mcdaddy Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Lately I've been persuaded to come to your side from the historical camp. Give me your best reasons why you think Jesus never existed. And for you Historical Jesus freaks, what's your most persuasive argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babylonian Dream Posted March 24, 2012 Share Posted March 24, 2012 The most persuasive arguement against the existence of a historical Jesus, is that there is no evidence of one. As for the best arguement in his favor, there are parts of the Jesus story that are plausible, such as there was a guy who claimed to be a messiah starting a new branch of Judaism, at a time when Judaism was branching off in different directions. Its not really evidence for his existence, but its the best plausability arguement. Personally, I doubt he existed, but really don't care either way. If he did, he was just another Jewish cult leader. If he didn't, he was just another one of those messianic myths popping up at around the same time. Just some jews wanting their own Mithras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qadeshet Posted March 24, 2012 Share Posted March 24, 2012 The Gospel Yeshua never existed. Whether or not there may have been a first centuty carpenter's son who did little and accomplished nothing, really doesn't matter. There is no reason why no writer or historian, who would have been a contemporary, bothered to mention him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tealeaf Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 The best "evidence" for a historical Jesus I've found are the likes of a few ramblings from Josephus, Tacticus, and Pliny the Younger. Aspiring Christian scholars I've talked to like to fall back on this as their bulletproof evidence.... And a whole lot of emotional speculation on top of it. It really is quite pathetic. The first most glarring problem is that none of these guys were alive/writing at the time of Jesus' supposed life. Then there is the fact that there is conflicting writings among them in other areas. Also....this is it. This is really the best "evidence" that is extra-biblical for the supposed "Jesus." A few minor mentions.... None of them specific. None of them spactacular or even unheard of in terms of descriptions of cult leaders. None of these accounts were compelling to the authors either, as they did not convert. And again, none of them were first hand accounts so that cuts it right there. If any of this stuff was for real, there would be evidence that is compelling and specific from his time ALIVE. Instead we have descriptions of early superstitious cults praising typical god-men figures....and even taking notice at the time of how gullible they supposedly were taking things solely on faith. I think it's unlikely everything about Jesus is based on one guy. It is likely a snow-ball effect that after a while gave rise to a set of gospel myths about a plausible nut-job person of the time. I'm undecided and of course open to any new evidence. There is just a glarring lack of it. It doesn't make any differnce in stance though. Real guy or not, there is no proof in the supernatural aspects. And that alone makes clinging to this faith until these times an empty self-serving make-believe delusion. Actually reading the bible makes it perfectly clear that "Jesus" promised to return at the end of HIS GENERATION; similar to how cults now make claims about the very NEAR FUTURE. It's been ~2000 years.... I think it's safe to say this stuff is bullshit and simply nothing special. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akheia Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 I wrote a shitload about this topic in the "Hi I'm Aaron" rant thread already, but Tealeaf has the right of it. Really the best thing one can say is that there were tons of Judean wizard-god-men running around screeching about being the Messiah, and it's not too unlikely that one might have gotten his butt killed, but it's weird that neither the anal-retentive Romans administering the area nor the anal-retentive Jews keeping journals and sending letters made a single note about the Biblical Yeshuah doing a single thing attributed to him. And his story is so jarringly similar to other miracle god-men's myths (like the aforementioned Mithras, Perseus, et al) that it's impossible to see the Gospels and not wonder about why the writers of these gospels just had to copy, practically word for word, these other myths. The utter lack of historical records about this particular Jesus was a major stumbling block for me as a Christian, and it remains the most compelling reason for my disbelief in Christianity today. I still remember sitting in a classical studies history class a few years before deconversion and learning about how similar Jesus' story was to the Mithraic myths and it just hit me like a thunderbolt between the eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Just as in Christianity, there have been different 'flavors' of Judaism, or denominations that differ in various areas of doctrine. Christianity is in no way a form of Judaism and neither is it a branch someone named Jesus invented. Christianity is its own monster that uses parts of Judaism to give itself credibility when claiming they are cut from the same cloth in the same manner in which Mormonism uses Christianity to give itself credibility as a Christian religion because they have a holy book that says so. And the Muslims too use the Christian and Judaic religions to give itself credibility. All of them feeding off of each other in order to keep their wars on humanity afloat. The 'evidence' of Josephus has been found to be fraud for almost 200 years, having been written years afterward to give Catholic claims of Jesus legitimacy. It comes down to the fact Jesus is a fake. Moses is a fake. They only exist between the pages of a book written by those who believe the garbage is true. Historical fiction is fiction based upon historical events. That is the bible--historical fiction. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivingLife Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Most folk grow up with the belief that the bible is some sort of authority. Many folk that delve into origins are perplexed to discover it is all BS and perhaps too embarrassed to admit they have been duped. I mean the anointing and operation of the gifts seem so real if you do not know better; then to find out it was all a fabrication and copies of older myths and so on and so on. Many of us took a hell of a long time to finally let go and suck it up and admit we waz fooled... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsRoper Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 My new favorite title: Judean wizard-god-men - thanks, Akheia. HereticZero, " It comes down to the fact Jesus is a fake. Moses is a fake. They only exist between the pages of a book written by those who believe the garbage is true. Historical fiction is fiction based upon historical events. That is the bible--historical fiction." This reminds me of a quote from the movie Little Nicky, "Jesus this, Moses that, Abraham hit me with a whiffle ball bat. Yep, the Lord sure did say a lot of hibbity, jibbity, bibbity, swibbity." LL: you just described my life. I thought the bible was a real history book before going to seminary and getting disabused of that message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivingLife Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Yeah Deanman, the gospels all harmonized b/c there was an app in eSword that showed the "harmony". I was blinded till an atheist pointed out a few inconsistencies that eSword does not report and the centre margin references ignore. Wow was I surprised to learn where these margin refs came from, some prisoner with time on his hands plus the Schoefield refs that kinda became scripture. 25+ translations plus the amplified plus plus... it seemed so real. Then I asked myself what else is screwed up or mistranslated or fiddled with or... and that was the beginning of the end of my faith. I hung on for awhile as a Universalist but that was just the last stepping stone out of the madness. Needless to say, where I grew up, no one took the A&E and flood literally so that was never a real show stopper, it was merely swept under the carpet of nonchalance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tealeaf Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Hmm LL, perhaps your account of the Red Pill experience can shed some light on some fairly recent communications I've had with an aspiring apologist/preacher in seminary school who is the same age as me. I've had first-hand interactions with the guy on occasions over the years, and went to the same highschool. Earlier this year I was drunk, and decided to go for a Facebook wall-clash in "public." I kept pressing the guy for accounts of Jesus written WHILE HE WAS ALIVE, specifically pressing that aspect of it. One by one he rolled out the names I mentioned above. And of course one by one I highlighted the inconsistancy, fruadulence, and the fact that he was ignoring my specific demand for accounts of Jesus written WHILE HE WAS SUPPOSEDLY ALIVE. He continued to ignore this and try to babble on about other garbage using standard analogies and fluffy bullshit. I hate Facebook and really only use it for shits and giggles. This encounter went on for about 30 posts though, and ended by me taking it off track because it was on someone elses wall (who it all pertained to). I'm just wondering though LL, is that really all they've got in seminary school? I mean, no Scientology-esque secret Jesus tapes or anything? This is really the core? How much effect in terms of seed-planting and Red Pill potential do you think a direct written account in a semi-public venue with an atheist has on a mind that is at least geared towards 'learning' but is obviously far out purchasing it's mid-day meal? Another big piece of bullshit I got was the emotional sentiment regarding Constantine's conversion. "Why would Constantine convert to a false faith?" Needless to say my face and palm became one unit for several hours.... Still, how it feels to live in intellectual dishonesty, knowing it, and denying it like this guy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConureDelSol Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 The utter lack of historical records about this particular Jesus was a major stumbling block for me as a Christian, and it remains the most compelling reason for my disbelief in Christianity today. I still remember sitting in a classical studies history class a few years before deconversion and learning about how similar Jesus' story was to the Mithraic myths and it just hit me like a thunderbolt between the eyes. This was essentially the nail in the coffin for me that made me leave Christianity. Also, I thought there was speculation that the mentions of Jesus in Josephus' writings was forged? At least, I seem to recall that. I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts