Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?

[pe7erpark3r]

@Vex-Man is of the opinion, that Jesus was not a historical person.

I hold the position, that Jesus was indeed a historical figure.

So how could one prove or disprove that Jesus did exist?

The first problem of course is that all that which we are talking about happened 2000 years ago. We have a lot of religious texts, in the bible and also apocryphical ones that talk about Jesus' deeds. Is a religious text enough to prove a person's existence?

The question is, what should we expect to find other than christian texts? Should Jesus not be in some register?

I'll let Vex, or anybody who wants to join in, open the debate :joy:

Please note I'm a busy man, so the debate will be slow like any other :yum:

[AbhiKerala]

I believe he existed. But he was probably a normal jew who thought too much about the universe and the society. I'm not christian but I feel he has done many good things even as a human and should be admired as a historical figure.

[Sij]

This post is deleted!

[AbhiKerala]

@Sij There is a structural difference. In both Quran and Bible different people are talking about a messenger of God and his actions. But the legends like Odyssey , Iliad are stories. As for Mahabharata and Ramayana, although they have the structure of a legend they are both considered as holy texts in India along with other religions texts. So I don't think books of monotheistic religions were originally supposed to be legends.

[spaceboy]

---

[Zack Williamson]

@spaceboy said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

If hid didn't exist, why we are speaking about him now?

My counter question to you- If Spiderman did not exist, why children or even adults talk about him now ?

And at the same time Jesus is also mentioned not only in Bible.

The Bible is a book of which first edition does not exist anymore. Will you indeed cite that book to me ? None of the messenger i.e. Paul and Peter met with Jesus who supposedly existed on this earth.

For example he was mentioned by roman historian Gaius Cornelius Tacitus and roman-jewish historian Josephus Flavius.

Here is what Josephus wrote-
18.3.3 — “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.
For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the
truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when,
upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those
who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored
to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him.
And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”
20.9.1 — “...brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was
James...”

The point should be noted the phrase “was called Christ” is awful and some transcriber inserted it. The later lines which Josephs referred to Jesus was the son of Damneus. That sentences looks like a christian was hoping to prove that Jesus existed. Of course it was a later assertion done by a church historian Eusebius. He referred it in 325 CE. At that time, Emperor Constantine's Council was present. I got to know thru these reasons-

1. Inspite of this fact that Josephus' writings were widely read, none Christian or scholar before Eusebius referred to it, especially not the Christian scholar Origen, whose library Mr. Eusebius used
2. Oringen wrote that he (josephus) never believed in Christ.
3. If the devoutly religious Jew Josephus really thought that Jesus was the Messiah, he would become a christian.
4. There was never ever a “tribe of Christians”
5. If you did read his texts carefully, you would know his texts were out of the context. There was a paragraph around his texts and it really interrupts his story line. This is how next paragraph begins from, "About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder...". It was referred to the previous paragraph in which Pilate along with his soldiers did massacre of Jews in Jerusalem
6. Josephus did write about minor-minor people of his time extensively. A single paragraph written on Messiah is impossible.

Tecitus wrote about “christos” (in 117 CE) and christos were being executed by Pilate. He could have used name ‘Jesus’ but not his religious title ‘Christos’. The second point you could note is, the reference of Tacitus’ was never mentioned by Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian in 3rd century. Tertullian was the one who quoted Tacitus’ great deal. I have a strong evidence https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/http://www.textexcavation.com/documents/zaratacituschrestianos.pdf which shows the tacitus’ oldest copy was modified to change “Chrestianos” (i.e. "Chrestians" - the followers of Chrestus) to Christianos" (i.e. "Christians" – the followers of Christ). Generally, it was modified or manipulated in 1468 because there was no mention prior to it.

As Peter mentioned, besides the Gospels at the beginning of the first century, there were lot's of apocrypha that were also based on the events that happened to Jesus. (Lately all this books were banned, by the church, but some of them have been saved to the present day. The Nag Hammadi library for example.)

Paul and Peter never referred to Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Calvary or Golgotha or any other pilgrim. Paul did not write about earthly existence, life and his teachings. The epistles which were the part of paul’s writing, were written after 48 CE. Both did not mention any type of miracle which worked, his trial, his virgin birth, his disciples or the empty tomb

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man is of the opinion, that Jesus was not a historical person.

I hold the position, that Jesus was indeed a historical figure.

I hold the position that Jesus was a fictional character.

So how could one prove or disprove that Jesus did exist?

No need to disprove it. The one who is affirmative claiming, ‘the burden of proof’ implies on him. In this case, you are affirmatively claiming, therefore it implies on you.

The first problem of course is that all that which we are talking about happened 2000 years ago. We have a lot of religious texts, in the bible and also apocryphical ones that talk about Jesus' deeds. Is a religious text enough to prove a person's existence?

The question is, what should we expect to find other than christian texts? Should Jesus not be in some register?

I'll let Vex, or anybody who wants to join in, open the debate :joy:

I have joined already.

Please note I'm a busy man, so the debate will be slow like any other :yum:

I too am busy xD

@AbhiKerala said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I believe he existed. But he was probably a normal jew who thought too much about the universe and the society. I'm not christian but I feel he has done many good things even as a human and should be admired as a historical figure.

I said ‘burden of proof’ not 'burden of believe or belief'.

[Kaho]

@Vex-Man seems like u research on it a lot

[Zack Williamson]

@Dubidubiduba33 said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man seems like u research on it a lot

True.

@AbhiKerala said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Sij There is a structural difference. In both Quran and Bible different people are talking about a messenger of God and his actions. But the legends like Odyssey , Iliad are stories. As for Mahabharata and Ramayana, although they have the structure of a legend they are both considered as holy texts in India along with other religions texts. So I don't think books of monotheistic religions were originally supposed to be legends.

I agree with you but the life of those characters was still near or same to one-another. Lets take an exmaple of Jesus (from the Bible) and Krishna (from the Mahabharat)-

1. Both had a divine father
2. Both were dead by violent deaths
3. While being infants both were tried to be killed by tyrants.
4. Announcement of stars before their birth
5. Both had a virgin mother too

[Kaneki-kun]

😂y'all searching for Jesus on the internet 😂🤦🤦🤦. When you can just get on your knees (even if you don't at least believe) and ask Him to show himself to you.

YOU WANNA SEE JESUS CHRIST? Well then PRAY and WAIT ON HIM the truth is in every single humans heart but y'all too deaf to hear it.

For those of you who believe, believing is good but it's not enough, get to seek Him. Get to know Him!! The internet is just a confusion device, Jesus Christ is in everyone's heart knowing constantly for you guys to open the door. Me personally I Know Jesus Christ is real, He brought heaven to man, He is God (I Am) made man, Jesus Christ is God in the flesh. God was with man in the flesh! but man was too filthy to recognize Him, too blind and too Deaf! I know God doesn't exist but He IS . God IS (you need to meditate on the Bible (kjv) to be able to make sense out of this)

Y'all looking for prove of Jesus and God is real? Just search your hearts respectively, not google (lol).

[A Former User]

Countless people have killed and died, built societies, loved and hated others over the idea of Jesus Christ. Does that make him real? Maybe more real than if he actually lived and died 2000 years ago

[AbhiKerala]

@Vex-Man I think Mahabharata was written some 1000 years prior to Jesus. And the old kingdoms of Bharata spread as far as modern Afgan. Maybe the stories of JC's divinity is influenced by stories of Krishna. But still I believe JC was real and his story was made divine .

[Sij]

This post is deleted!

[pe7erpark3r]

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

No need to disprove it. The one who is affirmative claiming, ‘the burden of proof’ implies on him. In this case, you are affirmatively claiming, therefore it implies on you.

Lets start like this: you can apply this burdon of proof to history in the same way you could with physical things. I mean yeah, of course we should do our best to check all the references and weigh up carefully the propabilities of things. And I will do so.

But really I think it is insane (edit: I apologize for the insulting choice of word) to say people who cannot be proven to have existed with absolute certainty did not exist. That would mean that 95% of humanity in the past did not exist, and that I have to prove they did before you accept that they do.

So I'll say again what I said before: you cannot expect to find a lot of documents on Jesus, because he was not at all a big political figure. And the documents that existed are lost in 2000 years of history. You simply cannot expect to find much other than religious texts. This is history. History is not science. Sadly :joy:

So consequently, even if you were right, that Jesus was added to Josephus Flavius writings and Tacitus writings, your claim that He did not exist is at best circumstancial.

I would even say that the history that follows after Jesus death allows me to say, you bear the burdon of proof. There is so much literature on him, so many people who follow his teachings, not only in the roman empire, but also in the holy land, which is basically christian after the Jews are driven out by the romans in 70 AD. There is so much reason to assume that Jesus was indeed historical, simply by the impact he had in isreal alone, that you need to find more than just the lack of mentioning him in official roman writers, to say he did not exist.

[Kaneki-kun]

@AllAboutGay said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@pe7erpark3r If you try to prove Jesus you should at least try to prove gays as well, since gays are by far the most persecuted,disbelieved (and invalidated!) group in the world.

@AllAboutGay is of the opinion, that gays were historical persons.

I hold the position, that gays were indeed historical figures.

So how could one prove or disprove that gays did exist?

The first problem of course is that all that which we are talking about happened 6900 years ago. We have a lot of LGBT texts, in the book of homosexuality and also apocryphical ones that talk about gays' deeds. Is an LGBT text enough to prove a gay's existence?

The question is, what should we expect to find other than LGBT texts? Should gays not be in some register?

I'll let straight people, or anybody who wants to join in, open the debate <3

Please note I'm a gay man, so the debate will be gay like any other 😋

😂😂😂😂😂😂y tho? Why you have to do the bro like this 😂😂?

[Zack Williamson]

@Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

😂y'all searching for Jesus on the internet 😂🤦🤦🤦. When you can just get on your knees (even if you don't at least believe) and ask Him to show himself to you.

YOU WANNA SEE JESUS CHRIST? Well then PRAY and WAIT ON HIM the truth is in every single humans heart but y'all too deaf to hear it.

But the Bible says even Christians do not know how to pray.---- In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. (Romans 8:26)

For those of you who believe, believing is good but it's not enough, get to seek Him. Get to know Him!! The internet is just a confusion device, Jesus Christ is in everyone's heart knowing constantly for you guys to open the door.

You wrote a verse written by Paul. That is nice but Paul himself originally never wrote Jesus’ story in his gospel. The original gospels have been changed according to time for editing and improving the omissions by the transcribers. It was added in the medieval time. Btw Paul himself never met with Jesus -
Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. (Acts 9:8), The Jewish name of Saulus was Paul.

Me personally I Know Jesus Christ is real, He brought heaven to man,

But the Bible states nobody has ascended into the heaven - No man hath ascended up to heaven.” Not even Enoch or Elijah? (John 3:13).

He is God (I Am) made man, Jesus Christ is God in the flesh. God was with man in the flesh! but man was too filthy to recognize Him, too blind and too Deaf! I know God doesn't exist but He IS . God IS (you need to meditate on the Bible (kjv) to be able to make sense out of this)

Y'all looking for prove of Jesus and God is real? Just search your hearts respectively, not google (lol).

But the Bible states we should not follow our hearts-
Seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a whoring (Num 15:39)
And Lamentations 3:18 and 3:44 state he doesn’t listen to your prayers until you don't cover out yourself from clouds
Even when I call out or cry for help, he shuts out my prayer. (Lamentations 3:18 NIV)
You have covered yourself with a cloud so that no prayer can get through (Lamentations 3:44 NIV)

I followed my heart and found Batman in it. Yes I meditated on Batman’s comic book to make sense out of it. Thank you. Second point- a preposition must be true, if there is no contradiction in it. It is one law of logic.

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

No need to disprove it. The one who is affirmative claiming, ‘the burden of proof’ implies on him. In this case, you are affirmatively claiming, therefore it implies on you.

Lets start like this: you can apply this burdon of proof to history in the same way you could with physical things. I mean yeah, of course we should do our best to check all the references and weigh up carefully the propabilities of things. And I will do so.

But really I think it is insane

Burden* Probabilities*
Ad-hominem argument. First respect you opponent and then you may debate.

to say people who cannot be proven to have existed with absolute certainty did not exist.

I said theistic God (with certain properties) does not exist with absolute certainty (in that debate, not this one). God of philosophy is different from God of religion. However, you have always inserted your christian God into a philosophical God.

That would mean that 95% of humanity in the past did not exist, and that I have to prove they did before you accept that they do.

The main proof can be fossil evidence of him. 95 percent of humans existed- we can date their dead bodies with several scientific methods. We have dated 4 billion years ago paintings and our ancestors’ fossils too. We could date his fossil which existed 2000 years ago. Of course scientists have not found any fossil evidence of him- https://medium.com/predict/the-fossil-argument-for-the-existence-of-a-historical-jesus-11d7cdd4a5e7

So I'll say again what I said before: you cannot expect to find a lot of documents on Jesus, because he was not at all a big political figure.

You never said to me so. Maybe you said to someone else. You are debating with me rn, not with ‘someone else’.

And the documents that existed are lost in 2000 years of history. You simply cannot expect to find much other than religious texts.

There will be no reason to debate on this topic if we do not find anything else than his religious texts.

This is history. History is not science. Sadly :joy:

A straw-man argument. You cannot refute your own claim. I never said history is/was science or vice-versa. An evidence is something which can be provided for supporting one’s assertion in any type of debate.

So consequently, even if you were right, that Jesus was added to Josephus Flavius writings and Tacitus writings, your claim that He did not exist is at best circumstancial.

Circumstantial*

Claim or evidence ? I mentioned the oldest edition of Tacitus' book. You can read the date or year of his book. Mr. Spaceboy or you did not give evidence for original writing of him. Where is it ?

you bear the burdon of proof.

I repeat myself- you started the debate with your assertion, I didn’t. I hold the negative position- Jesus did not historically existed. You cannot shift this burden towards me and it is argument from ignorance. You think your thesis is true because it is not proved to be false (supposedly). Until he is not proved true, it is reasonable to say that he did not exist.

I would even say that the history that follows after Jesus death allows me to say, There is so much literature on him, so many people who follow his teachings, not only in the roman empire,

There are more than 12 Gods who were born on the same day of Jesus. And those birth of all 12 Gods were celebrated by the Romans. Romans followed their teachings too.

but also in the holy land, which is basically christian after the Jews are driven out by the romans in 70 AD. There is so much reason to assume that Jesus was indeed historical, simply by the impact he had in isreal alone,

Israel*
Go back to more past (in 4th to 5th centuries). There were some non-orthodox religions which could not reside with Christianity. The scriptures of those religions (awesome books especially in 4th to 5th century) were not copied or destroyed by the Christians. In the fourth century, under the rule of Constantine, his opponents were compelled by threat of death and prison or by dispossession to fall in line.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13812

that you need to find more than just the lack of mentioning him in official roman writers, to say he did not exist.

Did they even mention originally ? Cite a credible website for your claim ‘original lack of mentioning’.

Unless you don't learn how to respect someone, I cannot debate. Therefore, I leave both debates.

[pe7erpark3r]

@Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

😂y'all searching for Jesus on the internet 😂🤦🤦🤦. When you can just get on your knees (even if you don't at least believe) and ask Him to show himself to you.

YOU WANNA SEE JESUS CHRIST? Well then PRAY and WAIT ON HIM the truth is in every single humans heart but y'all too deaf to hear it.

For those of you who believe, believing is good but it's not enough, get to seek Him. Get to know Him!! The internet is just a confusion device, Jesus Christ is in everyone's heart knowing constantly for you guys to open the door. Me personally I Know Jesus Christ is real, He brought heaven to man, He is God (I Am) made man, Jesus Christ is God in the flesh. God was with man in the flesh! but man was too filthy to recognize Him, too blind and too Deaf! I know God doesn't exist but He IS . God IS (you need to meditate on the Bible (kjv) to be able to make sense out of this)

Y'all looking for prove of Jesus and God is real? Just search your hearts respectively, not google (lol).

I've been trying to get this point across to Vex too :grin:

You wouldn't be worrying for lack of Jesus found in some registry, if you had direct experiential contact with Him. You can indeed find Him in your heart, and indeed, as not just the kjv points out, but even many philosophers note that God does not exist: the verb existing is only valid for anything other than God. Instead God is.

And those who approach Him with a humble heart, that is not filled with material things, glamour, fame, skill, money will be able to hear His Voice. For me it happened when I read TLIG. I just recognized His Voice and to this day, I cannot deny that it is indeed His Voice speaking...

[pe7erpark3r]

@Vex-Man said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

But the Bible says even Christians do not know how to pray.---- In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. (Romans 8:26)

Correct, the bible says that the spirit will help you pray.

You wrote a verse written by Paul. That is nice but Paul himself originally never wrote Jesus’ story in his gospel. The original gospels have been changed according to time for editing and improving the omissions by the transcribers. It was added in the medieval time. Btw Paul himself never met with Jesus -
Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. (Acts 9:8), The Jewish name of Saulus was Paul.

But Paul met and spoke with those who did.

But the Bible states nobody has ascended into the heaven - No man hath ascended up to heaven.” Not even Enoch or Elijah? (John 3:13).

And the bible states that the heavenly kingdom is among them in Jesus Christ.

But the Bible states we should not follow our hearts-
Seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a whoring (Num 15:39)
And Lamentations 3:18 and 3:44 state he doesn’t listen to your prayers until you don't cover out yourself from clouds
Even when I call out or cry for help, he shuts out my prayer. (Lamentations 3:18 NIV)
You have covered yourself with a cloud so that no prayer can get through (Lamentations 3:44 NIV)

I followed my heart and found Batman in it. Yes I meditated on Batman’s comic book to make sense out of it. Thank you. Second point- a preposition must be true, if there is no contradiction in it. It is one law of logic.

You do not believe in batman to be real. You did not find batman in your heart the same way we did find Christ...

Burden* Probabilities*
Ad-hominem argument. First respect you opponent and then you may debate.

I am very sorry. You are absolutely right. I should not have said it in this way...

to say people who cannot be proven to have existed with absolute certainty did not exist.

I said theistic God (with certain properties) does not exist with absolute certainty (in that debate, not this one). God of philosophy is different from God of religion. However, you have always inserted your christian God into a philosophical God.

Lets not return to the other discussion please. In this discussion the christians have spoken of the God of religion, and we spoke of Him in the language of religion, for this is how you can find Him.

The main proof can be fossil evidence of him. 95 percent of humans existed- we can date their dead bodies with several scientific methods. We have dated 4 billion years ago paintings and our ancestors’ fossils too. We could date his fossil which existed 2000 years ago. Of course scientists have not found any fossil evidence of him- https://medium.com/predict/the-fossil-argument-for-the-existence-of-a-historical-jesus-11d7cdd4a5e7

This article argues that the people saying "Jesus does not exist" are making a positive claim and thus have the burden of proof. So yeah, good article.

So I'll say again what I said before: you cannot expect to find a lot of documents on Jesus, because he was not at all a big political figure.
You never said to me so. Maybe you said to someone else. You are debating with me rn, not with ‘someone else’.

Woops sorry, that was in the topic's draft only. My mistake. I deleted that...

Point holds however: it cannot be expected to find much: Jesus was a relatively unknown figure in the roman empire... even many of the prominant figures in the israel of that time are not mentioned in non-religious texts, and they also existed. Many high priests of israel are not mentioned at all, there names are all lost. And yet they were the most prominent political figures at their times...

And the documents that existed are lost in 2000 years of history. You simply cannot expect to find much other than religious texts.

There will be no reason to debate on this topic if we do not find anything else than his religious texts.

Yes, a religious text is enough for a debate about wether the person existed, but there is a lot more.

This is history. History is not science. Sadly :joy:

A straw-man argument. You cannot refute your own claim. I never said history is/was science or vice-versa. An evidence is something which can be provided for supporting one’s assertion in any type of debate.

Yes, but you will not find proof of many many historical events. Evidence yes. Proof no. And for many many historical events you will find an utter lack of evidence other than religious texts...

So consequently, even if you were right, that Jesus was added to Josephus Flavius writings and Tacitus writings, your claim that He did not exist is at best circumstancial.

Circumstantial*

Wehuuweehuu grammar police :yum:

you bear the burdon of proof.

I repeat myself- you started the debate with your assertion, I didn’t. I hold the negative position- Jesus did not historically existed. You cannot shift this burden towards me and it is argument from ignorance. You think your thesis is true because it is not proved to be false (supposedly). Until he is not proved true, it is reasonable to say that he did not exist.

No, there is enough evidence of him in the religious texts. It is reasonable to think he exists, since quite a few other clearly historical figures wrote religious texts about him. It is not true, that a religious text cannot count as evidence.

However I concede that it is reasonable to say he did not exist after providing good arguments as to why the religious texts are not enough evidence.

I would even say that the history that follows after Jesus death allows me to say, There is so much literature on him, so many people who follow his teachings, not only in the roman empire,

There are more than 12 Gods who were born on the same day of Jesus. And those birth of all 12 Gods were celebrated by the Romans. Romans followed their teachings too.

Yeah, they follow somebody's teachings about those Gods, which tend to be hundreds of years old. They did not follow a person's teaching, who lived only a few decades ago.

but also in the holy land, which is basically christian after the Jews are driven out by the romans in 70 AD. There is so much reason to assume that Jesus was indeed historical, simply by the impact he had in isreal alone,

Israel*

Israel is just as an ambivalent term as holy land. People know what holy land means. You know what it means. I will continue to use this term.

Go back to more past (in 4th to 5th centuries). There were some non-orthodox religions which could not reside with Christianity. The scriptures of those religions (awesome books especially in 4th to 5th century) were not copied or destroyed by the Christians. In the fourth century, under the rule of Constantine, his opponents were compelled by threat of death and prison or by dispossession to fall in line.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13812

So? Seems off-topic to me.

that you need to find more than just the lack of mentioning him in official roman writers, to say he did not exist.

Did they even mention originally ? Cite a credible website for your claim ‘original lack of mentioning’.

"Lack of mention" means that he wasn't mentioned. It is your argument that there is a lack of mention, not mine. I allowed this claim, despite not agreeing. And I said even if it was true, this is not enough.

Unless you don't learn how to respect someone, I cannot debate. Therefore, I leave both debates.

I am very sorry for my use of the word insane. I need to learn to not use such harsh language. It is not just insulting, but an exaggeration too. Exaggeration is a rhetorical trick, and as you know I despise those. Sadly its an old habit of mine to speak like this (also about myself) so please forgive.

[AbhiKerala]

@Vex-Man I'm not trying to prove he existed. I'm just saying it is possible that a certain human named Jesus might have lived in that era and done some good deeds. I mean you dont have to be divine to do some good in the society. But his followers could easily spread news that he did something impossible. I mean we are talking about a 2000 year old civilization. I have seen people even in these times of science believing some random guy did some impossible things. If you think about it the Christian community could be really small in the time of his death , only a bunch of idiots maybe. But once such a powerful resurrection story spreads people will follow him naturally.
I'm pretty sure that the birth date of JC is fake and roots back to some pagan roman traditions. All new religions have copied from existing ones. Also the story of angels visiting him during his birthday could be fake too(probably made after his death).

But proving he lived scientifically is not easy considering there is no archaeological evidence. This also mean we can't say he did not live either. So the best way to put it would be Jesus was a normal human and his divinity was fabricated after his death by his followers to gain popularity for the religion.

@Kaneki-kun Everything you see happens inside your brain . If you can truly believe something exists you might see random things that look like it. You sound more idiotic as you try to sound more intelligent. No Offence ;)

[pe7erpark3r]

One of the main reasons to why there is today (almost) a scientific consensus that Jesus was a historical figure is an archeological one: that there have been found many many christian house churches in israel from the first century. This means, that people who heard little of St. Paul, believed in christ. Many of them have propably known Jesus in person, or at least their parents have. If he did never exist, such a presence of believers in the holy land during the first century is inexplicable.

Edit (2019-11-10): @Vex-Man please disregard this argument for now. I realized we already have too many open arguments in our previous posts. So let us both try to return to the debate rule we reached an agreement on: only 1 argument per post, max 500 words, then wait for the argument to be answered.

So consequently, if you answer to other people please make a separate post. Off-topic arguments should also be separated from the posts that pertain to the debate itself.

After having answered an oponent's argument I think its okay if we create a new post with our next argument, so that there will be max. 2 open arguments (one of the opponent + your new one).

[AbhiKerala]

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

You do not believe in batman to be real. You did not find batman in your heart the same way we did find Christ...

I used to believe anime characters were real and I used to fight with my friends because they found other anime characters real.
I mean I understand your point man. Some of this anime characters have helped me in my hard times too. Of course then I grew up and lost my ability to believe 100% in imaginary characters. I'm not joking. We all need an imaginary friend. :D