Why do people get mad if I think that Jesus was made up?
968487
Beacuse you are messing with deep seated beliefs indoctrinated into the masses over centuries. Trying to change the effects of brain washing is never easy!\n\nHowever, I believe Jesus DID exist and walk upon the Earth. The point is that he was a spiritually advanced prophet, preacher and healer. It was due to his "Miracles" that people elevated him to "Godly" status, he never claimed that for himself. (He stated he was the "Son of God"). That is where the difficulties arise.
637133
There are plenty of criticisms of Jesus (or the authors of the New Testament) on the internet. Contact me and I will give you a few. No room to list them all here.
712923
I think religious wars and squabbles can be the most violent, Sol.  I do believe that Jesus is a real Person, but that SO many people have given Him such a bad name that not many people want anything to do with Him anymore.  However, history actually proves that the Person called Jesus did in fact rise from the dead, and that the Jewish leaders of the time planned a coverup story with the Romans to say that Jesus' body was stolen by His followers.  There's a book called "Evidence That Demands A Verdict" about the real, historical life of Jesus, His death, His resurrection, and His ascension out of earth to Heaven.  What I tell you is based on writings both outside of the Bible as well as from nonChristians.  You can do some research on it if you want to find out more.
674027
You sound so very angry. Are you in hell already?  Calling people inbreds because they believe in Jesus doesn't sound very enlightened or intellectual to me.  If you don't want to see Jesus as the way, then follow your own spiritual path in whatever way your soul leads you ... but be kind to others and respect their beliefs.  I wish you peace and love in your spiritual search.
29965
There are so many controversies regarding the actual life of Jesus, or lack thereof, because no one really knows what happened.  There is an extreme lack of physical evidence regarding his life.  The Bible wasn't written during his life, so even that's not a direct source.  You could set your life's work to prove any given controversy about Jesus and perhaps make some headway.  So in answer to your question, no one knows.
371661
The "Dead Sea Scrolls" don't prove that the Jesus of the Bible was a real person, nor do they prove that such a person performed the miracles attributed to him. \n\n"Noah's Ark" has never been found. That was a hoax and has been well-documented. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ark-hoax.html\n\nJust like all the other gospels, Judas' gospel proves nothing. The gospels in the Christian bible as we have it today, were written by anonymous authors, decades after Jesus' alleged death, with numerous contradictions, and they weren't eyewitness accounts.\n\nLaws aren't based on Christian principles. The idea of not killing one another, and treating others as you'd have them treat you, have been around much longer than Christianity has. In fact, the so-called "golden rule" was taught by Buddha hundreds of years before the Jesus story popped up.\n\nIf you want to look at Christian principles, let's see what Jesus allegedly said:\n\nLuke 14:26\nIf any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (The word "hate" in that verse is "miseo", the Greek word. The same one from which we get other words that indicate hatred, like "misogynist." It definitely means HATE.)\n\nMatthew 10:35-36\nI am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.\n\nLuke 19:27\nBut those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. (This one is a parable, but read it and make no mistake: who do you think the king is?)\n\nMark 14:3-7\nYe have the poor with you always. (Here, expensive oil is used on Jesus. Instead of using the oil to sell to provide money for the poor, this was his response: "You'll always have the poor." How compassionate.)\n\nThe fact that the Christian religion is supposed to fulfill Judaism, yet completely contradicts it should be more than enough evidence to undermine Christianity, but the ignorance of Christians when it comes to the origins of their own religion prevents them from looking beyond what they're taught at church.\n\nChristianity is supposed to be the "fulfillment" of the "Old Testament" - if so, the Jewish Bible is what must be used to determine what such fulfillment will consist of. Using the Jewish Bible, it can be shown that to date, no one has come who has fulfilled the requirements of the Jewish Messiah. Furthermore, the Messiah was only ever for the Jews - not the Gentiles - so even if Jesus *had* been the Messiah, it wouldn't concern a non-Jew, anyway.\n\nOutside of the Christian bible, which was written by a combination of anonymous authors and Paul (a self-confessed liar), there is nothing to support the existence of an historical Jesus whatsoever. There is nothing that is both historical and contemporary to show that there ever was a Jesus of the Christian bible at all. The so-called Josephus passage that is often cited, was not contemporary (Josephus never saw Jesus, let alone met him), and that single passage is agreed by the majority of historians to be a forgery. After all, if he truly believed Jesus to be "the Christ", why was only ONE sentence devoted to Jesus in all his writings, and why did Josephus himself remain a Jew? Not very convincing.\n\nExtraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I, too, was once a wide-eyed believer. I truly believed with every fibre of my being that Jesus was Lord. Then I saw the light.\n\nI strongly recommend you research your claims and your supposed evidence a little more thoroughly. They're the same pieces of "evidence" that I once believed existed as well.\n\nGood luck on your journey.
463231
Its another fake Gospel written by an early christian sect who obviously had no contact with Jesus, the disciples or the disciples followers. It was common for christian sects with no direct link to church founders to create bogus gospels to support there beliefs.\nIf the gospel is real it would have been mentioned somewhere in the ancient history or copies of it would have surfaced elsewhere. Not to mention a true gospel always matches with what the rest of the bible says.\nPeople have a bad habit of thinking if a text is old then it must be a part of Gods word.  This is not true!
171515
I agree with your statements. \n\nMost people like to believe everything others accept as truths - it is so much easier that way. Not everyone has the intellect or time or truth seeking characteristic in them to make them want to find out the absolute truth (if it exists!). \n\nHere are some other things I question:\n\n1) the book of Mark was the first recorded version of the synoptic gospels (the other books follow mark) - however, early versions (about 50 AD) ended at mark 16:8 and did not include anything about the resurrection.\n\n2) I suppose you are discussing the literary christians - have people really looked at the teachings of the gnostics? Their interpretation makes a lot more sense to me. Perhaps jesus was married to Mary Magdalene....and Saul/Paul was a woman hater....\n\n3) isn't it strange that Paul ursurped the new testament (his teachings take over from those of the apostles after the gospels)? Does this make sense to anyone else - if paul was the right person to expand the religion, why did Jesuah ben joseph (Jesus to most) not accept him as an apostle? Oversight?\n\n4) Popes through the ages have committed incesteous acts, organised murders, led crusades against Christian parties (Saracens were Christians), meddled in politics, made huge errors in scientific terms (earth is flat and all that)...and people still believe that they would not edit the bible to suit their own needs?\n\n5) Most of what Christians believe today were decided at the Council of Nicea (Apostle's creed, Holy Trinity etc etc) - does this make sense? A group of old men telling future generations what to believe rather than letting them make up their own minds?\n\n6) Everything is based on faith. If you wanted to buy a stereo but you could not try it (you have to pay upfront of course), would you do so? You have to rely on faith that it is good and it works....Does this make sense? Can faith be described as ignorance and acceptance of what people tell you without being able to find out the truth? if Thomas can ask questions, are we not allowed to do so as well or is he just an exception?\n\nWhat irks me most are the bible loving people who have not read and have not bothered to do more research on the basis of their beliefs and yet come around and preach to others. isn't it a case of "blind leading the blind", and perpetuating the infallibility of the bible?\n\nI remember a Jehovah Witness telling me that he believes the bible to be true so I should as well. I asked him if a madman genuinely believed he was Napolean Bonaparte, does it make him Napolean? Of course not, this is a subjective belief. Perhaps this is it: we will never find objective evidence to prove religion either way and can only decide subjectively if we want to believe. \n\nBTW, for every example of a scholar who converted to Christianity after doing research, there are also the opposite cases, where scholars have given up their beliefs due to their findings. To quote one or the other as irrefutable evidence of the truth/untruth is probably naive.\n\nHowever, in my search for the truth, I have not come across the indication that the First Holy Roman Emperor removed all references to reincarnation. I question this quote from you.... \n\nUltimately, I ask if the teachings have harmed humanity and I think that my answer is no. The teachings of the bible are in essence good but only intellectual flyweights would believe it wholeheartedly and as literal truth.
732458
My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge\n\nIf you want to know more about Jesus becoming God then \nread the book When Jesus became God it is true he is not\nGod He also told his disciples when ask if one could sit on the right side of him in heaven and he said it is not mines to give \nit is up to my father. I have did extensive research on this and the book is the only evidence other than scripture that i have but people have gotten upset with me because of what i be live it was around 425 A.D. the Nicene creed 4 century is where the emperor Constantine and the pope voted on the humanity and spirituality of Jesus and they voted him God the Church need to fully tell the truth and stop lying to people but they wont but remember what the bible said about the whore of Babylon she has many daughters. Also might i add the bible speaks about nation before the ere was churches and what not as women
1125891
This is real and the fact is you don't have any evidence to think otherwise than what was fed to us by so called thinkers who seek to explain the sinful reality we live in. Jesus came to this reality to save us and we should believe that and accept it or else you will have to excuse to say why you didn't believe in the reality that you knew and had the facts about.
357853
Look at it this way.  Jesus was an ancient Middle Eastern Jew.   These guys were not clean and certainly didn't dress well.  If you saw a smelly guy in rags on the corner screaming that he was the son of god---would you believe him?  Most folks would walk to the other side of the street just to aviod him.
1182940
Christians are upset because it raises questions about the authenticity of the church, bible, etc.   It brings up valid history, some valid theories, but puts in a little bit 'o fiction as well.\n\nChristians are upset for 2 reasons:\n\n1- They don't want to believe these theories are true.\n\n2- The book doesn't seperate what's fact from what's theory.  For example, the book says that there are several gospels left out of the bible.  FACT.  It says that some gospels imply that Mary and Jesus had a relationship.  FACT.  It says that Jesus and Mary were married...THEORY, not fact.  It says that Jesus kissed Mary on the mouth...FICTION.  There is a hole in the parchment here, we don't know where he kissed her.\n\nSo, take ideas they don't like and mix it in with theories the book's characters assume are true...and you've got some upset Christians.\n\nThe history explained in The Da Vinci Code is about 50% fact, 40% theory-assumption, and 10% false.
1095178
i agree with you and I think that people are hard pressed to look at their beliefs objectively and have a sense of history...all religions have eventually been shown to be false or proven wrong, its only a matter of time for christianity..And also there is just as much historical proof that some greek myths occured and were based on truth just like the bible..Just think about Troy which was considered a myth and not a real city until it was discovered in the 20th century..
643125
You obviously never heard the stories of Jesus accepting sinners, lepers and pagans when Jews of his time shunned and out casted these people.  Do you bash Christianity because it teaches that being gay is wrong or are you just not knowledgeable about Christianity?  It sounds like you're bashing Christians.
607677
Jesus was an OK guy.  He believed that we should love one another.  It's the Christians that are really annoying.  Too often they think they have all the answers and it usually goes, "Jesus is the answer!" But what is the question?  Furthermore, when there is no doubt, there is no need for further inquiry, brain atrophies and emotions elicit violent anger when "true beliefs" are confronted by empirical evidence.  Intolerant certainty leads to arrogance, haughtiness, condescension, and self-righteousness.  I do not want to spend eternity with brain dead Christ fans.
224006
because christians get pissed when you make them think! ;)
984437
There IS supporting evidence that proves that is was indeed written at the time it should have been. Christians refuse to believe in anything to do with it, simply because it would shred a major part of the Christ myth. It's amazing - even with the knowlegde they have of how the bible was constructed, and even knowing that many books were taken out of the bible as being heresy, they refuse to admit it might possibly be true. Why is it so hard to believe?  It was Judas' destiny to do it! And Jesus must have known that, too! If Judas was, as the text says, Jesus' favorite, and the one chosen, why is that bad? Jesus knew he had to die, he even knew where and how. All Judas did was help the prophecy be fulfilled. And to say his family wrote it to clear Judas' name is just stupid. Be open minded, people! You say you're enlightened by the Word - then you should be able to look at this with open minds.