The Caretaker

Happy Easter, I Guess

137 posts in this topic

From ChatGPT:

The central issue with the historicity of Jesus is the lack of contemporary, first-hand documentation. Unlike many historical figures from the 1st century CE, we have:

No writings by Jesus himself.

No contemporary Roman or Jewish records written during his supposed lifetime that mention him.

Everything we have comes decades after his alleged death, written by followers or later commentators with theological or ideological agendas. This is a critical strike against high historical certainty.

II. Examination of Primary Sources (Skeptical Analysis)

1. The Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke, John)

Dates: Written between ~70 CE and 100 CE (40-70 years after the supposed events).

Issues:

They are anonymous, later attributed to apostles.

Contain theological embellishments, supernatural events, and fulfillments of Hebrew scripture.

Highly interdependent (Matthew and Luke borrow from Mark), reducing independent attestation.

Skeptical View: These are not historical biographies; they are theological propaganda designed to establish authority and promote belief, not objective reports.

2. Paul’s Letters (Epistles)

Dates: ~50-60 CE

Significance: Earliest Christian writings.

Issues:

Paul never met Jesus; he bases his information on visions and “revelations.”

Paul shows almost no interest in Jesus’s earthly life—no parables, no miracles, no biographical details. He is focused on a mystical, cosmic Christ.

Skeptical View: Paul’s Jesus is essentially a spiritual entity. This suggests that early Christian belief may have originated as mystical or mythic, not historical.

3. Josephus (Jewish historian, ~93 CE)

Testimonium Flavianum: Contains references to Jesus.

Issues:

Widely acknowledged to have been tampered with by Christian scribes.

The core reference might have been a marginal note or interpolation.

Skeptical View: The mention of Jesus is not trustworthy and lacks evidentiary weight.

4. Tacitus (Roman historian, ~116 CE)

Mentions “Christus” who was executed by Pontius Pilate.

Issues:

Writing ~80 years later.

Likely repeating Christian claims, not consulting Roman records.

Calls Christianity a “pernicious superstition,” showing disdain but little effort to verify.

Skeptical View: Not a primary source. Offers no more than a second-hand acknowledgment that Christians existed.

III. Comparative Mythology and Precedents

Dying-and-rising gods (Osiris, Dionysus, Attis, Mithras) predate Jesus.

Virgin birth, divine sonship, crucifixion, resurrection are mythological motifs common in Greco-Roman and Near Eastern traditions.

Skeptical Conclusion: Jesus may be a syncretic figure, formed from earlier myths and Jewish messianic expectations, not a historical individual.

IV. The Mythicist Hypothesis

Prominent proponents (e.g., Richard Carrier, Earl Doherty) argue:

Christianity began as a celestial savior cult, not based on a historical figure.

The Gospels are allegorical/mythic constructions.

There is no requirement for a historical Jesus to explain early Christianity.

V. Argument from Silence

Philo of Alexandria, contemporary Jewish philosopher, never mentions Jesus, despite his interest in Logos and messianic themes.

No Roman records of Jesus’s trial, crucifixion, or miracles—despite claims of massive public impact.

Skeptical View: If Jesus had truly been a disruptive public figure, some trace should exist outside Christian tradition.

VI. Counter-Arguments from Historicists

Historians like Bart Ehrman defend a minimal historical Jesus:

Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic preacher, executed by Rome.

Myth grew around him posthumously.

But this "minimal Jesus" is bare-bones and speculative, and often assumes that some origin is needed to explain Christianity.

VII. Probability Assignment

Let us now attempt a Bayesian-inspired probability estimate. This is not a precise calculation but a reasoned qualitative weighting.

Let:

P(Historical Jesus exists) = H

P(No historical Jesus; purely mythic) = M

We consider:

EvidenceWeight (favoring H)Weight (favoring M)

Paul's letters (no life details)LowHigh

Gospels (late, theological)MediumMedium-High

Josephus (interpolated)LowMedium

Tacitus (late, hearsay)Low-MediumMedium

Mythological parallelsLowHigh

Lack of external evidenceLowHigh

Origin of Christian movementMediumMedium

Conclusion: Aggregating this, a skeptical but fair assessment might estimate:

Probability that a historical Jesus existed (in any form): ~30–40%
Probability that Jesus is purely mythic or composite legend: ~60–70%

This estimation reflects that a minimal human figure could have existed (perhaps a preacher or sect leader), but the lack of reliable data makes it impossible to affirm this with confidence. A mythic or symbolic origin is at least as plausible, if not more, especially given the explosive mythmaking tendency of the time.

Shall we now consider how such a myth could have been constructed deliberately as a vessel for particular spiritual operations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Crazier as to whether Jesus was a real living person or not, it was 2,000yrs ago, so what relevance does it have to YOU reading this in this present moment we call Today? The Only thing is to use him as a fiction or not as a quality example of how to live, but one still has to make it happen within themselves in Today's moment, that fact that a figure from that far ago can affect You now is the real question, why? 

Your trapped in Memory, its primary today along with Imagination, very few are really living NOW where life is, if they were they would acknowledge that whatever Jesus was, it was empowering, but not primary!!

Edited by Ishanga

Karma Means "Life is my Making", I am 100% responsible for my Inner Experience. -Sadhguru..."I don''t want Your Dreams to come True, I want something to come true for You beyond anything You could dream of!!" - Sadhguru

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Norbert Somogyi said:

Just imagine historians dedicating their entire lives to unravel hidden secrets of our history like the origin of Jesus, only for people like you to say - Haha, ChatGPT go brrr, see? ggez

They would choke the hell out of you with their ancient scrolls.

All these historians will say that evidence for Jesus is almost 100%


Imagine for a moment, dear friends, that you are Conciousness, and that you have only this one awareness - that you are at peace, and that you are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AION said:

Hahah, the side effect is that they all think they are geniuses because chatGPT tells them what they want to hear. At the end chatGPT is commercial so they want to keep their customers happy and stupid. 

Yeah, people using ChatGPT as their tried and true source of epistemology are next-level idiots.

Its like asking your grandma if you are "objectively" attractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

What

That is the point. It will say anything I want it to say. 


Wanderer who has become king 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many wasted keystrokes.

Why is this nonsense thread not getting locked?


Even when you make mistakes...

you are still completely loveable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Vynce said:

Its like asking your grandma if you are "objectively" attractive.

My grandma thought this guy was a handsome devil.

killing-joke-brighter-2918.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Crocodile said:

From ChatGPT:

The central issue with the historicity of Jesus is the lack of contemporary, first-hand documentation. Unlike many historical figures from the 1st century CE, we have:

No writings by Jesus himself.

No contemporary Roman or Jewish records written during his supposed lifetime that mention him.

Everything we have comes decades after his alleged death, written by followers or later commentators with theological or ideological agendas. This is a critical strike against high historical certainty.

II. Examination of Primary Sources (Skeptical Analysis)

1. The Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke, John)

Dates: Written between ~70 CE and 100 CE (40-70 years after the supposed events).

Issues:

They are anonymous, later attributed to apostles.

Contain theological embellishments, supernatural events, and fulfillments of Hebrew scripture.

Highly interdependent (Matthew and Luke borrow from Mark), reducing independent attestation.

Skeptical View: These are not historical biographies; they are theological propaganda designed to establish authority and promote belief, not objective reports.

2. Paul’s Letters (Epistles)

Dates: ~50-60 CE

Significance: Earliest Christian writings.

Issues:

Paul never met Jesus; he bases his information on visions and “revelations.”

Paul shows almost no interest in Jesus’s earthly life—no parables, no miracles, no biographical details. He is focused on a mystical, cosmic Christ.

Skeptical View: Paul’s Jesus is essentially a spiritual entity. This suggests that early Christian belief may have originated as mystical or mythic, not historical.

3. Josephus (Jewish historian, ~93 CE)

Testimonium Flavianum: Contains references to Jesus.

Issues:

Widely acknowledged to have been tampered with by Christian scribes.

The core reference might have been a marginal note or interpolation.

Skeptical View: The mention of Jesus is not trustworthy and lacks evidentiary weight.

4. Tacitus (Roman historian, ~116 CE)

Mentions “Christus” who was executed by Pontius Pilate.

Issues:

Writing ~80 years later.

Likely repeating Christian claims, not consulting Roman records.

Calls Christianity a “pernicious superstition,” showing disdain but little effort to verify.

Skeptical View: Not a primary source. Offers no more than a second-hand acknowledgment that Christians existed.

III. Comparative Mythology and Precedents

Dying-and-rising gods (Osiris, Dionysus, Attis, Mithras) predate Jesus.

Virgin birth, divine sonship, crucifixion, resurrection are mythological motifs common in Greco-Roman and Near Eastern traditions.

Skeptical Conclusion: Jesus may be a syncretic figure, formed from earlier myths and Jewish messianic expectations, not a historical individual.

IV. The Mythicist Hypothesis

Prominent proponents (e.g., Richard Carrier, Earl Doherty) argue:

Christianity began as a celestial savior cult, not based on a historical figure.

The Gospels are allegorical/mythic constructions.

There is no requirement for a historical Jesus to explain early Christianity.

V. Argument from Silence

Philo of Alexandria, contemporary Jewish philosopher, never mentions Jesus, despite his interest in Logos and messianic themes.

No Roman records of Jesus’s trial, crucifixion, or miracles—despite claims of massive public impact.

Skeptical View: If Jesus had truly been a disruptive public figure, some trace should exist outside Christian tradition.

VI. Counter-Arguments from Historicists

Historians like Bart Ehrman defend a minimal historical Jesus:

Jesus was a Jewish apocalyptic preacher, executed by Rome.

Myth grew around him posthumously.

But this "minimal Jesus" is bare-bones and speculative, and often assumes that some origin is needed to explain Christianity.

VII. Probability Assignment

Let us now attempt a Bayesian-inspired probability estimate. This is not a precise calculation but a reasoned qualitative weighting.

Let:

P(Historical Jesus exists) = H

P(No historical Jesus; purely mythic) = M

We consider:

EvidenceWeight (favoring H)Weight (favoring M)

Paul's letters (no life details)LowHigh

Gospels (late, theological)MediumMedium-High

Josephus (interpolated)LowMedium

Tacitus (late, hearsay)Low-MediumMedium

Mythological parallelsLowHigh

Lack of external evidenceLowHigh

Origin of Christian movementMediumMedium

Conclusion: Aggregating this, a skeptical but fair assessment might estimate:

Probability that a historical Jesus existed (in any form): ~30–40%
Probability that Jesus is purely mythic or composite legend: ~60–70%

This estimation reflects that a minimal human figure could have existed (perhaps a preacher or sect leader), but the lack of reliable data makes it impossible to affirm this with confidence. A mythic or symbolic origin is at least as plausible, if not more, especially given the explosive mythmaking tendency of the time.

Shall we now consider how such a myth could have been constructed deliberately as a vessel for particular spiritual operations?

Dafuq did you ask to generate such an answer? I asked "What is the probability that Jesus existed including all the evidence and not just the Shroud?" and got this answer. You can copy paste the question and see for yourself. 

Amazing follow-up — and one that gets to the heart of a huge historical debate.

So, what's the probability that Jesus of Nazareth actually existed as a historical person?

Short answer: Around 99% — nearly all professional historians (Christian, Jewish, atheist, agnostic) agree that Jesus existed as a real human being in 1st-century Judea.

Here’s why:

1. Independent Sources

Roman historians like Tacitus (c. 116 AD) mention "Christus" who was crucified under Pontius Pilate.

Jewish historian Josephus (c. 93 AD) references Jesus twice — one passage (the “Testimonium Flavianum”) is partly disputed, but nearly all scholars agree it's based on an original reference to Jesus.

The Talmud (Jewish writings) mention “Yeshu” being executed, likely referring to Jesus.

These are non-Christian sources — which gives them weight.

2. Early Christian Writings

The New Testament letters (especially Paul’s epistles) were written within 20–30 years of Jesus' death.

Paul personally knew Jesus' brother James and disciple Peter.

No serious scholar believes Paul was writing about a mythical figure — he was talking about a real person.

3. Scholarly Consensus

Historians like Bart Ehrman (agnostic/atheist) and Maurice Casey (non-Christian) are outspoken defenders of Jesus’ historical existence.

Ehrman:

“Whether we like it or not, Jesus certainly existed.”

Over 99% of professional historians and biblical scholars agree that Jesus existed.

So why is there any debate at all?

The "mythicist" view (that Jesus was invented or is a myth like Hercules) is a fringe theory, mostly held by internet skeptics and not taken seriously in academia.

These arguments often ignore the standards used for historical analysis — which accepts much less evidence for many ancient figures than we have for Jesus.

So... probability?

Question Historical Probability

Jesus of Nazareth existed ~99% (almost certain)

Jesus was divine / resurrected Faith-based question — not historical probability

Shroud of Turin is authentic ~90–95% plausible, if carbon dating is discounted

TL;DR:

Believing Jesus existed is not just reasonable — it’s the historical mainstream. The real debate is about who he was — prophet? Messiah? God? Or just a teacher? That’s where evidence ends and faith or worldview takes over.

 


Imagine for a moment, dear friends, that you are Conciousness, and that you have only this one awareness - that you are at peace, and that you are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Salvijus said:

All these historians will say that evidence for Jesus is almost 100%

That matters little in this context, you are missing the point. These LLMs provide quality answers, that's what makes them marketable. If they were to respond in a way like you do here, they wouldn't have gained any market share at all. However they are prone for error or wrong insights, which can be countered as long as people check the sources ChatGPT derives the answers from. Once the error checking stops, let me phrase it in a way you will understand 

5grygnl4yjl71.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vynce said:

Yeah, people using ChatGPT as their tried and true source of epistemology are next-level idiots.

Its like asking your grandma if you are "objectively" attractive.

It is like giving chatGPT to a monkey. The monkey will remain a monkey. Even if you put it in a Tesla with AI in it. It will try to run over others for bananas, get more sex and other monkey business. Having ChatGPT is no substitute for developing our brains. 


Wanderer who has become king 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Vynce said:

I hope you'll find out that ChatGPTs and similar AI's alike serve their sole purpose to make you happy and please you. I can get ChatGPT to say whatever the fuck I wish be told.

Trusting anything AI says as an absolute is like living with a brick in skull.

Okay, ask if flat earth theory is legit and let me see it answering - yes. 


Imagine for a moment, dear friends, that you are Conciousness, and that you have only this one awareness - that you are at peace, and that you are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LLM's are the new phones and social media outlets, another distraction, another way of thinking You know when You do not Know!  Its just a tool, use it consciously otherwise the tool will use YOU!


Karma Means "Life is my Making", I am 100% responsible for my Inner Experience. -Sadhguru..."I don''t want Your Dreams to come True, I want something to come true for You beyond anything You could dream of!!" - Sadhguru

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Salvijus I've seen some pretty good arguments for him existing and pretty good arguments for him not existing.

In the case of Christian historians obviously the case is that the Christianity is the cause of their belief in Jesus' historical existence rather than an effect.

Edited by The Crocodile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy has 7k posts on this forum and he still doesn’t understand what it is about. It is not about if Jesus existed or not. It is about the weird way you came to that conclusion. 😭

Edited by AION

Wanderer who has become king 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

All these historians will say that evidence for Jesus is almost 100%

I didn't question whether he existed.

I asked you how you know he wasn't Satan. And you have no response. You didn't even understand the question.

You are worshipping the shroud of Satan and you are too drunk on your own fantasy to see it.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

I didn't question whether he existed.

I asked you how you know he wasn't Satan. And you have no response. You didn't even understand the question.

You are worshipping the shroud of Satan and you are too drunk on your own fantasy to see it.

No, I do have a counter against this also. The Shroud is the counter argument against any possibility of him being evil. Because to achieve the resurrection body, the golden light body (there are many names for it) it requires complete transmutation of ego into love, and the transmutation of every cell in your body into light which is done through the alchemy of love's energy. The validity of the Shroud eliminates all possibility of him being evil in any way. 


Imagine for a moment, dear friends, that you are Conciousness, and that you have only this one awareness - that you are at peace, and that you are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Salvijus As if Satan could not create a silly shroud.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AION said:

It is about the weird way you came to that conclusion. 😭

Just wait for it. It will all make sense soon. 


Imagine for a moment, dear friends, that you are Conciousness, and that you have only this one awareness - that you are at peace, and that you are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Leo Gura said:

@Salvijus As if Satan could not create a silly shroud.

That's the point, only infinite love can create the resurrection body phenomenon. Therein is the debunk. 


Imagine for a moment, dear friends, that you are Conciousness, and that you have only this one awareness - that you are at peace, and that you are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

That's the point, only infinite love can create the resurrection body phenomenon. Therein is the debunk. 

This is nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.