What do you REALLY believe?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

. . .  my understanding is that there is quite enough non-biblical evidence to show that Jesus was a real historical character

There is actually no non-biblical evidence that Jesus was a real historical character. Believe me, it was a year of hell Basically, there are some passages in historians accounts which mention either someone with a similar name, a reference to the beliefs of Christians or in a couple of cases, fraud that was stuck into the books later. One would think that had a guy been running around raising the dead, curing the sick and walking on water... he might have gotten a mention in the local Variety section if nothing else

but I get a distinct vibe from your post that you would find the task disturbing 

Nope, I'[ve done it before and would gladly jump in to examine any new data as well. I have no problem with the possibility that Jesus may have existed. But I'm loathe to interpret 'who he really was' until I figure out 'if he really was.

- that said . . . millions of people over two millennia have believed  in the historical Jesus as presented in the gospels both biblical and otherwise [or acted as though they believed, or pretended that they believed, or re-written to their own preference and then 'believed'].

They also believed the Earth was flat and the Sun went round the earth. The Sun and the Earth are the two biggest things in human perception.... if they got that wrong for 2000 years, I'm not so trusting on their opinion of a dead Jew.

Our whole damn society, and it pretty much doesn't matter which one you belong to or which ones you descend from, is shot through with Jesusism so it really is totally irrelevant what the "truth" of the matter is, the effects of Jesus's words historical or fictional are there in plain sight for anyone to see.

Well, sure but we can say the same of other societies and their gods... that doesn't mean we should examine Zeus' speeches to see what kind of guy he was.... We can examine him to see what kind of Archetype he was being used to represent by his followers... and we could do that with Jesus too.

But that's different than saying "Was Jesus a Hippie, Rabble Rouser or Mindfucker?"

[Epimetheus]

My ninth grade history teacher taught us about Jesus as a real person...
Should I sue?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

My ninth grade history teacher taught us about Jesus as a real person...
Should I sue?

[LMNO]

Yes, for the lulz.

[AFK]

My ninth grade history teacher taught us about Jesus as a real person...
Should I sue?

You should have the textbooks banned and burned. 

[MMIX]

My ninth grade history teacher taught us about Jesus as a real person...
Should I sue?

You should have the textbooks that teacher banned and burned. 

traditional solutions - if not always the best usually the urckiest

[AFK]

urckiest?  Is that the 1,000,001st word? 

[MMIX]

urckiest?  Is that the 1,000,001st word? 

goddrang but it would be fucktabulous if it were!

[P3nT4gR4m]

. . .  my understanding is that there is quite enough non-biblical evidence to show that Jesus was a real historical character

There is actually no non-biblical evidence that Jesus was a real historical character. Believe me, it was a year of hell Basically, there are some passages in historians accounts which mention either someone with a similar name, a reference to the beliefs of Christians or in a couple of cases, fraud that was stuck into the books later. One would think that had a guy been running around raising the dead, curing the sick and walking on water... he might have gotten a mention in the local Variety section if nothing else

but I get a distinct vibe from your post that you would find the task disturbing

Nope, I'[ve done it before and would gladly jump in to examine any new data as well. I have no problem with the possibility that Jesus may have existed. But I'm loathe to interpret 'who he really was' until I figure out 'if he really was.

- that said . . . millions of people over two millennia have believed  in the historical Jesus as presented in the gospels both biblical and otherwise [or acted as though they believed, or pretended that they believed, or re-written to their own preference and then 'believed'].

They also believed the Earth was flat and the Sun went round the earth. The Sun and the Earth are the two biggest things in human perception.... if they got that wrong for 2000 years, I'm not so trusting on their opinion of a dead Jew.

Our whole damn society, and it pretty much doesn't matter which one you belong to or which ones you descend from, is shot through with Jesusism so it really is totally irrelevant what the "truth" of the matter is, the effects of Jesus's words historical or fictional are there in plain sight for anyone to see.

Well, sure but we can say the same of other societies and their gods... that doesn't mean we should examine Zeus' speeches to see what kind of guy he was.... We can examine him to see what kind of Archetype he was being used to represent by his followers... and we could do that with Jesus too.

But that's different than saying "Was Jesus a Hippie, Rabble Rouser or Mindfucker?"

IMO the whole importance of Jesus being real thing came from the christians who, as is their wont, threw out the baby and then drank the bathwater.

The raising the dead, the walking on water, healing teh sick with voodoo... These only mean anything to a christian if Jesus was a real guy. Christians (in general) have no concept of metaphor, especially in relation to the Jesus myth. He had to be real and he had to do the superpowers otherwise anything he said was utterly meaningless.

My personal opinion is he either didn't exist or he was just some poor schmuck who held up a protest banner one day and was promptly beaten to death in the street by a centurion who wasn't in the mood for any nonsense that day. Then a whole bunch of bog standard, done to death, myth and legend was applied to him by the guys who put his dumb ass up to waving the banner in the first place. The jesus story, to the best of my knowledge does not contain a single original element.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

. . .  my understanding is that there is quite enough non-biblical evidence to show that Jesus was a real historical character

There is actually no non-biblical evidence that Jesus was a real historical character. Believe me, it was a year of hell Basically, there are some passages in historians accounts which mention either someone with a similar name, a reference to the beliefs of Christians or in a couple of cases, fraud that was stuck into the books later. One would think that had a guy been running around raising the dead, curing the sick and walking on water... he might have gotten a mention in the local Variety section if nothing else

but I get a distinct vibe from your post that you would find the task disturbing

Nope, I'[ve done it before and would gladly jump in to examine any new data as well. I have no problem with the possibility that Jesus may have existed. But I'm loathe to interpret 'who he really was' until I figure out 'if he really was.

- that said . . . millions of people over two millennia have believed  in the historical Jesus as presented in the gospels both biblical and otherwise [or acted as though they believed, or pretended that they believed, or re-written to their own preference and then 'believed'].

They also believed the Earth was flat and the Sun went round the earth. The Sun and the Earth are the two biggest things in human perception.... if they got that wrong for 2000 years, I'm not so trusting on their opinion of a dead Jew.

Our whole damn society, and it pretty much doesn't matter which one you belong to or which ones you descend from, is shot through with Jesusism so it really is totally irrelevant what the "truth" of the matter is, the effects of Jesus's words historical or fictional are there in plain sight for anyone to see.

Well, sure but we can say the same of other societies and their gods... that doesn't mean we should examine Zeus' speeches to see what kind of guy he was.... We can examine him to see what kind of Archetype he was being used to represent by his followers... and we could do that with Jesus too.

But that's different than saying "Was Jesus a Hippie, Rabble Rouser or Mindfucker?"

IMO the whole importance of Jesus being real thing came from the christians who, as is their wont, threw out the baby and then drank the bathwater.

The raising the dead, the walking on water, healing teh sick with voodoo... These only mean anything to a christian if Jesus was a real guy. Christians (in general) have no concept of metaphor, especially in relation to the Jesus myth. He had to be real and he had to do the superpowers otherwise anything he said was utterly meaningless.

My personal opinion is he either didn't exist or he was just some poor schmuck who held up a protest banner one day and was promptly beaten to death in the street by a centurion who wasn't in the mood for any nonsense that day. Then a whole bunch of bog standard, done to death, myth and legend was applied to him by the guys who put his dumb ass up to waving the banner in the first place. The jesus story, to the best of my knowledge does not contain a single original element.

I concur. Most of the extraordinary claims about Jesus were made before about other "Sons of Gods". The Theraputes, Mithras, etc etc

If Jesus was real, he was very unoriginal.

[MMIX]

My personal opinion is he either didn't exist or he was just some poor schmuck who held up a protest banner one day and was promptly beaten to death in the street by a centurion who wasn't in the mood for any nonsense that day. Then a whole bunch of bog standard, done to death, myth and legend was applied to him by the guys who put his dumb ass up to waving the banner in the first place. The jesus story, to the best of my knowledge does not contain a single original element.

I concur. Most of the extraordinary claims about Jesus were made before about other "Sons of Gods". The Theraputes, Mithras, etc etc

If Jesus was real, he was very unoriginal.

I totally agree, but Cain's post was offering a different interpretation on the stuff Jesus is supposed to have said,so it doesn't matter whether Jesus was
1] real
2] God's son
3] a saucy sailor
4] an alien plant OR
5] a fucking cabbage

Don't matter whether he lived or died, was a swinger or a celibate, screwed Mary Magdalen or screwed in a lightbulb, It really just does not matter, and especially to people around here as evidenced by 100% of the replies to Cramulus's poll totally failing to acknowledge him as their redeemer!

I am also intrigued as to why we might want  to give more credence to the views of an historical sociologist than to Walter Wink.

[The Wizard]

Wow. I'm the first Monotheist here. Shit.

[Requia ☣]

Wow. I'm the first Monotheist here. Shit.

No you're not.

[Epimetheus]

Wow. I'm the first Monotheist here. Shit.

"I believe in Eris as an entity but do not follow other Gods", "Eastern somethingorother" and "Something else not on this list" can all be monotheistic options.

[The Wizard]

Ya, okay. What I meant was that I was the only one that went with the Christianity, Islam, Judaism option.