Do you believe Jesus was real or just borrowed myths predating Christians?
435502
While he may have been a real man what is written about him isn't.  That is a book of fables that have ripped things off from many places.
939916
Intersting that the only reference cited outside the bible is Josefus, who never mentioned Jesus. Any reference to Jesus in his writing was added 1000 years later by other 'christians 'trying to strengthen their arguement.\n\nGreenleaf may have decided that the story was real but I don't believe that it would stand up in court. It would be interesting to look at his background.
217888
I think that many people will start to pray for you from making a statement like that...\n\nWell, I can't realy convince you one way or the other on this topic being that it's not a forum for discussion, just a single answer for your one question...\n\nI can tell you what i believe...  I believe in Jesus.\n\nI can also say, there have been many people in the past that sought to prove Jesus was either just a man, or that he's fiction, and many of them, after everything, became christians...\n\nOne other thing to note, outside of current events (and say for the past could hundred years), Jesus being real, dieing on the cross, then comming back is one of the most (if not the most) documented events in history...   The Romans, who at the time didn't care about Jews for the most part, even recorded it into their records of history...\n\nThat's all i can realy say for now with out discussion...\n\nThanks.
1185485
consider:  virtually NO information appears in historical textx that can verify the existence of Jesus.  \n\nConsider: Most of the items in the Bible that can be examined for their historical accuracy, including the importance of Jerusalem in the ancient world, have been found, through archaeology, to be false, or gross exagerations.
982221
There is no ( or at the very least, precious little) evidence of a person called Jesus outside of the bible.  Xians will say Josephus mentioned him, but in fact, the only translation we have of Josephus was done by a christian writer in the 4th century...we don't have it in the original Latin.  And what is mentioned is very weak and open to interpretation and very likely was subject to interpolation.\n\nThe Romans were meticulous record keepers.  If Jesus existed, and had fostered the kind of revolution that would get their attention by threatening Roman rule, performing miracles, there would be copious writings about him from the Romans, and other sources.\n\nPaul the Apostle is agreeably the earliest christian writer, and he wrote probably a couple decades after the putative events.  Yet Paul makes no reference to a recently living Christ...and if you read his works separate from the rest of the NT, he seems to be writing of a supernatural creature who fought a battle, died and rose again in a spiritual realm, eons ago.  Paul went to Jerusalem to visit Peter, and yet he makes no mention of a pilgramage to Golgotha, or the tomb or any sites that would be shrines to a real person recently living, crucified and risen again ascending into heaven. Paul is bizarrely disinterested in anything relating to a real physical Jesus.\n\nAll other accounts, were written much later.  The earliest Gospel of Mark (by the way, it wasn't written by anybody called Mark, it is anonymous) couldn't have been written any earlier than 40-50 years after the events.  The Gospels all contradict each other as to Jesus life, miracles and death.  I recommend any of Randall Helms books on the New Testament and Gospels for a detailed overview of the problems.\n\nIt really is quite interesting if you are prepared to have an open mind about it.  Jesus, if he existed, was at best a wandering prophet/holyman/philospher.  We have lots of legendary heroes with stories about them, like King Arthur, William Tell...but we know they never actually existed.  I think it more likely he never actually existed, and was created as a "founding father" in the heroic tradition by the early church.
808295
It's entirely possible. The bible (both OT and NT) borrow liberally from other religions and mythology.
245851
The fact the christianity and other such religions have a particular point of origin proves that they aren't for real.\n\nWhy would god have made these people here and these people there, so the people there could tell the people here all about him?  Thats absurd.
957090
bible stories were plagiarized from pagan traditions... which came long before jesus was... um... invented
1074931
Do you people not realize that "Jesus" was just a man like any other man. Historical facts. Let me guess, the bible? The word of "God"? What did they hold a press conference so that they could get all the facts from "Jesus" and print them in one "historically accurate book"? I don't think so. I'm sorry but the bible is nothing more than a person or group of peoples perspective on a point in time. \nJesus was a human being! He had needs and desires just like every one else. Religion doesn't want to admit that because what, it will make him seem less "God like"? \nI think you people need to re-read the book. Yes "The Da Vinci Code" is a work of fiction. But I believe that a lot of the historical premises is based in truth. To what extent I don't know. The same with the bible. There may be a lot of truth there, but just like so much other written history, facts get lost or changed to suit the intentions of the author. \nCall it what you will, but I like to believe that maybe, just maybe the bloodline of Christ still exist out there today. What would be so wrong with that?
277172
It's not a weird notion.  There is no evidence of a lot of things that transpired during the times of Christ.   Sure the Bible talks about it and is the ONLY accepted history of that time.   I'm inclined to think that the apostles did run with their interpretation of Christ's teachings.   I'm not so sure it was to create an alternate Jewish religion, but an alternate politically correct on of the time.   Jesus didn't come to Earth to have people worship him as God.  That was furthest from his teachings.  His teachings were to show people the way to the Father through his teachings.  Even the perverstion of "The only way to heaven is through Christ."   It simply means that to get to heaven is to be like Christ and follow his teachings.   It does not mean to worship him as God.   Never has, never did, never will.
493861
Some do, yes, but probably not in a traditional way. I am a UU, and I have christians who believe in the divinity of Jesus in my congregation as well as those who do not (like me). I believe in a primitive Christianity in the sense that I believe that Jesus was a very good, holy person, a great prophet & philosopher. I think anyone would be well to emulate Jesus in their personal life. I don't believe he was God, though, and do not believe that there is only one way to God. \n\nAs I understand it, the "traditional" christians in the UU do think Jesus was God incarnate, but also believe, as I do, that there is not only one path to God. There are many religions, and all of them have merit. I do not think that God would be so close minded as to create all the world, then allow only one narrow path to find him. I also do not believe that God would prohibit, say, the Dalai Lama from his presence, just because he did not follow one doctrine or another, as he is a good, holy person.\n\nSo, yes, there are still christian UU's, but probably not too many, and not very traditional, in the strict sense.
356966
First, I don't think anybody can definitively "prove" Jesus' existence.  But, I do know that I admire the mythology of Jesus and his teachings.  I also admire other great humans from antiquity.  Whether you choose to believe in Jesus or not, don't disregard the wonderful parables and teachings of the man.  You can choose to learn from a variety of sources without having to be a Christian or Muslim or Atheist.  There is good knowledge out there.  Seek it.
455797
Yes! I love that I've found someone else who knows this. (I watch a lot of History Channel and learned a lot about lost gospels that weren't included simply because of the politics of the day.) \n\nThe earliest gospel about Jesus was actually written about three decades after his death, and yet it speaks as if it were a first hand account. The author wouldn't have known Jesus. \n\nAnd I don't know why it's such an atrocity for Jesus to be depicted as human. He was. And he very well could've been married. Jewish men two thousand years ago were expected to marry. You couldn't be a rabbi without being married, and he was called rabbi. \n\nAlso, many Old Testament stories were much older in origin. Like for example the flood story came from the Epic of Gilgamesh, an ancient Sumerian epic poem. The bible is not history. It's a collection of myths and tales. \n\nAnd it's true about the older holidays. When the early church was trying to convert everyone to their religion, they overshadowed old religions' holidays to make the conversion easier for the pagans. Christmas is at the winter solstice when pagans celebrated the return of the sun, when the days would get longer. In the bible, it clearly says that Jesus was born in the spring when sheppards were out with their flocks. So it's obvious that they deliberately put the birth of their savior in the winter.\n\nReligions have always been fluid. They mix and interact with other religions and myths they come in contact with. Tales have been passed down for thousands of years and always change as they go. Nothing is original anymore.
712923
I think religious wars and squabbles can be the most violent, Sol.  I do believe that Jesus is a real Person, but that SO many people have given Him such a bad name that not many people want anything to do with Him anymore.  However, history actually proves that the Person called Jesus did in fact rise from the dead, and that the Jewish leaders of the time planned a coverup story with the Romans to say that Jesus' body was stolen by His followers.  There's a book called "Evidence That Demands A Verdict" about the real, historical life of Jesus, His death, His resurrection, and His ascension out of earth to Heaven.  What I tell you is based on writings both outside of the Bible as well as from nonChristians.  You can do some research on it if you want to find out more.
317430
""Question for those who say `Jesus never existed', or `he is a myth'...? Where did the 100's of Christians in Rome come from (around 64 AD) that were tortured and killed by Nero?""\n\nFirst, plenty of people died for their faith, even if you think their faith was nonsense. Sincerity and willingness to die for what one believes in, does not mean that what one believes in is True.\n\nSecond, there are plenty of people who lived over the last 3,000+ years who definitely existed, but whose faith centered around myth, unless, of course, you think that Zeus and Jupiter, Hercules and Dionysus, among many other mythological gods, and those who followed them, were all real???
842796
Well, there was David Friedrich Strauss, but as far as I can find he only claimed that Jesus was not divine. I'll keep searching and see if there was another who went further.
1068834
Amazing how so many people actually believe there is evidence supporting the Jesus myths.\n\nThe only evidence anyone has that a person named Jesus of Nazareth existed is the bible itself. The primary reason people believe it to be true is because the Roman Empire executed anyone who refused to accept it as true.\n\n"Christianity"  is the biggest fraud in the history of mankind.