Historical Jesus, Biblical Jesus

[jerry mcmasters]

I am understanding the usage you and @EvieTheAvocado were using indicates a difference
not sure if I fully understand though
I enjoy getting plastered and talking about this shit for some reason
others may not have the patience obviously
I am still processing the comments

It is interesting shit and is fun to kick around.

I am having a hard time seeing historical christ as a temporal person
to me christ is an amalgamation

The term "Christ" itself is unnecessary for historical purposes.  Can it not fall into a general concept "humans that think they are supernaturally touched"?  They tend to be people embedded in their historical context, part of the religious flotsam and jetsam of their time.  Thought of like that, our "Jesus" can be reasonably seen as an amalgamation indeed, of several things, the main two (I think) being a kernel of a real dude and a heavy layer of myth-making on top of him.  Knowing what we know about modern day cult leaders, is it that hard to imagine our boy Jesus' temporal existence at all, is it really MORE likely the whole thing was made up?  Not that I think any of this is a big deal, but I agree with you it's fun to speculate and toss around.  I guess if you're a Christian (generic you, not you) this shit actually matters, lol.