Did Jesus Christ Exist as a historical person? If so, who was he?

[Winston]

"Eyewitness to Jesus", documentary about how new discoveries, such as the Jesus papyrus, suggest that the Christian Gospels may have been written much earlier than we thought.

[Winston]

An unbiased examination of whether Jesus really existed and whether the Christ myth theory holds any water.

[Adama]

People deny Christ, partly because there are sins which are off-limits according to the commandments, which they want to immerse themselves in. So because they don't want to obey, they refuse to believe. They want pleasure more than they want salvation.

But what they are overlooking, is that, if they don't get saved, they will never live again. This life is just a prelude. Its purpose is to determine what your reward will be in eternity. This life is not the end goal. This life is part of the journey. It is not the final destination.

Eternal life will be over one billion times more glorious than this life. David said, at God's right hand there are pleasures forever more. There will be no death. Unfortunately I cannot state much more about the New Earth.

As for those who refuse to believe, eternal death will be a billion times, if not one trillion times worse than they imagine. If a person has ever suffered insomnia, or ever fasted for a day, or ever been afraid of the dark, or come close to drowning, then that is just a preview of eternal death.

All life was created by Christ for His pleasure. Believe or perish (obedience is not faith, but disobedience can prevent a person from getting saved).

[Adama]

I just heard from Glenn Beck, that Hasidic Jews are against Israel.

[Adama]

An unbiased examination of whether Jesus really existed and whether the Christ myth theory holds any water.

Christ definitely exists. God the Father made all things by Him. He is the Creator of this world, and He is the one who has given all of us life. Everyone's soul is in the palm of His hand. He is the source of life, peace, wisdom, knowledge, understanding, love, beauty, glory and every virtue a person can name. He is also the Lord, the Master, and the Commander, the source of Righteousness.

He created humanity to please Himself; for His pleasure, to be His praise and glory, to worship Him. That is why we must serve Him. Because to reject Him, is to reject the virtues which He possesses and imparts onto us: life, peace, joy, wisdom, and love.

[Winston]

Besides Caesar's Messiah, there is a new book now with the same thesis, that the Roman Emperors invented Jesus to pacify violent messianic Jewish rebellions. I just got it on Kindle for only 6 dollars, and so far it makes a lot of sense and presents some strong arguments. It shows you a Roman coin with Christ's symbol on it in the First Century, and also shows you a letter to Emperor Trajan from Pliny the Younger about how he should treat the Christians, which indicates that Christians were not persecuted as they claim. Such historical hard evidences seem to disprove what the Christians claim about their early history and persecution. See below.

https://www.amazon.com/Creating-Christ- ... 01LRP3EDG/



Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity

Exhaustively annotated and illustrated, this explosive work of history unearths clues that finally demonstrate the truth about one of the world’s great religions: that it was born out of the conflict between the Romans and messianic Jews who fought a bitter war with each other during the 1st Century. The Romans employed a tactic they routinely used to conquer and absorb other nations: they grafted their imperial rule onto the religion of the conquered. After 30 years of research, authors James S. Valliant and C.W. Fahy present irrefutable archaeological and textual evidence that proves Christianity was created by Roman Caesars in this book that breaks new ground in Christian scholarship and is destined to change the way the world looks at ancient religions forever.

Inherited from a long-past era of tyranny, war and deliberate religious fraud, could Christianity have been created for an entirely different purpose than we have been lead to believe? Praised by scholars like Dead Sea Scrolls translator Robert Eisenman (James the Brother of Jesus), this exhaustive synthesis of historical detective work integrates all of the ancient sources about the earliest Christians and reveals new archaeological evidence for the first time. And, despite the fable presented in current bestsellers like Bill O’Reilly’s Killing Jesus, the evidence presented in Creating Christ is irrefutable: Christianity was invented by Roman Emperors.

*****

”I have rarely encountered a book so original, exciting, accessible and informed on subjects that are of obvious importance to the world and to which I have myself devoted such a large part of my scholarly career studying. In this book they have rendered a startling new understanding of Christianity with a controversial theory of its Roman provenance that is accessible to the layman in a very powerful way. In the process, they present new and comprehensive archeological and iconographic evidence, as well as utilizing the widest and most cutting edge work of other recent scholars, including myself. This is a work of outstanding and original scholarship. Its arguments are a brilliant, profound and thorough integration of the relevant evidence. When they are done, the conclusion is inescapable and obviously profound.”

Prof. Robert Eisenman,
Author of James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code

"A fascinating and provocative investigative history of ideas, boldly exploring a problem that previous scholarship has not clearly or credibly addressed: how (and why!) the Flavian dynasty wove Christianity into the very fabric of Western civilization."

-Mark Riebling, author of Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler

[Winston]

Some deep thoughts i shared with my friends on whatsapp yesterday about problems with fixed beliefs, jesus, mythicist arguments and skepticism of early Christian history.

[6/14, 7:03 AM] Winston: [6/2, 6:27 PM] Alex From Venice: so your quick dismissal of my logical and analysis skills by assuming they good only if applied to a single field of intellectual activity, it's illogical and very wrong

[6/14, 5:15 AM] Winston: But alex. U need to understand psychology too. Even the most logical people in the world can be closed minded and opinionated. The problem is that when u have beliefs you dont want to change them. You want to defend and preserve them. Both Christians and atheists are guilty of this. Even you are too with regards to your beliefs about jesus and the innocence about jews. Etc. Thats why i avoid having beliefs. They close your mind and make u refuse evidence that contradicts the beliefs. Almost all people are guilty of that. Everyone i know is. Except maybe michael.

[6/14, 5:22 AM] Winston: For example if I showed u some strong or good evidence that jesus was a myth and not historical. Or that jews have been involved in conspiracies or have too much power, etc. Or have lied about history or holocaust. You would automatically reject such evidence like a computer program deleting files. Because your beliefs and opinions on those matters are FIXED and CANNOT be changed. Right? You know that is true. Thus you cannot examine or follow such evidence like a neutral unbiased objective person with no beliefs or opinions. Right? Of course. Even u cannot deny that. Thats how all humans are. Nearly everyone is like that, no matter how smart they are. They cannot follow or weigh evidence with an objective mindset if they have preexisting beliefs on the subject matter that are fixed and strong. Right? You cannot deny that. Everyone is like that. Its human psychoy and human nature.

[6/14, 7:03 AM] Winston: Btw michael i mentioned you above as an exception. You dont have fixed beliefs like nearly everyone does. Including Christians, atheists and new agers and even truthers.

[6/14, 7:03 AM] Winston: Every belief and paradigm has opposing data and evidence that contradicts it or doesnt fit into it. So how can we believe anything? U know what i mean michael?

For example, Christians and atheists can't explain the evidence for reincarnation. Or why astrology, numerology or tarot cards work. So they deny it all, even if the evidence is very strong or persuasive. Or the evidence for near death experiences either. NDEs dont fit the fundamentalist paradigm because most non-christians see heaven or God or jesus during their NDE, which should not be according since all non-christians are supposed to go to hell.

And of course atheists cannot explain intelligent design or DNA or computer code within DNA or RNA or the complexity and design inside all cells, etc. Its a big thorn in their side and achilles heel in their theory of blind chance in an atheistic godless universe.

And new agers cannot explain why theres evil or justify their claim that we all choose our life before we are born, because if that was true everyone would choose the best life. No one would be born as a beggar who dies young of malnutrition.

New age doesnt explain the evidence for demonic possession, like what father malachi martin or reverend bob larson has experienced in exorcisms. Or explain why bad things happen to good people. Etc. Or why all american indians had such bad karma that they deserved to be wiped out. Etc. New agers cant explain all that. It doesnt fit their paradigm.

You see what I mean? No matter what u believe theres always data and evidence that doesnt fit into it.

Even truthers and conspiracy people have problems in their paradigm that cant be explained. They cannot explain why if the monarchy belongs to royal illuminati bloodlines, why they would create world revolutions to dethrone themselves, the monarchs of the world in the last 2 centuries. Etc. That's an obvious contradiction but no one in the truth movement is smart enough to ask it except me. Lol

Arent i the ultimate truth seeker? Lol

So you see, no paradigm is perfect and complete and can explain everything and all data. Unless you come up with your own paradigm that accounts for all data. But that is hard. Its the ultimate challenge. Im certainly trying to do it. Arent you?

Have you thought about all this too?

[6/14, 7:03 AM] Winston: Btw michael do u think jesus existed as a historical person?

Ive been studying the mythicist theory and it has some strong arguments and evidence to support it. The Christians have their evidence and arguments too, though its highly circular of course.

So im on the fence about it.

Btw did u know your hero Michael Tsarion says jesus is a myth and solar deity, based on astrotheology?

Also the greatest mythologist of all time Joseph Campbell, whom everyone admires and respects, also said jesus was a myth and listed many parallels between Jesus, Buddha and Moses that Christians cant deny because they are very clear cut and well known. They can deny similarities with Horus and Jesus. But not with Moses and Buddha.

Its also suspicious that nothing is written about jesus until 70 AD. That means it could have been made up. Its a possibility. Have you seen the caesars messiah documentary? Its free on YouTube now. There are no historical references to jesus between 1 and 33 AD. If christians want to claim that jesus was too insignificant for historians to document during 1 to 33 AD then why is jesus the most famous figure in history today if he was so insignificant during his life? That's self contradicting and makes no sense. Dont u agree?

What do you think of the resurrection of jesus? The Christians have some good arguments for it but they are circular of course. I find it too suspicious. Word gets around fast. When a celebrity dies, everyone knows about it the next day. If someone really rose from the dead, word would get around very fast. Even the roman emperor would hear about it. Jesus would have been called in by roman guards for questioning and inspection. Even the emperor would be interested in whether jesus had some secret for immortality. All emperors seek the fountain of youth.

See what i mean? Too many suspicious problems with the story if you think about it. Plus, why wouldnt a resurrected Jesus show himself today? Or make annual visits for pep rallies with Christians, like amway has? Lol

What do u think? Have u given this deep thought too?

[6/14, 9:27 AM] Winston: Also when u study early Christian history, it ends with Paul, Peter and James getting executed at around 64 AD. Then after that Christianity goes underground and nothing significant happens until 312 AD when Emperor Constantine legalizes Christianity after seeing a cross sign in the sky that gives him military victory.

So essentially Christianity disappears for 250 years. No significant events, names, dates, accomplishments, stories, etc.

Very weird. Very very weird and odd. Makes no sense either. So nothing interesting happened for 250 years? The Christians just lived in underground catacombs and thats it? For over two centuries? Highly suspicious and unusual. Huge gap too.

Also there was no official roman persecution of christians at the time either. If you read the letter and response from pliny the younger to emperor trajan, it indicates that there is no official roman policy or persecution of Christians. So clearly Christians were not persecuted as much as they claim today. If so why would they be in hiding all that time with no history? Very suspicious and unexplainable.

[Adama]

Besides Caesar's Messiah, there is a new book now with the same thesis, that the Roman Emperors invented Jesus to pacify violent messianic Jewish rebellions. I just got it on Kindle for only 6 dollars, and so far it makes a lot of sense and presents some strong arguments. It shows you a Roman coin with Christ's symbol on it in the First Century, and also shows you a letter to Emperor Trajan from Pliny the Younger about how he should treat the Christians, which indicates that Christians were not persecuted as they claim. Such historical hard evidences seem to disprove what the Christians claim about their early history and persecution. See below.

https://www.amazon.com/Creating-Christ- ... 01LRP3EDG/



Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity

Exhaustively annotated and illustrated, this explosive work of history unearths clues that finally demonstrate the truth about one of the world’s great religions: that it was born out of the conflict between the Romans and messianic Jews who fought a bitter war with each other during the 1st Century. The Romans employed a tactic they routinely used to conquer and absorb other nations: they grafted their imperial rule onto the religion of the conquered. After 30 years of research, authors James S. Valliant and C.W. Fahy present irrefutable archaeological and textual evidence that proves Christianity was created by Roman Caesars in this book that breaks new ground in Christian scholarship and is destined to change the way the world looks at ancient religions forever.

Inherited from a long-past era of tyranny, war and deliberate religious fraud, could Christianity have been created for an entirely different purpose than we have been lead to believe? Praised by scholars like Dead Sea Scrolls translator Robert Eisenman (James the Brother of Jesus), this exhaustive synthesis of historical detective work integrates all of the ancient sources about the earliest Christians and reveals new archaeological evidence for the first time. And, despite the fable presented in current bestsellers like Bill O’Reilly’s Killing Jesus, the evidence presented in Creating Christ is irrefutable: Christianity was invented by Roman Emperors.

*****

”I have rarely encountered a book so original, exciting, accessible and informed on subjects that are of obvious importance to the world and to which I have myself devoted such a large part of my scholarly career studying. In this book they have rendered a startling new understanding of Christianity with a controversial theory of its Roman provenance that is accessible to the layman in a very powerful way. In the process, they present new and comprehensive archeological and iconographic evidence, as well as utilizing the widest and most cutting edge work of other recent scholars, including myself. This is a work of outstanding and original scholarship. Its arguments are a brilliant, profound and thorough integration of the relevant evidence. When they are done, the conclusion is inescapable and obviously profound.”

Prof. Robert Eisenman,
Author of James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code

"A fascinating and provocative investigative history of ideas, boldly exploring a problem that previous scholarship has not clearly or credibly addressed: how (and why!) the Flavian dynasty wove Christianity into the very fabric of Western civilization."

-Mark Riebling, author of Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler

Just a little bit of reasoning would tell the reader that this can't possibly be true. Why? Because the vast majority of Jews have always denied Jesus as the Messiah. That alone tells you it is a false premise.

As for money, the person whose image was on them was Caesar, not Jesus.

[Winston]

Just a little bit of reasoning would tell the reader that this can't possibly be true. Why? Because the vast majority of Jews have always denied Jesus as the Messiah. That alone tells you it is a false premise.

As for money, the person whose image was on them was Caesar, not Jesus.

That's because you aren't familiar with the theory and haven't researched it. Like Atheists, you have a small box view of reality and you try to stuff everything into it, but it doesn't work.

The Jews were kicked out and their temple destroyed in 70 CE. So it didn't matter what they believed. As long as the new Christian religion could pacify some Jews that was enough. Many were converted. Either way, Christian documents didn't exist until after 70 CE.

The coin has a Christian symbol on it. I seen a photo of it. You are talking about different coins. I will try to look up the coin online and see if I can post an image of it.

[Winston]

Check out what the great Zen teacher Alan Watts said about Jesus here in this lecture below. He explains who Jesus most likely was, and what he was trying to convey to everyone, but wasn't allowed to. I think this best represents what the true historical Jesus (if he existed) was about. It makes a lot of sense and is worth listening to. Alan Watts was also very witty, funny and had a unique original way of explaining things. You just know when you hear him that he's on a very high wavelength and consciousness that's different than everyone else.

I love the part in the lecture where he says that "People on Earth cannot accept a mere mortal man on Earth being the Son of God, so they had to kick Jesus upstairs in order to deify him." LOL. The audience laughed at that. It's so true. Men cannot accept a mere mortal human on Earth being God or the Son of God, so they had to crucify him and deify him and put him on a pedestal in the heavens. Because people can only accept a God that's up there in the heavens, but not amongst them on Earth. That's so funny, witty and true about human nature. lol



Here's an excerpt from it entitled "What Jesus Really Meant But Wasn't Allowed To Say" which is a great title and very catchy.

[Winston]

The Real Jesus Christ - Timeline Documentary

After the death of Jesus, his followers split into two factions. They held radically different views about their leader – his identity, his message and his vision of the future. One of those factions flourished under the guiding genius of St Paul – and eventually wrote its version of the story in the Gospels of the New Testament. The other faction withered and died away, leaving behind no written records. But what if the losers in this power struggle had written their version of the story? The Real Jesus Christ reconstructs that lost biography of Jesus: an alternative version of his life as it would have been told by those who lost the battle for the succession, but who knew him better than anyone else – his closest followers and his family.

[MrMan]

This is a very liberal reinterpretation of the Bible. There is no evidence that Paul was trying to get Jews to eat kosher foods. Christians used to eat bread and wine with each other. There is nothing inherently non-kosher about either of those things (if it isn't the week of unleaven bread and Passover season.) There were Jewish traditions in Judea against eating with Gentiles at all, no matter if the food was kosher or not, or going into their houses. These weren't written in the BIble. Probably the Hellenistic Jews in the diaspora did not follow these Pharisaical traditions, and it is likely that many Jews throughout the countryside of Judea or Galilee did not usually follow them either. Peter stopped eating with Gentiles after some Jews came from Jerusalem, but there is no indication that James told them not to eat with Gentiles.

The video slanders James with no evidence whatsoever. The video has some outright lies in it. There is no evidence that James taught that Gentiles must eat kosher foods if they are with Jews. That's totally made up. There is no evidence for that in the Bible, and where else could they possibly get evidence? That wasn't the issue at all. It's not a sin for Gentiles to eat beef slaughtered by Jews, and it is not reasonable to think from Paul's writings that he would have opposed this.

There is no reason to think that James supported the Jews who wanted to circumcise Gentiles, either, which was one of Paul's major concerns in Galatians. Acts shows that he held to the opposite opinion.

[Winston]

The documentary above makes some sense. Apparently there was an early Christian sect called the ebionites who followed the version of Jesus by James, brother of Jesus, and rejected Paul's account of Jesus, which they claim was greatly embellished. Apparently James and Jesus' immediate family told of a different Jesus than Paul did. And their account is more plausible and less contradictory than Paul's account. And since Paul never met Jesus, then James account of Jesus is likely to be closer to the historical jesus. See the documentary again below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ftrUdKFKZg

This documentary makes some sense. Paul's Jesus was a pie in the sky theological Jesus. He never knew the historical Jesus. But James did and was Jesus' brother so his account is likely to be more credible. In James account there is no virgin birth or three wisemen. Just a normal birth.

And the crucifixion story doesnt make sense either. The Jewish punishment for blasphemy was stoning, not crucifixion. And when Romans crucify someone they leave them up on the cross for days or even weeks. Not just a few hours like Jesus was. They also dont usually bury the crucified body afterward, but leave it up for animals to consume or rot as a warning to any thinking of opposing Rome.

Pauls story also blames the Jews for Jesus crucifixion. And his texts and Gospels never utters a single negative word about the Romans. But James version of Jesus was of a revolutionary who tried to overthrow Roman rule and become king and messiah himself (messiah in Jewish tradition also meant political royal king too). Thats why the Romans crucified him. This makes more sense than Paul's account of Jesus.

For more info look up "Ebionites" on Wikipedia.

Links to more info about the Ebionites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_the_Ebionites

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ebionites

https://jamestabor.com/ebionites-nazare ... -of-jesus/

[Winston]

This is a very liberal reinterpretation of the Bible. There is no evidence that Paul was trying to get Jews to eat kosher foods. Christians used to eat bread and wine with each other. There is nothing inherently non-kosher about either of those things (if it isn't the week of unleaven bread and Passover season.) There were Jewish traditions in Judea against eating with Gentiles at all, no matter if the food was kosher or not, or going into their houses. These weren't written in the BIble. Probably the Hellenistic Jews in the diaspora did not follow these Pharisaical traditions, and it is likely that many Jews throughout the countryside of Judea or Galilee did not usually follow them either. Peter stopped eating with Gentiles after some Jews came from Jerusalem, but there is no indication that James told them not to eat with Gentiles.

The video slanders James with no evidence whatsoever. The video has some outright lies in it. There is no evidence that James taught that Gentiles must eat kosher foods if they are with Jews. That's totally made up. There is no evidence for that in the Bible, and where else could they possibly get evidence? That wasn't the issue at all. It's not a sin for Gentiles to eat beef slaughtered by Jews, and it is not reasonable to think from Paul's writings that he would have opposed this.

There is no reason to think that James supported the Jews who wanted to circumcise Gentiles, either, which was one of Paul's major concerns in Galatians. Acts shows that he held to the opposite opinion.

Are you sure you watched the whole one hour documentary above? The video doesn't slander James. It is pro-James and anti-Paul. It claims that Paul embellished his version of Jesus as a pie in the sky theological God, and that his theological Jesus was more accurate than the historical Jesus that James knew. It ascertains that James and Jesus' immediate family had a different account of Jesus than Paul did, and since they knew the historical Jesus then their account is more likely to be more accurate than Paul's, especially since Paul never met the historical Jesus. There is evidence that the account of Jesus that James wanted to tell the world was vastly different from Paul, but because James faction lost and Paul's faction won, it was suppressed and not told in official canon.

See the above links about the Ebionites for more info. It seems you are going off what Paul wrote, and what the NT says. If you look at the Gospel of the Ebionites or the Gospel of the Nazarenes, which was based on the version of Christianity that James preached, you get a very different picture.

[Winston]

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... nites.html

Known only from fragments in 7 quotations from Epiphanius, an early Church Father, the Gospel of the Ebionites is the name given to the gospel which was probably used by the Ebionites - a group of Jewish-Christians who were prominent in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. There are several notable differences between the Gospel of the Ebionites and the canonical gospels. The gospel presents Jesus and John the Baptist as being vegetarians, does not mention the virgin birth and records Jesus as saying that he has come to abolish sacrifices. Similar to the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of the Ebionites addresses Jewish identity after the temple’s destruction.

For more information and free PDFs & audio of extra-Biblical texts and more, visit: https://yahushatruth.com/