Is the Bible real?. Or did Jesus not exist

Where did lucifer originate if the Bible version was fake

Welcome @Water1. Please post an introduction in the NEW MAGICIAN AND INTRODUCTIONS area, and tell us about yourself and any magical experience you may have. It is a rule of this forum.

1 Like

I honestly want to knw the answer myself lol all thought i believe , might be wrong , that Jesus is a form of lucifer ?

There is a historic Jesus, all historians agree on that. But Lucifer was a poetic nickname given the human King of Babylon in the Vulgate translation of Isaiah 14:12. It only means morning star, and has nothing to do with the satan.

Lucifer is a Roman God, the counterpart to the Greek God, Phosphorus. They are the God of the Morning Star.


This is not accurate :slight_smile: Some historians believe he was a real person, and many others believe he never existed.


There is a theory the New Testemant was a form of Roman political propaganda. However, Jesus definitely surpasses the typical historical threshold of presuming someone existed.

Key word is presuming.

1 Like

The Bible is stories in symbolic language not to be taken literally


Not so. Quote me a legitimate historian that doesn’t believe he existed. There are fringe historians that don’t believe in a historical Jesus, but they’re not taken seriously. Legitimate historians all agree on the existence of Jesus. Not necessarily the Jesus of the Gospels, but a Jesus of history who was probably baptized and crucified and created a following.

“Today, nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which has to be weighed and assessed critically. There is general agreement that, with the possible exception of Paul, we know far more about Jesus of Nazareth than about any first or second century Jewish or pagan religious teacher.”
-Graham Stanton, The Gospels and Jesus (2nd ed.), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) p. xxiii

“It is certain, however, that Jesus was arrested while in Jerusalem for the Passover, probably in the year 30, and that he was executed…it cannot be doubted that Peter was a personal disciple of Jesus…”
-Helmut Koester, Introduction to the New Testament , 2 (2nd ed.) (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2000) pp. 80 & 166

“Even the most critical historian can confidently assert that a Jew named Jesus worked as a teacher and wonder-worker in Palestine during the reign of Tiberius, was executed by crucifixion under the prefect Pontius Pilate, and continued to have followers after his death.”
-Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus (San Francisco: Harper, 1996) p. 121

“There are no substantial doubts about the general course of Jesus’ life: when and where he lived, approximately when and where he died, and the sort of thing that he did during his public activity.”
-E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus (London: Allen Lane, 1993) p. 10

“In the academic mind, there can be no more doubt whatsoever that Jesus existed than did Augustus and Tiberius, the emperors of his lifetime. Even if we assume for a moment that the accounts of non-biblical authors who mention him - Flavius Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger and others - had not survived, the outstanding quality of the Gospels, Paul’s letters and other New Testament writings is more than good enough for the historian.”
-Carsten Peter Thiede, Jesus, Man or Myth? (Oxford: Lion, 2005) p. 23

“Frankly, I know of no ancient historian or biblical historian who would have a twinge of doubt about the existence of a Jesus Christ - the documentary evidence is simply overwhelming.”
-Graeme Clarke, quoted by John Dickson in “Facts and friction of Easter”, The Sydney Morning Herald , March 21, 2008


This is a FACT : Some historians believe he was a real person, and many others believe he never existed.

Our opinions about his existence doesn’t matter and I really personally do not care. People from both sides will always claim that the historians who agree with them are the best. Understood.

Still, that doesn’t change THE FACT that not all historians believe he existed. Your statement was not accurate. It simply contradicts reality. Doesn’t matter what you believe, doesn’t matter what I believe. We’re not discussing a “spiritual” subject here. :grimacing:

A simple research would show that for anyone who lives all his-her life under a rock or in a cave and doesn’t know that until now, there’s no agreement among historians on the existence of Jesus.

Again, simply claiming that the historians who agree with your point of view “are better” doesn’t change anything. People who believe Jesus didn’t exist, also claim the same thing. And both sides are fully aware of each side’s argument and evidence.

So…let me say it clearly. Your statement was false. Not accurate. Not true. This is not an opinion that we can argue about. There are in this universe - until now - such thing as FACTS in reality. What’s in your head and in my head… sometimes doesn’t matter.

The moon is not made of cheese. Fact. Your opinion, my opinion, doesn’t matter. :slight_smile:

Save your proofs and evidence that you collected in your reply and - seriously - write a book to answer other professional historians and philosophers and thinkers and spiritual masters who believe that Jesus never existed, and already published hundreds of thousands, if not millions of studies and books about it.

His existence is not my concern. I do not care if he existed or not. My reply was only to clarify a false statement you made. It’s not a false statement because I think so or believe so… it’s false because it contradicts reality.

I’m not saying you didn’t have a poker game with Jesus in the astral realm last night. This is not a matter of belief or “personal experience” that will always get us to a dead end in any argument. This is about verifiable REALITY. Search Google, Amazon or Library of Congress or any other source, and you will EASILY verify this FACT.

I hope I’m making sense to you :slight_smile:


This isn’t true, it’s the majority of historians who believe that Jesus was real. Those who do not are the “some historians”. The Christ myth theory is what is known as a fringe theory. Almost no academic historians believe in the Christ myth theory, and you have yet to show any sources. Like I have.

You’re right, this isn’t about opinions, this is about facts, and the fact is that the historical Jesus is practically a settled matter among historians. Go to your local college or university and ask to see a history professor and ask him/her about the historicity of Christ. I would bet on my honor that s/he was affirm that Jesus was a historical person who existed. And then ask him/her what about those who believe in a mythic Jesus among historians. I would be very interested to find what s/he says about it.


I’m sorry, I’m not interested in any of that. You’re repeating a false statement that contradicts physical reality. That’s beyond my mental ability to form a productive discussion :slight_smile:

So as a conclusion, allow me to encourage anyone to do their own research and type anywhere online “Did Jesus Exist?” and find out if ALL HISTORIANS believe and agree that he does exist, or not. Takes less that 10 seconds.

Good luck :+1:


Yes, because we know nothing is posted on the internet without serious academic rigor.

1 Like

People are intelligent enough to know and understand which resources are credible enough to believe or not :slight_smile: They’re not waiting for a fake guru to enlighten them and show them the way to the ultimate truth of the universe! Especially when it comes to well known debate regarding the existence of Jesus among historians. It’s not rocket science, really. So relax and let them find out. Unless you already know the result very well and you don’t want them to find out :wink:


Okay, okay. I think we can safely say that this is a subject that people are never going to be able to see eye to eye on.
The best i can come up with with is…“There were more than one type of Jesus”. The man, the myth, the legend. But that is just me and has no basis in fact. Heck some Americans may even have Jesus working their back garden for them, its just a name.

There was an episode of the beginning of star trek DS9 S2 where they had to rescue this legendary resistance fighter who was a POW. When rescued he was met with people throwing themselves at his feet praising him. He couldn’t handle the exagerated praise and tried to flee, he was caught. When asked by the captain (commander) as to why he fled he explained that everything that people believed about him was a lie and all he did was shoot a man who was caught by surprise in an embarassing situation. The captain told him that maybe it is the legend that is more important than the man. Anyway at the end of the 3 parter he takes a phaser blast to protect someone.

1 Like


The Bible is both real and imaginary but to accept this one must first recognise the true nature of reality. IMO, this is best achieved through self-knowledge.
In terms of stereotypical perceptions of reality, it is highly unlikely that Jesus, as depicted in the Biblical narrative, ever existed. However, the way reality appears is nowhere near the whole picture.


I believe alot of what happened in the Bible is likely based in fact. As has already been stated, there is a substantial amount of evidence pointing to Jesus existing. Whether he was a genuine sorcerer/ divine prophet, or just a conman of sorts, is up for debate.
I’d say that largest piece of evidence against Jesus being divine ( or as powerful as he is portrayed, in the Bible ), is the fact he was captured and crucified. I know Christians believe it was so god could forgive their sins, but it’s a ludicrous notion, as Jesus and god are meant to be different aspects of the same being. Why would a being with infinite power feel the need to kill itself so that it could then forgive the people for breaking the rules it made up?
As for lucifer, there was a thread fairly recently about him. Personally, I believe the Christian Satan is lucifer, who was cast down with the other rebellious angels. This is mostly discussed through metaphor or through someone who has aligned themselves with Satan, through their actions.

1 Like

The history in it is real if even being a biased source of history. The theology in it, it is what you make of it

1 Like

This seems like arguing and not debate, thank you to all who took part, I am going to close this topic.