Were Jesus and Buddha real human beings?

>>16992120
Buddha was jeebus wasnt

there are no scholars who doubt the actual existence of gotama buddha.

jesus' existence, however, has many doubters.

buddha's life is recorded fairly accurately in the buddhist texts. for example, it's said that he died from food poisoning which caused him bloody diarrhea. would you include such details in a fanciful mythological account of his life if he didn't really exist and die from complications due to food poisoning?

>>16992169
There was a Jesus in Jerusalem recorded around the time Jesus was believed to live

>>16992120
Jesus was probably a real person. As for being anything other than a rabbi or spiritual teacher? No idea.

>>16992120
Yes they were.

And also they were not, just like the rest of us.

psalm 82:6

>>16992169
He knew he was going to be poisoned.

Jesus Christ was not only real but the son of God. It sounds crazy to you now just like it did to me, but when you understand the control system of this world you see he had to exist, otherwise we would not exist the plug would have been pulled.

File: bodhisattva.jpg (78KB, 600x719px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 600x719px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTIVrFV3S2c

>>16992173
They had a census Bureau back then?

>>16992120
Most likely yes.

>>16992234
This is actually one of my favorite lectures of all time. I opened this thread to post it, but you beat me to it. Everyone should listen to this.

>>16992120
Yes to both. You can count on both hands the number of genuine scholars of history that doubt the physical existence of Jesus, but it's a popular myth among atheists and contrarians. Buddha doesn't generally get the same treatment even though the surviving accounts of his life are even more removed from his life than the gospels are from Jesus'. Both lived, taught spiritual reforms and had their biographies embellished after the fact.

Jesus was a human being who reincarnated from higher planes. Buddha was a human which reached enlightenment directly as a human being. There you go OP.

>>16992120
I don't know about Buddha, but it's a pretty good bet Jesus wasn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79Lmmy2jfeo

>>16992120
The Jesus described in the gospels probably didn't exist, but is based on a variety of figures. There were people called Jesus or Yeshua living at the time, and some may have contributed to inspiring the figure in the gospels, but there is very little certainty regarding this subject and the contradictory nature of the hundreds of surviving gospels from the time, along with the elements of them that appear to have their origins elsewhere, would suggest that there is no central figure from which the gospels sprang.

Buddha was probably a real person but most of what's written about him is most likely made up. I know very little on this particular subject, however.

>>16992372
yes
it's fucking rome dog
where do you think the word "census" comes from

>>16992136
This guy
Buddha real
Jesus debatable

>>16994200
>>16992173
Rome had records but there is no first hand contemporary record of Jesus. Even Christian scholars think the Josephus reference is a fabrication.

On the other hand, they found Buddha's ashes in the 60s.

I wonder if there are as many tryhard Asian edgelords who discount the existence of the historical Buddha

>>16992120
maybe, maybe not. whether they actually lived or not isn't as important as their teachings. kindness is no less important a value if it is promoted by a fictional character. some real person or persons came up with those teachings. does it really matter who?

>>16992120
yes to both.

>>16994197
>hundreds of surviving gospels
It's a few dozen, and they mostly arrange into clades like "orthodox" "gnostic" "docetic" etc. The most common thread throughout them all was that Jesus taught a certain set of disciples, often as a revelatory figure.

>>16994200
>>16994283
Find the roman census document where Jesus was supposed to be listed and isn't.
The "records" Jesus is missing from is contemporary historians accounts, and by all Christian accounts of Jesus life there's no reason he'd be mentioned in any of them. Someone writing about ceasars and governors and wars with persia didn't tend to write asides into random Judean preachers. Already by 116 you have Tacitus referencing the existence of Christians in Rome and reporting that their founder was executed under Pilate. The reference to Jesus in Josephus was rejected almost from its first discovery as too good to be true, but even the critical view has the reference to James as authentic.

>>16994497
Yeah, sorry, I mistyped there. There's like, 60-70ish.

>>16992173
There were a lot of Jesus's in Jerusalem around that time, Joshua/Jesus was a very popular name to give boys around that time, just like Mary was the most popular name for women. So finding any record of a Jesus or of any of the names associated with Jesus doesn't necessarily prove his existence.

Even if there was a historical Jesus, there has been so much that was done or said by others, or that are purely fictional accounts intended to score points by sectarian Christian groups added that identifying that individual is basically an impossible task. Even if you could identify the historical Jesus he would almost certainly be rejected by Christians as he wouldn't match the legendary Jesus.

>>16994524
Its a reference to a James, but its James son of Damneus whose brother Jesus was the high priest of the Temple.

These were extremely common names.

File: autismal_driver.jpg (20KB, 238x279px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 238x279px

>>16992120
Yes Jesus and Buddha were real human beings and real heroes...

File: tmp_27921-14419396357191046072059.jpg (822KB, 1577x2060px) Image search: [Google]

822KB, 1577x2060px

>>16994296
/thread