Was Jesus a Historical Figure?

definitive answer, yes.

as was fred flintstone...

history is a rather wideranging topic, no?

Jesus was born a Jew, he was thinking as a Jew, talking to his fellows as Jew, he died as a Jew and he wanted to reform the Jewish religion. He in no way intended to start a new religion called Christianity.
Luther was also a reformer within the Catholic Church. Luther was born Catholic and died as a Catholic and had no intention to start a new denomination called Lutheran Church. To make the story better Luther is always reffered to as the poor munk. He was not just a poor munk, but a very educated man with a doctor´s title. Then as a married man he was even rich.
It just seems better to always talk about the poor munk who reformed the church than a very well educated man.
People of that time recognized stories about others just like we do today.
Our modern "heroes" are stars in sports, music, film and entertainment preferable flawless.

Such figures as Alexander the Great there is no question about however a cult leader by the name of Jesus who know and who care?

There are probably more people who care about Jesus whatever they are admiring him or denaying him than there are people who care about Alexander the Great.
Then you could also call Luther, Calvin, Mohammed, Buddha and other religious leaders cul figures and ask who cares. Again a lot of people care more about them than about Alexander the Great.

Who care as in if he ever did live at the best he was just one of many cult leaders of that time period that later a frame work of stories was created using his name.

The fantasy stories about this figure did effect the world more then the real deeds of Alexander the Great but that have no connection with the important of some minor cult leader himself.

Once more who care if some cult leader was real or not real as one way or another it does not effect the stories and the cult that grow like a cancer from those stories.

Second comment saab it is interesting that almost the complete list of names you gave we have solid proof that they did in fact exist and that is clearly not the case for the Jesus figure.

If he did exist he was not all that important during his lifetime unlike say Mohammed only gaining frame centuries afterward when a cult was build up in his name.

The writers could had pick any other name and any other cult leader real or not for thier stories to connect to.

So once more who care if there was "real" Jesus or not any more then if there was a man name Zeus that was a friend of the story teller who created that god.

I thought the whole point of this thread was to offer some evidence of that, not just to state it with conviction.

Whatever Jesus was a historical person or a myth his parents were
Jewish or at least his mother depending on your belief
He belonged to the Jewish community
He was not a Christian as some people believe as Christianity did not exist until after his death.
Whatever you believe he lived or not there still are scriptures about how he thought and talked.
These stories were not made up by CNN or BBC or something like that but comes from Jewish background.
That is evidence enough for me to be convinced about Jesus being a Jew.

I think we're done here. At least I am. Nice chatting. See ya on other threads.

We don't even know if he existed. So how can you be talking about his parents.

Are you saying that "in the myth" he was Jewish and his parents were... ? If so, then one myth is as good as any other.

This is like talking about the real parents of superman instead of humans who raised him. Kind of both silly and pointless would you not say saab?

I see no reason to doubt that Jesus actually existed. I am "reasonably" certain both Socrates and Jesus existed. We are talking about ancient times. I do not expect to find physical evidence of everyone who lived thousands of years ago.

There is a distinction to be made here which you are either ignoring, or haven't taken the time to think out. These people were contemporaries or near contemporaries of Isocrates. There are no such contemporaries or near contemporaries of the putative Jesus who have left us such accounts. All accounts we have date from the late first century at the earliest, and the copies we have of them are from the fourth century or later. All alleged contemporary accounts such as Flavius Josephus are highly suspect, and even the account in the Annals of Tacitus was not published until the early second century, never mind that it is very likely an interpolation for the reasons given.

Personally, i consider it a fifty-fifty shot. Either there was a Rabbi Yeshuah, a Joshuah the Teacher, about whom the more than ridiculous accounts called the testaments were written (they are historical fairy tales for reasons to numerous too go into here), or, there was a group of Essenes whose teachings were personified with a character known as Joshuah the Teacher.

Far more important than whether or not this joker lived is the bullshit which is passed off in the testaments, and the worse bullshit derived from the constructions put on "scripture" by the adherents of a sect--and Saab, who usually gets very little right is absolutely correct in stating that this was a Jew who was preaching to Jews about the practice of their religion. There is no reason to assume that it was the intent of this Joshuah the Teacher (if he ever lived) or of the Essenes to change the religion of the Jews into an all new sect.

Fifty-fifty is also good enough for me, Setanta. Even if events described in the testaments were invented, there is a fifty-fifty chance that Rabbi Yeshuah actually existed. You know, of course, that some believe that Socrates was entirely invented by Plato.

Yeah, but Plato would have had to have had the collusion of a lot more writers, which is unlikely.

If Jesus did not exist, and all accounts are fiction, then why would the accounts have made him Jewish, considering Jews were not exactly high in pagan society? Also, assuming his early followers were supposed to be Jews, and the faith only became a Gentile faith, more or less, after Constantine made it acceptable, then why would those early Jewish followers of Jesus have a need to develop a fictional adjunct to Judaism?

There is also the thought that paganism was losing its grip on the collective thinking of the masses, and like the Romans putting Roman names onto Greek gods (I thought), then it makes a lot of sense that a Jewish sect was utilized as a transition away from paganism/idolatry. Why reinvent the wheel?

There is no where need the level of evidence that a man name Jesus exist compare to Socrates or any number of others men in history.

As far as him being the son of god and the virgin birth and the raising of the dead and on and on come up now we are not children or are we?

Ex-Ordinary claims demand ex-ordinary proof and here we have zero proof and every sane reason to class such claims along with many others make throughout history before and since.

In my own lifetime a very powerful cult had risen base on the writings of a third rate science fiction author and a hundred years before my birth a cult that is now consider by most a fairly main steam religion was born and now “control” a large percent of population of one of our states.

All the supernatural nonsense including the claims of a son of god that is credit to Jesus have roots dating back a thousands years before the time of “Jesus” at least.

Because this silly cult begin in a Jewish area!

Sentanta
I have never met a person in Europe - they might exist - who do not think Jesus is a historical person. Of course religious people belive so, people who are very sceptical regarding virgin birth, Jesus being son of God still believe he is a historical person, people who are not religious at all also believe Jesus is a historical person. That is one point they all seem to agree.

What might add its impetus to any American doubtfulness, regarding Jesus having existed, might include an anti-Christian position of some of the gay community? America (U.S.) is not as comfortable, in many parts (especially the Evangelical born again regions), with the gay community, as perhaps large segments of Europe. Pehaps, the belief is that if Jesus can be fictionalized, then Christianity would dissolve, and with it a supposed cause for some anti-gay feelings.