Our latest ‘Underground Knowledge’ discussion group poll on the popular literary site Goodreads.com asks: Do you believe Jesus Christ was a real historical person? Interim results show that 60% of poll respondents say Yes; 23% say No; and 17% are Unsure.
Christ as depicted by artist Heinrich Hofmann.
The poll was inspired by a lively new discussion thread titled Forbidden history of the Bible in our group.
That thread in turn has spawned the following debates:
Earlier historical versions of Jesus Christ?
Extensive biblical revisions made by the Romans
Biblical conspiracy theory re Adam & Eve
Book of Genesis – not an original document?
and last but not least…
Before voting in the poll, members were advised, “For anyone wanting to read more on this subject before voting, here’s a discussion thread in the group on “Earlier historical versions of Jesus Christ”: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/…”
A selection of poll respondents’ comments follow (names withheld):
No offense but the question to me is nonsensical, so I didn’t weigh in. No genuine scholar denies that Jesus existed. That leaves pretty much only propagandists and pseudo-scholars, who know nothing about history, that deny that He did. There is way more proof for His existence than there is for many other people that we accept as historical. People can argue about what His significance is, but that He was a historical figure is unquestionably so.
I am obligated to be honest with respect to my Christian brethren and friends here. My “YES” Jesus existed is qualified by the separation of what is ascribed to him in the Gospel. It is problematic to align with Paul’s advocating that a Jew of the first century would claim divinity when the Jews challenged Rome over the same issue to the very end of a disastrous conclusion, and without surrendering their belief: they rather faced a holocaust than surrender their belief before Rome. The followers of Jesus rejected Paul, not Jesus.
I don’t ALTOGETHER believe Jesus Christ existed as such, but the question, with only Yes, No and Unsure options, imposes limitations on the answer. By that I mean that it’s perfectly plausible that a man, or many men existed at that time called Jesus of Nazareth, and it’s wholly plausible that one or more might have been regarded as Jesus Christ. What I don’t believe is that a ‘Jesus Christ son of God’ existed, any more than I believe God himself existed. I hope I’ve explained that clearly. (Gulps)
I believe there is a true person behind the legends and stories. Just not that every action, event, or saying ascribed to him in the canonical or other writings is 100% accurate.
Way too much historical evidence for him. See Josephus.
It’s my understanding that many (or most?) historians now believe Josephus’ documents that name Jesus are forgeries: http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm
It is very possible the Church threw in the forgery. I don’t disagree with that. I do disagree that Jesus is a figment of some one’s story telling ability.
Are you aware of all the Pagan Gods who came before Christ – like Mithra, Horus and Osiris – whose lives are remarkably similar to the story of Jesus? I find the history (or lack of, depending on your take) surrounding Jesus gets really convoluted the deeper you research.
Agreed. Lot’s of stuff borrowed. There was even a second messiah around 100 AD.
To see all the comments, or better still to have YOUR say, go to: https://www.goodreads.com/poll/list/142309-underground-knowledge—a-discussion-group?type=group
**************************************
Morcan Books & Films 