user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Of course
My History teacher at school told me that there was more proof that Jesus existed than there was that the Roman army existed. Whether he was the son of god, I dont know. Though I like to think he was.
Whether he was the son of god, I dont know. Though I like to think he was. ( I meant Jesus, not my history teacher.)
Voted : Of course
He certanly did, his existence is an historical fact.
I think there was a Jesus. I see him more as a great humanitarian and philanthropist like a Ghandi figure than the superhero water -> wine/feeding the 5,000 that most people think of him as.
Voted : Of course
Indeed. There is historical evidence. There is also historical evidence of Buddha (Buddhism), Mohammed (Islam), and Chuang Tzu (Taoism) as being real people.
Of course he's real. And I have the Jesus Christ the Avenger action figure (with Holy Grail Grip) to prove it.
Voted : Of course
Someone said all those things written in the gospels.
Voted : Of course
 "Jesus, he's my friend; Jesus, he's my friend.
He took me by the hand; Led me far from this land.
Jesus, he's my friend."
(Doobie Brothers)
Voted : Of course
a nice range of choices. interesting personality you have chosen to pursue. I like the fourth choice as it really taps into the core of why--in my modest opinion--most people choose to believe he could NOT have been a "real" person. Questioning whether he was "real" is different from questioning whether he existed in the same way that you, or I do. Of course the lineages given in the "gospels" of Matthew and Luke both trace his genetic origins, one on the side of the purported "mother" and the other on the side of the purported "father" while the writer referring to the father's ancestry seems to qualify "Joseph, who was said to be the father". Nevertheless, ties are established by these writers to other persons; some of whose historical existence is unquestioned, (ie. King David, for instance) Now, the circumstances surrounding the accounts referred to here are such that it lends credibility to the claim that someone (or something) existed with that name. They were only written some 30 to 60 years after the time in which he was alleged to have lived. Pretty impressive, when you consider that he wasn't even a Roman Citizen; but, apparently possessed only the status of "subject".
Also, considering the fact that nothing was written (or still exists) BY CONTEMPORARIES to DISPUTE the alleged existence of this "man." At the time, the "Jesus Movement" was actually considered subversive to the Roman government. It wouldn't embrace the idea for another 300 years.
Coincidentally, those of the same era who DID differ with texts which would later become "canonized" by the Catholic Church did not dispute his "existence;" but, rather whether he was human. There was too much information to contradict the idea that he simply "never happened." Rather, these writers and their philosophies, which were addressed in the Pauline Epistles, chose to pursue a much more ethereal approach to the personality. in simpler terms they chose to portray him as GOD; but, not a man. These were the earliest dissenters. It wasn't until much, much later that others chose to present him as a MAN who was not a god. (ie Dan Brown, etc.)
And the guy really doesn't fit the stereotype of your typical "legend" either. If his was a legend, then it is exceptional and exclusively in it's own class as legends have one common attribute: They take hundreds of years to develop. This one (if indeed it was a LEGEND) is atypical in that it only took 30. It's premise written by and supported to their (the writers and early "believers") own ultimate demise (death) at the hand of an extremely authoritarian government.
In summation, yes... of course... I believe he was real...
However, the accounts of him are so IN-credible that I can definitely understand why a person would not want to believe it. It boils down to faith, or a lack thereof.
We're all still believing that a white guy with a virgin mother was born in Israel, everyone knew it was gonna happen too, cause apparently time was counting down for his arrival, cause now we live in the A.D. times, 2000 years after his resurrection and death, all of which to re-assure people that God is real, he had a human child, and he sent him to forgive our sins so that we can never communicate with God as easily as we could then ever again, and believe in oxymorons like virgin birth.
Voted : Of course
I think so because it was passed down.
|
|
