings of Christ. How can you prove Christ did NOT exist? For 2,000 years, the institution of Christianity and Christ's teachings have remained uninterrupted. What other institution can equal this fact? The Bible is the most printed and widely distributed book in the world.

Side: Real historical figure
Daedalus(86) Disputed
4 points

Although I agree that Yeshua of Nazareth was a real historical figure, your argument is fatally flawed.

What other institution? Islam is but 500 years younger than Christianity, while Buddhism is 400 years older. The earliest Hindu Vedas date to at least 1,100 BC. Judaism goes back maybe 4,000 years. And that's just religions. Other institutions lasting that long? City-scale government has been around for 5,000 years. Agriculture is about 11,000 years old. But then, those are practical applications, so I guess it's unfair to compare them to religion.

But all this is ignoring the fundamental problem here: lots of people believing in something doesn't make it true. Lots of people used to believe the world was flat; and moreover, many people still don't realize that this theory was debunked in the 4th century BC by the Greeks, rather than by Columbus, who in fact merely believed the world was a smaller sphere than was believed at the time (he was dead wrong and would have died if a hitherto-unknown continent hadn't happened to be in his way).

Side: Debunking mistakes
2 points

Numbers do not equal legitimacy. Like your mother probably told you, "If all the kids in town jumped off a cliff, would you follow?"

Side: Mythological Fiction
2 points

jump all over you for tyring to give them the facts. We can see it all coming together and you know exactly what I mean when I say that.

Side: Real historical figure

For all the good it does to argue the point of Jesus Christ being fact or fiction I cannot quite understand why it would matter in any way, shape or form. Is it not enough to read and comprehend the teachings in the Bible to know whether or not whomever wrote them was indeed real? Indeed, why does it matter if it was the Christ or Schlomo from Ur who wrote those loving words? For me, Jesus Christ is fact and His words tell me that He was indeed a most unusual man.

Side: Jesus Christ lived
2 points

Fact. I have seen to many miricles and answered prays to not believe in Him.

Side: Jesus Christ lived
sparsely(495) Disputed
3 points

try praying to a milk jug for a while. See how that goes.

Optical Illusion
Side: Mythological Fiction
2 points

There is sufficient evidence that Jesus actually was a historical man. Aside from the Gospels, which were written within a generation of Jesus' death, he is mentioned in Roman records and by other authors. The gospels certainly do not contain the only mention of Jesus. There is no doubt that he truly did walk on this earth.

As for Jesus being the son of God, I believe it to be true. I believe he died and rose again.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

Jesus really did come to earth and he will come soon just like the bible says. Ive seen the promises that God has made in word come true in my life and the prophecies of the last days are coming about, so with no doubt. My lord jesus exists.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

I'm sure he was a real person, who preached love and had a large following and was probably a really, really great guy...

Who probably didn't walk on water, but did inspire many people.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

Jesus Christ did exist and thats not fiction. He was a holy child born from Mary and he did perform miracles by God's leave. I do believe in Jesus christ as prophet of GOD

Side: Real historical figure

I didn't know this was debatable. He was definitely a real guy; whether or not he walked on water, well, that doesn't exactly see eye-to-eye with my beliefs.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,

the only-begotten Son of God,

begotten of His Father before all worlds,

God of Gods, Light of Lights,

very God of very God,

begotten, not made,

being of one substance with the Father,

by whom all things were made;

who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven

and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the the virgin Mary

and was made man;

and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.

He suffered and was buried.

And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures

and ascended into heaven

and sits at the right hand of the Father.

And He will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead,

whose kingdom will have no end.

Side: Jesus Christ is the Son of God
2 points

There were other writers besides the Christian gospels. Take Josephus, for instance. Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus. Lots of them mentioned a religious leader by the name of Christus. Whether or not you accept the Biblical version, surely the pagans are to be believed.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

"There were other writers besides the Christian gospels. Take Josephus, for instance. Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus. Lots of them mentioned a religious leader by the name of Christus. Whether or not you accept the Biblical version, surely the pagans are to be believed"

Indeed. He is considered one of the greatest historian.

Supporting Evidence: Tacitus (www.britannica.com)
Side: Real historical figure
2 points

my name is Paulos Aberra. i used to say that Jesus is a fiction but after i sow a miracle in my life, i was very ashamed of what i belive. every day there is a miracle in my life, i always keep asking my self why is that, is it really a coincedence. i dont think so. in my country Ethiopia, every day you will see thousends of miracles. so are you sure that this all miracles of Jesus Christ is fake or fiction?

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

It's more probable than not that a man named Jesus lived. My problem with him being more than a man is the fact that he did not know how to write. It seems to run in the family. We gods can create everything... but don't know how to write.

It just seems unreasonable.

Side: Doesn't matter

how can you say that a man named jesus did not exist when there was clearly a man named jesus and he did die on a cross for you me and every other christian and selfish atheist (not all atheists are selfish)

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

there was clearly a man named jesus and he did die on a cross for you me

Really? Prove it. And no the bible doesn't count as factual evidence.

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

Gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John all testify to Christ walking the earth. Luke is the only one who was not an eye witness.

Side: Real historical figure
beevbo(295) Disputed
6 points

If the argument is whether Jesus Christ is fact or fiction it stand to reason that those character found within the story are not plausible evidence of his existence. That's like me using the testimony of Jimmy Olsen to prove the existence of Superman.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

The earliest of which, was written at least 30 years after his death.

You'd think such eyewitnesses would've been more prompt about recording such miraculous events.

Side: Mythological Fiction
passionate1(85) Disputed
8 points

Imagine you took part in the civil rights movement. Would you have written down your experience a few years afterwards, or towards the end of your life after you have had time to see the effect and reflect upon what was accomplished?

Also, it is true that Luke was not an eyewitness. It was instead written as a historical account of the life of Jesus, probably commissioned by the man Theophilus. (It was also part 1 of a series, the book of Acts being part 2.) Being a physician (Colossians 4:14), he was a very intellectual man and did not just start writing the account, but instead spent much time researching all of the events that took place, from before Jesus' birth to the years following his death. What makes this source, or any of the gospels for that matter, so much more unreliable than a secular source?

Side: Real historical figure
tonicole(854) Disputed
7 points

But none of the Gospels thought they had to, because they though Jesus would be coming back to save them in their life times. they didn't think it would be centuries later.

and how many people achievements were written about on the spot ? I haven't read a single book about the great achievements of a person that wasn't written until after they died.

also keep in mind that not everyone was literate and mostly passed their history by word of mouth during this time frame.

Side: Jesus Christ lived
MasseyTom(3) Disputed
2 points

They weren't stenographers. They didn't have email. They probably didn't even know how to write.

Yet, they changed the world with their bold proclamations. Not of a prophet, but of the Messiah !! How would those fishermen even dream that up ?? They weren't religious leaders.

Side: Jesus Christ lived
1 point

The authors of the Gospels wrote the gospels as polemical text to combat Jewish rumors that reported Jesus was stolen from the tomb. Each of the 4 gospels is more or less inspired by the one before it, going back to the pre-markan passion narrative which was an oral tradition that evolved over those 30 years you speak of.

There is also a lot of circumstantial evidence which I could get into if you asked.

Supporting Evidence: Pre-Markan Passion Narrative (www.earlychristianwritings.com)
Side: Real historical figure
lldoolj2(4) Disputed
1 point

Jesus indicated to his followers that he would be returning at some time in the future. Given that the eyewitnesses had seen Jesus in resurrected form, they believed that his return would be soon -- within their lifetimes. Why write about Jesus when he was soon to return and word of mouth was sufficient to successfully spread the word?

However, as time passed and his foretold return did not come about, Jesus' followers changed from first-person sharing about Jesus to writing down the narratives as a more permanent method that could be passed on after they died.

Paul's epistles -- which included content about Jesus -- may have been written as early as 48 AD (Galatians). While not considered part of the gospel accounts, these letters do refer to events related to Jesus' teachings and life/death/resurrection. If Jesus was put to death somewhere between AD 26 and 36, these letters are more contemporary accounts of Jesus than those gospel accounts written later.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

there is no doubt that he is real, there are a myriad of historical accounts that attest to his existance; more so than attest to the existance of julius ceaser.

for more information on it http://www.carm.org/questions/Jesus_myth.htm

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

You need to be careful about the words you choose.

Whether or not this Jesus is the "Messiah" or "Christ" is a matter of faith. Jews don't accept that Jesus was the messiah. Christians affirm Jesus is the messiah (but they redefine "messiah" to fit Jesus' ministry). To an atheist the whole discussion is nonsense.

There are references that confirm that the Jesus of the Bible was a real person but very little is known about him. Read the last chapter of Schweitzer's "The Quest of the Historical Jesus".

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

There are too many accounts for Christ not to have existed.

Paintings, writings, et cetera.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

The "mythological fiction" advocates can cry "there's no evidence! No evidence!" and they're completely right. They cannot prove that something doesn't exist. The "historical figure" people have to prove that Jesus existed. So if there are secular sources for the existence of Jesus, as were stated at the beginning of this debate, that would be evidence that Jesus existed. That is not evidence that he performed miracles; it also does not mean that those "miracles" were not performed. Jesus could indeed have done great things that were misinterpreted as miracles and expounded upon by oral tradition. He also could have been the son of God and performed the impossible with the power of divinity. Or, he could be a complete fabricated lie.

Sherlock Holmes is a "mythological figure" who is referred to by many other "secular" sources (read: sources other than Arthur Conan Doyle). As somebody else mentioned earlier, Ghandi is a real man who became a myth, and is also referenced in many sources which would be considered secular. I am a real person who, unfortunately, has not ascended to mythology.

I must also wonder if any public person - Jacques Chirac, Bono, Tom Brokaw, Osama bin Laden - does NOT have a sort of mythology.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

Do you mean the late J.C.? I believe his mother was the Mary with the cherry.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

Real Person. But not magical.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

ok people... he 'j.c.' really existed.he is just like any other preacher that wer the apple of the eye of the higher state of "preachers"before,why maybe hes like ghandi or alexander,too hard to control,too hard to handle.

and the old catholic suppresed hes existency by conspiricing the truth about him,ofcourse its political reason.people 2000 years ago are very superticious that they actually believe in every miracle hearsay,and those times are like a martial law that people are hungry of freedom,hungry of faith.well i think the real question here is about j.c.'s miracles and sermon,his not myth but his magic's are...?is it?..

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

As a Jew, I do not believe that Christ was of any historical significance, but should anyone look at either the old, or the new testimet, they will see that Christ was a person, and there is even a burial site for him.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

Jesus Christ was a true historical figure. Not only did He live for 33 years, but He sacrificed Himself for the sins of the world. Then amazingly He rose from the dead having the keys to death and hell and He now sit on the right hand of The Father making intercession for the belivers waiting till He is told to come back for us.

Side: Real historical figure
altarion(1951) Disputed
4 points

If he sacrificed himself for the world's sins, then how come he was crucified unwillingly by the Romans? I'm sorry but your reasoning is lacking. History clearly states that the Romans crucified Jesus because he broke Roman law. He didn't sacrifice himself.

Side: Debunking mistakes
tonicole(854) Disputed
5 points

He didn't break the law; he got turned on by rumors and the king's fear of loosing his position pressured him to agree with the crowd

Side: Jesus Christ lived
bushhaterr(32) Disputed
2 points

WOW...they seen you coming

Side: Debunking mistakes
1 point

Arguing that Christ was not real is just ignorant.

The Council of Jerusalem was around the year 50 AD, only 17 years after the death of Christ.

By then, there was real in-fighting among the Christians.

As early as 22 years after the death of Christ, Paul wrote letters to the followers of Christ. Even if you disregard his opinions, it is hard to argue that he is writing to imaginary people.

These earliest letters were to a slave owner named Philemon, the church of the Thessalonians, the saints (believers) in Phillippi, the church in Corinth, the churches in Galatia (more than one), and to the believers in Rome.

These people knew that Christ was real. They all lived during His time, even though Paul never met Him in the flesh.

Greek and Roman mythology was not overcome by another myth. Whole civilisations have left their fairy tales in favor of the living GOD.

Side: The fact that he lived is OBVIOUS
1 point

The reason why there is so much reference even in a secular world is that Jesus performed and talked to and was seen by tens of thousands of people. It almost impossible for a person to not have real existence and stories being made up if that fact alone where not true.

Nobody thought the City of Troy was real just another mythological story made up out of the bible.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

There is so much emphasis on the genealogy of the descendent's leading to Christ not only in the bible but also in the scribes of the day when they where keeping record. Dead Sea scrolls validates this even further even if you don't believe in the chronological order of the bible there is also outside reference to his existence from Roman scribes as well. You would have to dispute several countries writings to disprove his life, not very likely.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

It is a fact.

The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.

Side: Real historical figure

There is historical evidence of him being alive. Plus zeitgeists facts are mostly wrong

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

If He was a myth, wouldn't at least some of his followers have indicated that at some point in their lives? None of them did. What about the individuals who witnessed His miracles? The fact is that there are no accounts of people who later attempted to dispute the Biblical narrative. If Jesus was a myth, at least some of those who witnessed his actions would have attempted to refute the Biblical account.

Side: Real historical figure
DrOffats(4) Disputed
3 points

Doesn't hold water ... Most were dead by the time the gospels were written and canonized. Gospels were written by Greek scholars, not illiterate contemporaries of Jesus. Most the people you are appealing to wouldn't even know the bible existed much less read it.

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

To argue that Jesus Christ did not exist is pure Pagan denial and it is infantile that they continue to do so. Even though the Bible cannot be actual evidence that Jesus existed, there are still the later writings of both Pagans and Christian Church Fathers that mention him by name and repeat the Gospel story in a precise manner.

Early Christianity was an oral tradition in that there was no writings of Jesus Christ per se. What the deniers are trying to claim is that hundreds, if not thousands, of Jews suddenly had this great idea to start a new religion from scratch by making up a figure named Jesus Christ and then worshiping Him as the Son of God. That's totally illogical and ridiculous! Their animus towards Christianity gets in the way of their reason in an obvious way. One could say the same thing about existence of Socrates, and perhaps even Plato and Aristotle, but they never do. Christ existed and that is a historical fact.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point
Supporting Evidence: Jesus Fact (www.mcgi.org)
Side: Real historical figure
1 point

I believe in Jesus, and I don't think you people have the right to tell the Christian people that their God does not exist any more than I have the right to say Buda or Gunesh or Mohamid doesn't exist. I highly respect religious people no matter what their religion. At least they believe in something, at least they keep morals.

Side: Real historical figure
Humanityrox(1) Clarified
1 point

As one who has attended many churches and many denominations of what is believed to be Christian faith,

I have in the recent past put my faith in humanity.

We as a race of beings will continually search for our

Creation and strive to know the truth. Until that day is

Upon us, I cannot believe in an almighty creator who burned

cities to ash, waged wars, set plagues upon Egypt, etc.

For those who claim that there is but one way to heaven

through Christ the Saviour, I ask, are the thousands of other

religions on our planet wrong? And all their interpretations

of evolving. We have the ability of thought. Use it. There is not a civilization on our world that does not try to preserve its own

existence through care and self- preservation, even at the expense of others who may infringe upon them. We are and

always will try to topple the food chain. We need religions on our planet to set forth basic teachings for our children. Beyond that scope, living, loving, knowing pain and coping with these things are what brings us to maturity.

Side: Real historical figure
1 point

Even one of the most famous atheist, Richard Dawkins admitted, that Jesus really existed. I think its foolish to think other wised. Regardless of your personal faith, or how you feel about Jesus, He did in fact did exist.

Side: Real historical figure
Gokumohan(335) Disputed
2 points

He said Jesus OF NAZARETH existed NOT Jesus christ .

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

I don't understand how your flawed philosophy of Jesus not existing has any true evidence either. Absence of evidence does not automatically suggest complete absence.

And the Bible was clearly written during the Apostle's lifetimes- Paul and others did not live "hundreds of years" after Jesus, therefore they DID have first-hand accounts. And why do all the atheists think that the Bible isn't true because we haven't found the originals? If the Koran or some other religious writing was written thousands of years ago, would you expect the oigials to be still somehow intact???

Side: Real historical figure

History books record Jesus Christ as being a real Person.

Side: Real historical figure
0 points

Jesus was a real man. He lived on earth about 2000 years ago. There is a body of evidence that supports his existence. Also, he was married to Mary Magdalene, whom was was of his disciples.

Supporting Evidence: GodTube (www.godtube.com)
Side: Real historical figure
stanleyge(64) Disputed
3 points

Dan Brown's fictional "The DaVinci Code" says Jesus was married. I think it would be a good thing if Jesus was married. But there is no reliable evidence of this.

Side: Real historical figure
ghebert(29) Disputed
0 points

Outside of the bible there is no evidence of his existence. Although there were known historians living in that era and although Jesus supposedly performed miracles and resurrected from death none of this those historians for some odd reason didn't include something of such high importance in any sort of historic record? Jesus is a mythological figure...a story.

You may or may not have seen the movie "Zeitgeist" which shows us many pre-christian gods and messiahs that share the exact same characteristics as Jesus ie: Born of a virgin on the 25th of December, announced by a star in the east, performed miracles such as healing, died and resurrected in 3 days. Most people don't believe what is presented in Zeitgeist for the simple reason that it contradicts their faith. Here is a video on youtube from someone who was used as a resource for the movie Zeitgeist explaining how evidence for this was censored and destroyed long ago.

Zeitgeist, Part 1 (Debunked/refuted?)
Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

Ghebert, this shows you lack of knowledge on history. Zeitgeist has been thoroughly debunked (surprisingly by the YT atheist community) and is lacking in any profound information.

First of all, historians affirm a historical Jesus, not one that did miracles, so if he was just a normal (illiterate) guy that got executed for preaching a philosophy to other illiterates, we would not expect him to be mentioned in contemporary writing. This is an argument from silence.

The only other god that was born of a virgin was a late Mirtha god, and it was trying to fulfill Old Testament prophecy like Jesus was. Horus was not born of a virgin. That's a complete fabrication that originated from a chain e-mail. Horus was born of Isis and Osiris, whose dead body Isis reanimated for the purpose of humping. Clearly not a virgin, Isis was.

No where in the bible does it say Jesus was born on Christmas. This actually does come from the pagan tradition of celebrating the Winter Solstice. Zeitgeist is deceitful for not mentioning this.

Other Gods did have resurrections (upper Egypt Osiris for example) but that's not surprising. Resurrection is everywhere in the Old Testament and where his followers probably got the idea. Again, you're drawing parallels to mythical features of Jesus, not the historical one.

People don't believe in Zeitgeist because it is a piece of inept propaganda.

Zeitgeist Debunked
Side: Real historical figure
sparsely(495) Disputed
-3 points
TERMINATOR(6762) Disputed
1 point

There were very few historiographers at that time, and few bothered with advertising a religion they considered erroneous.

Several gave reference to him, which would imply that he actually existed.

Side: Real historical figure
cms07(46) Disputed
-1 points

What verifies your existence? All that Material, like ID, SS#, bank account... Doesn't seem like evidence to me....

Side: Real historical figure
-2 points
0 points

The debate over the historicity of Jesus seems to me to be the only debate where primary source documents written by eyewitnesses only a few years after the events are discarded.

We have multiple accounts of the life of Christ. The authors are known as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They wrote their accounts very soon after the events on question and used at least one source (Q) which must have been written earlier.

The gospel accounts enjoy far greater textual support in the form of thousands of pieces, fragments and full codices that allow historians to show that the text that we read today is approximately 99% true to th original documents. The remaining 1% could be discarded without changing anything of significance.

The common assumption behind many posters who deny the historicity of Jesus is that we need extra-biblical sources confirming the Gospels. This is simply not true. The Gospels themselves are the kind of first-person accounts that historians seek.

Supporting Evidence: Gary Habermas (www.garyhabermas.com)
Side: Real historical figure
DrOffats(4) Disputed
2 points

The gospels were not written by eyewitnesses. Names were given to the stories posthumously. This is fact and not a controversial statement. If this is the backbone of your belief, you are in for a big challenge to your faith.

Supporting Evidence: Bart Ehrman, biblical scolar (www.bartdehrman.com)
Side: Mythological Fiction
sparsely(495) Disputed
1 point

"A few years" is pretty disingenuous. Try 30. That's three decades for peole to write about someone who supposedly persuaded masses, fed them all from a picnic basket, riled up the establishment of the day, and whose life ended iwth public execution. And apparantly no other historian of the day, whose works survive, can corroborate any of this.

Yes, we have testimony that people followed a person they referred to as Christ, but everything boils down to the word of mouth of one or two authors. It is no more legitimate than the writings of Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church, who claimed Jesus visited North America after his Mesopotamian tour.

Side: Mythological Fiction
-1 points

The Bible's a pretty good source for any proof you need.

Somethings to think about:

1. If the disciples made this up, why would they make themselves look so bad?

2. Yes, the Bible is contradictory in places. More than one person wrote it, you know.

Side: Real historical figure
beevbo(295) Disputed
1 point

Neither of those point speak to proof of anything. To the best of my knowledge no disciple of Jesus (I assume that's who you're talking about when you say "disciples") is credited as being a historian living during the time of Jesus. So you could easily argue that these disciples are simply a part of the fable.

Yes, the Bible is contradictory in places, eh? This is part of what I find so infuriating about arguing religion, because those who argue for Christianity change their views to suit their argument. On one hand they'll tell you the bible is the divine word of God, and is infallible, and then turn around as proclaim the Bible is written by men, and therefore is not perfect.

Side: Mythological Fiction
-1 points

yes he was alive and well back then.

Side: Real historical figure
-1 points

Jesus Christ fact ya exist ya will return ya when? try to study the holy quo ran.

to believe in Jesus firstly you should believe in god because : 1- right now no intact evidence you can touch about Jesus e.g where is Noah's ship ,stick of mousse so how will you believe? by ignorance. no; but by measuring lots of recently discovered facts ( formation of fetus, universe, water, did you knew that mecca is the center of earth and mecca timing is the ideal all over the world not Grinch ) are since 1400 years written in quo ran of Muslims. you can measure these facts -you can touch- by their script in quo ran. then look for the script ions toll about Jesus,mousse ,Ibrahim and think.............

2- some things up till now behind your limits (ghosts, Jeni,for casting future, your difficult problem solving without your intervention is it your skills?)

go realistic for all ancient script ions made by human ( friends you know the knowledge 500 years ago Galileo who ever burned because he said "the sun is the center of universe not the earth" - czar said he is the god or son of god or 1 of gods. how you believe such pull chat

Pharaohs had their stories like each other place i am Egyptian i can tell you. good luck for all

Side: Real historical figure
-1 points

Even if you don't believe that Jesus was the son of God, he still EXISTED. In fact, Jesus was the most documented person in the history of civilization. Although you can disagree with what he said or did, to believe that Jesus was not a real person is ridiculous.

Side: Real historical figure
Whiteson(8) Disputed
1 point

...meaning that you have run short of evidence for the existence of Jesus....?

Side: Mythological Fiction
-1 points

i believe that jesus might have been real but i do not heink that he could heal just by touching people or that he came back from the dead. he could've been just some guy that everyone liked and over the years he became the son of god and could perform all these different things.

Side: Real historical figure
Whiteson(8) Disputed
1 point

jesus was neither real nor just some guy because; consider these 2 Qs: if he was real son of god how come he is almost absent from historical records other than the gospels? OR if he was just some guy how come his status rose to a son of god soon after his death?

Side: Mythological Fiction
-2 points
beevbo(295) Disputed
2 points

I could say the same about the Flying Spaghetti Monster and be just as accurate.

Side: Real historical figure
lldoolj2(4) Disputed
1 point

This is a spurious argument. What evidence do you have to support the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Side: Real historical figure
-3 points
-3 points
-5 points
12 points

To be honest, I hold no clear position but I tend towards that the story is mythological to an extent; obviously at the time there where many "sons of god" going around. There is to little concrete evidence for the Jesus Christ figure to be considered a real historical figure, and there is some evidence pointing towards the possibility; therefore, the answer cannot be clear.

Side: Mythological Fiction
asaweak(12) Disputed
4 points

The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

WHY DOES THIS HAVE 4 POINTS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Side: Mythological Fiction
11 points

There is no conclusive proof that he existed as a man.

However the miracles were definitely fiction

Side: Mythological Fiction
6 points

The bible cannot be used as an official source of someone's actual existence. Pure fiction.

Side: Real historical figure
cybrweez(53) Disputed
4 points

Interesting thought. Why?

Side: Mythological Fiction
jtopolnak(158) Disputed
0 points

Look at how many cities and stories like Troy for example that have been discovered,many non believers thought only to be pure fiction. Only to be true

You will be amazed at how many archaeologist whether believers or not have referenced the Bible for digging locations.

Look at the Dead Sea Scrolls if you know anything about them they expose many of Old Testament scribes and the record keeping of the time, originally before their discovery many thought to be just fable. The story of them is quite amazing.

Even if you go into other facts King Ebeneser not only have we uncovered that actual building but all of the references of the Bible where able to help with location and it's character. I can keep going on with one after the other on just facts alone, it's only yourself that can either chose to ignore it or accept it.

Side: Mythological Fiction
8 points

The story of Jesus Christ can largely be solidified as mythology when, as made famous by Zeitgeist, the relationship between Christ and the celestial cycle is considered. His rise from the dead during the vernal equinox is a clear metaphor for the coming of spring.

Side: Mythological Fiction
cybrweez(53) Disputed
3 points

You actually posted this AFTER someone posted about how zeitgeist is a joke.

Side: Mythological Fiction
8 points

Everything we know about Jesus comes from the bible. The books of the bible could easily have been written by colluding fantasists. Maybe he existed as a man but the supernatural powers attributed to him are completely without foundation.

Side: Mythological Fiction

Wait, but we have about 3 metric tons of wood from his cross!?! ;)

Side: Real historical figure
7 points

There is almost no historical primary source material to believe that this man was anything other than an amalgamation of similar beliefs and deities.

Side: Mythological Fiction
12 points

An objective archaeological analysis not citing biblical tests finds that the likelihood of "Jesus Christ" to be very low. The name Yeshuah was common in that time period among Jews, as were the names Miriam and Yosef. Tracking down the right Yeshuah is like finding a particular John Smith today. The specific important life events and attributes mentioned in the gospels all correspond to previous cultures, religions, deities, and myths. Even if we could figure out which Yeshuah ben Yosef we were looking for, there is no way to verify the association of those events or abilities with that person.

Side: Mythological Fiction
8 points

This will probably be a touchy subject. But, without a source outside of the Bible to validate the historicity of Jesus the Christ, the most safe and accurate conclusion would be that Jesus is a historically fictional character (think: vietnam war novels with fake characters at real battles).

It is highly "coincidental" that Jesus has all the markings of Mithra and Horus, and several other deities that preceded the Jesus folklore.

Side: Mythological Fiction
charlesviper(72) Disputed
8 points

I think Jesus was a real character -- his apostles certainly were. I don't believe in his miracles, that his mother was a virgin, etc.

If we look at our leaders of recent times -- Ghandi, Teresa, King -- they've all be glorified even in this age of photographic and video media. We look at videos of King as a testament to his existence, however we have put King past what he really was. Certainly a great social leader, but not without is own problems [domestic affairs, etc]. Same can be said for Ghandi -- a great social leader, with poor economic choices that kept many Indians in poverty even until modern times with his de-industrialization and concept of "spinning thread for peace".

Jesus, in my eyes, was a regular ordinary guy with an awesome stance on social conservatism and ideas that really helped in that time period. His social and economic philosophies were an oral hit, and his ideology was spread far and wide until it was put into the Bible in about 170AD. In that 170 year time period, his overall being was transformed from "genius" to "our supernatural savior" -- as conceptions that there would be a Messiah had been present for a long time.

In regards to the comment of Mithra and Horus, it's not too much of a stretch to argue that when Jesus' story, keeping in mind it was an oral tradition back then, had it's intricacies changed slightly. That doesn't mean it was "made up", and I don't know why you'd think that.

If you look at the proof -- notarized, official letters from Jesus' apostles to the royalty of the time period, the fact that they died for their beliefs -- strictly looking at the apostles, it appears they have the conviction you would only have from witnessing first-hand a character as powerful as Jesus.

However, it isn't too much of a stretch to think that SINCE the time of the apostles, he's been glorified and edited to fit with the "Old Testaments" version of the messiah.

Regardless, what I imagine is his "original" message -- that of turning the other cheek and helping the poor -- has little to do with religion, and is the political stance of a well-known historical figure.

Side: Real historical figure
MasseyTom(3) Disputed
1 point

It is ridiculous to say that, just because a particular document was chosen to be a part of the Bible makes that document an unreliable source. Should the King James compilers left some documents out, so that you would deem them credible?

Side: Real historical figure
Bluefish7(49) Disputed
-10 points
Rhyolite(31) Disputed
2 points

"almost no historical primary source material"

So, based on your statement, there is some fractional amount of historical primary source material stating that Jesus Christ, in fact, existed.

If there is historical source material pertaining to the existence of Jesus Christ, then how can you even begin to argue that he was some figment of thought?

Either there is no evidence and he does not exist or there is evidence and he does exist. "almost no... material" implies some material, intrinsically discrediting your stance that Christ is a myth.

Side: Real historical figure
sparsely(495) Disputed
4 points

mm no. The only primary source material talks about people worshipping a person referred to as Chrestus (which is merely a title, meaning Anointed One). The best evidence anyone can postulate as evidence are the writings of Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews), which was not only based on Christian writings itself, but proven to have been the victim of forgery by Christians in order to insert text bolstering the historicity of their myth.

That means we're about as close to zero evidence as you can get, I only say almost so that I don't sound too cocky. Fact is, Christianity is built on a legend that doesn't have a historical leg to stand on. All this evidence evaporates as soon as we take a close look.

Side: Mythological Fiction
TERMINATOR(6762) Disputed
2 points

There are various references to a religious leader in ancient Roman (secular, I might add) historiography.

Side: Real historical figure
6 points

Jesus may have lived, but the stories told of him passed by word of mouth through the decades before he was written about most likely altered anything "true".

Side: Mythological Fiction
TERMINATOR(6762) Disputed
3 points

They were not 'word of mouth'. They were written, for the most part, by people who claimed to have known Him.

Side: Real historical figure

The picture says it all.

Supporting Evidence: Christianity [PIC] (img444.imageshack.us)
Side: Mythological Fiction
TERMINATOR(6762) Disputed
2 points

That picture takes the entire religion out of context.

It was not a magical tree. It was a tree that they had been told not to eat from - psychology's reactance theory would suggest that, being forbidden, they were enticed to eat from it.

Jesus was not a zombie. Zombiism comes from African folklore - completely taken out of context.

Side: Real historical figure
6 points

Pics or it didnt happen! XD

But really, I think this is like the King Arthur story.

There's no way the person we think of as Jesus Christ was real.

He might have been a real person but as the stories were told over time more fiction was told than facts.

Seriously, when you find a real person who can turn water into wine let me know, i might hire him for personal services

Side: Mythological Fiction
5 points

Theres really no real evidence that proves that he actually existed at the time being, so for right now I will say no.

Side: Mythological Fiction
4 points

human beings can't get their history right from one day to the next, how in the world can you believe that the story of jesus is an accurate account?

the current catholic rulers just went ahead and added more sins to their list, for pete's sake! right there, change has been made that from now on will be taken as gospel, the word of god.

of COURSE jesus is a mythological fiction we have better recordkeeping options now then at any other time in history and WE mess things up. think about it people.

Side: Debunking mistakes
3 points

If you're going to believe in Jesus, then there is no evidence that you shouldn't believe in Zeus, Amun-ra, Poseidon, Dagda, Budda, or Zelda.

Whats more probable, ancient people at the early beginning of civilization believed in spirits and made a bunch of stories about it, or that there was son of God that came to earth and did so many impossible things...hmmm

Side: Mythological Fiction

There is absolutely NO first hand account of this supposed prophet or his acts in the time they were said to have happened even though many well known historians lived in the time. Most historical references are to "the christ" which simply means "anointed one" and is not a name and were written well after the supposed death of christ. The Josephus passage has been sent through the wringer many times and has been absolutely been proven a forgery by many well known scholars as well. If you understand the history of the bible and the circumstances in which it was compiled the evidence seems pretty clear the there was indeed no singular person that all the passages, in the bible or otherwise, could be attributed to. There was no historical Jesus.

Side: Mythological Fiction
3 points

With the amount of information we have available to us today, all the history we have managed to uncover and still no mention of this character jesus christ..the only reference of this man is in the bible. A book that was wrote to control man and keep them in check. Therefore its my position this man did not live.

Side: Mythological Fiction
3 points

Total, unabashed fiction. People feel they need to believe in something, and what better "idea" to believe in than life after death or eternal grace or any of that other nonsensical jargon.

I believe in a lot of the tenets of Christianity- the "do unto others..." and "turn the other cheek" but in NO way do I believe that a man (the son of god) was born to a virgin and died on a cross.

Side: Mythological Fiction
3 points

There is no hard fact to suggest jesus ever existed, and the miracles are definitely not true,

The bible cannot be used as a source as it has no backing whatsoever.

Side: Mythological Fiction
3 points

Jesus christ is an absolutely mythological fiction, his presense totally contradicts the workings of karma and karmic relationship

Side: Mythological Fiction
3 points

first account of Jesus was written about 150 years after Jesus death.

150 YEARS!! that could be several generations.

Why the delay if it was clear that he was the important individual?

Side: Mythological Fiction
3 points

There were myriad mythological Solar Messiah's whose exact same story was told long before the birth of the last "Messiah." Those mythological figures were:

1-Horus - 3000 BC

Born of a Virgin

Born on Dec 25th

Dead for 3 Days - Resurrected

2-Attis - Greece - 1200 BC

Born of a Virgin

Born on Dec 25th

Dead for 3 Days - Resurrected

3-Mithra of Persia - 1200 BC

Born of a Virgin

Born on Dec 25th

12 Disciples

Performed Miracles

Dead for 3 Days - Resurrected

Aka: the "Truth," the "Light"

4-Krishna - India - 900 BC

Born of the Virgin Davakie

Star in the East

Performed Miracles

Dead for 3 days - Resurrected

5-Dionysus of Greece - 500 BC

Traveling Teacher

Performed miracles

Turned water into wine

Aka: "King of Kings," "God's only begotten Son", "Alpha and Omega"

Dead for 3 days - Resurrected

There were many more "solar messiahs" .. The immaculate or miracle birth was painted on walls long before the "birth of Christ" .. You've been hoodwinked, bamboozled, misguided, and TOTALLY BRAINWASHED, for the most part, by your parents and others that impressed this upon your mind from the time you were born.

Supporting Evidence: The Greatest Story Ever Told .. (hubpages.com)
Side: Mythological Fiction
Kemo(9) Disputed
1 point

You argument is weak for 2 simple reasons.

1. Jesus was not born on the 25th. That date was instituted by Constantine I to harmonize religions in the Roman Empire and as Christianity eventually became the dominant religion in the empire, that date became accepted as the one to celebrate his birth. So he is the odd man out in your list.

2. Lets look at Horus directly the on Jesus is claimed to be a direct copy of:

i. Horus’ mother was not a virgin. She was married to Osiris, and there is no reason to suppose she was abstinent after marriage. Horus was, per the story, miraculously conceived.

ii. Acharya's footnotes don't provide evidence for the claim of Isis being a virgin or for "Meri" being part of her name. Only Christ-mythers make the claim that "Meri" was part of her name.

iii. Horus was never crucified. There’s an unofficial story in which he dies and is cast in pieces into the water, then later fished out by a crocodile at Isis’ request. This unofficial story is the only one in which he dies at all.

iv. Jesus was an actual person who the Romans crucified. Even if you don't believe he was more than a man. His divinity can be in doubt but his existence and being human can't. It is a historical fact he was human that actually walked the Earth. The same can't be said for these other gods.

Side: Real historical figure

mmm, historically, it seems to me that little of Christianity is original, but then, the best ideas are always recirculated. The video starts 'zeitgeist part 1' from 1.30 Thought I might post it up to compare to the antirefutal zeitgeist posted by ghebert, and the Jewish dude's rebuttal. However, I will note now that it is not the strongest, actually, probably one of the weaker arguements and is riddled with propagandist falacies and both audio and visual techniques I've not seen outside of government propaganda runs, and may some corporate propaganda too, except in this it's really obvious... but yeah, thought it might be interesting to compare.

Zeitgeist part 1
Side: Mythological Fiction
2 points

Jesus Christ is a mythical figure plain and simple. First of all, the basis of Jesus Christ being a human being came from the Bible. How can we prove anything that the Bible says is true. Just because every single minister, preist, religious fanatic says that the Bible is undoubtedly true doesn't make it so. Along with this basis, there have been a total of about 1,000 different versions of the Bible (including the Quran and its variations.) Now prove to me that the Bible is completely and undoubtedly fact. But more importantly, prove to me that all of these different versions of the Bible are accurate. Now as for my next point, Jesus is depicted as a man. The Roman Catholics in the fourteenth century depicted Christ as a raggedy man with a beard wearing a robe and sandals. Now I personally do not believe that God was ever on this Earth as a human, much less a scruffy looking human being. Now don't get me wrong. I believe in God with all of my heart and spirit, however Jesus is depicted to show that human beings are capable of being perfect like Jesus if we do good deeds. This is what the Catholics believe. Over the ten thousand years of human existence, wars and confusion have arisen and have distorted the true Bible (yes there used to be a true Word of God), and the Catholic Church has edited their Bible to include Mythological fiction for a number of reasons. One of the reasons include the fact that Catholics had lost the true word of God and made up most of the Bible. Soon everybody came to believe that the Catholic bilble was true. Even the Lutherans, Protestants, and Baptists derived parts of the Catholic church's into their own bibles, including the story of Jesus Christ. Another point I would like to make is that the only true reasons why people praise Jesus Christ is that either people are idiotic enough t think that the Bible is completely true and accurate so they believe this myth. People are also inspired by what Jesus did for us in the Bible so people are given personal hope and inspiration through Jesus Christ, which is fine but people need to know that this is a myth. The third reason is that people have a desire to be all powerful. People want to be as powerful so they (meaning religious and political powers) create God as a huiman being and show that people can be as powerful as God. In conclusion, God is all-powerful iand Jesus Christ is a myth.

Side: Mythological Fiction
Whiteson(8) Disputed
1 point

Im an atheist but I find you seem to be mixedup...so how was god revealed to you? and by the way which god do you believe in? the christian god or muslim god?

Side: Real historical figure
2 points

There may have been a Jesus even if there are no evidence that he did exist but that he made all these miracles is obviously mythology. So no, he did not exist.

Side: Mythological Fiction
2 points

Belief in Jesus as a historical figure has often only been supported by the new testament or the sword. Neither method indicates the story is true. Historical references outside the bible are all outside Jesus's lifetime and tend to refer to the stories told by the culture. About the only thing you can say is maybe, but unlikely anything like the figure described in the New Testament.

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

fiction i think.

i've never seen any evidence.

and the bible..well wouldn't you say that it could just be a story written by some guys making up something that may make sense in how the universe and earth and all of the things that live on earth were created?

i think they were desperate to find out and made up some ridiculous stories.

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

The whole of Christian mythology is absurd.

If we accept the christian message, we have to accept also that christ was god come to earth to spare us for our sins, correct?

Ok... What about the people who came before Christ appeased us? Are they all doomed, purely because god couldn't be bothered to save their souls at the time? He was still throwing stroppy little tantrum?

Not only that, but Christ died to save us from God's wrath, so therefore, he died to appease God. However, if he were God, then the ridiculous and almost psychotic argument of Christianity is that God came to earth to be tortured to death by his people, so that he could appease himself and forgive his people, the creation.

That's like a parent, angry at their child, asking their child to stab them so that the child can be forgiven and the parent's anger removed...

That just makes perfect logical clarity. Or, instead, it makes Christianity sound like a sado masochistic fetish party.

Sounds like some shaky 'knowledge', kid...

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

If jesus was a fact he and everything about him would have been in most or all non-christian historical writtings such as the Early Jewish Writtings by Philo

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

Jesus Christ was fiction because his story sources are only the Gospels, only

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

Non of the critical events such as earth quake, rising of the dead etc, associated with Jesus Christ's story are recorded in non-religion historical writtings or books or records

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

Jesus Christ can not be fact because God/god/gods does not exist in real sense

Side: Mythological Fiction

The Christians said he was a virgin prophet who died for everyone's sins.

The Jews said he was a drunken village idiot who fooled around with women and was killed for a real crime.

Either somebody's wrong, or you're all a bunch of idiots arguing over a myth.

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

the available historical writtings by historians who were present during the suppossed life time of jesus do no say anything about jesus or ocurrances associated with jesus

Side: Mythological Fiction
1 point

There is NO letter "J" in the Hebrew, Arabic, Greek and Latin language! The Name above all Names could Not begin with the letter "J" as this letter did not exist some 2,000 years ago. The letter "J" is only 500 years old

Side: Mythological Fiction
Banana_Slug(845) Clarified
1 point

Letter "J" (in English) until about middle of 14th century was pronounced as "Y" so it was more like Yesus which was Roman way or writing down Yeshoa

Side: Real historical figure

There is no actual evidence for Jesus Christ as a real historical person. Bible was written about year 300 from selected myths. Majority of Jesus myths didn't even made into bible. For example his birth in May or other one in June. That he killed his fried as kid, that he burned a live his teacher, that fled over cities like a bird, Jesus fuc*ing some chicks, Jesus as a warlord, and many many more his miracles, usually done on multiple places but in same time...

Jesus is as real as Gandalf the Grey.

Side: Mythological Fiction
0 points

As a matter of fact, He was fiction. Ok, surely I jest. He was a historical figure.

Side: Mythological Fiction