The "historical" jesus that never existed

[sealybobo]

It is important to note that we have one, and only one, source of information about the life of this Jesus and that is the Christian Gospels (nowhere else in recorded history or rome or Jewish writings o the time). The Gospels are the sole source of information about this figure; everything that we "know" about "him" depends on these sources.

as to the christian laimes of Josephus to "prove" the historical Jesus

Here’s a neat little paragraph succinctly summarizing one of the many problems with the passage in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus used to “prove” the historicity of Jesus Christ, called the “Testimonium Flavianum”:

“Its brevity disproves its authenticity. Josephus’ work is voluminous and exhaustive. It comprises 20 books. Whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure seditious leaders. Nearly forty chapters are devoted to the life of a single king. Yet this remarkable being, the greatest product of his race, a being of whom the prophets foretold ten thousand wonderful things, a being greater than any earthly king, is dismissed in a dozen lines.”

John Remsburg, The Christ (29)


although one would think this argument alone would suffice to prove this passage is fake in toto. Yet, because it often contended that the TF is the “best evidence” for Christ’s historicity, it is fought for tooth and nail. Hence, the existence of the world’s most famous man essentially rests on a brief and palpably bogus forgery.


Josephus on Jesus Forgery and Fraud Flavius Testimonium

Jesus Myth - The Case Against Historical Christ

Even if he did write about the rumors he heard about this prophet or messiah he didn't meet Jesus. That's hearsay.

By that same logic you don't exist

I dont.

 

[amrchaos]

excluding peach reference to a sentor, the argument for Jesus existence/non-existence appears to be based on hearsay by individuals with an agenda.

Also hortysir,
Because Jews used christians claims to argue against Jesus does not mean they knew he existed or not. What it does suggest is that they found enough fault with the claims in which they felt they can make a sound argument against Jesus being the Jewish Messiah.

Can't very well claim someone who doesn't exist isn't the Messiah

I don't think the issue of Jesus existing or not is the problem. However, a simple trap exists if you claim Jesus did not exist despite if Jesus existed or not.

Better is to concede the idea that there is someone that can be construed as Jesus and argue from OT scriptures that the Jesus is not the messiah.

Then take it up with the OP
It is the title's claim that He didn't exist

All speculation and opinion.....

What is that saying about a lack of evidence is not evidence for a lack of? Applies greatly here. especially with a plethora of hearsay and the possibility of several individuals that can fit some description of Jesus existing around/near the time frame in question.

This story was literally spread by 11 people. Judah didn't get to spread the word.

Yes, the core to whether or not Jesus actually do rest on the (sometimes contradictory)words of several men. However, it is difficult to show that these men did not have a central figure they were talking about.

It is even possible that the 11 added lots grand elaborations in their descriptions, even so that does not negate the possibility that this person did exist(barring the elaborations) and could be considered Jesus.

It is not safe to argue from the "Jesus did not exist" standpoint. Even fingering the incorrect person as Jesus could seriously undermined such an argument.

Oh, by the way--if you consider the OT false, then where is the discussion?

OT false-->There is no Jewish God-->There is no immaculate conception-->There is no Jesus/christian messiah.

 

[amrchaos]

I just thought of something

If we start with the assumption "the OT is false" it does not invalidate Judaism because Judaism is not a universal religion.

However

OT false --> Christianity is invalidated(because it is a universal religion)--> Islam is invalidated(because it too is a universal religion)

In short, if you wish to invalidate Christianity or Islam, one method is to demonstrate that the OT is false. Hence why we have Young earth creationists. The OE'ers don't realize what they have admitted to.

 

[sealybobo]

Can't very well claim someone who doesn't exist isn't the Messiah

I don't think the issue of Jesus existing or not is the problem. However, a simple trap exists if you claim Jesus did not exist despite if Jesus existed or not.

Better is to concede the idea that there is someone that can be construed as Jesus and argue from OT scriptures that the Jesus is not the messiah.

Then take it up with the OP
It is the title's claim that He didn't exist

All speculation and opinion.....

What is that saying about a lack of evidence is not evidence for a lack of? Applies greatly here. especially with a plethora of hearsay and the possibility of several individuals that can fit some description of Jesus existing around/near the time frame in question.

This story was literally spread by 11 people. Judah didn't get to spread the word.

Yes, the core to whether or not Jesus actually do rest on the (sometimes contradictory)words of several men. However, it is difficult to show that these men did not have a central figure they were talking about.

It is even possible that the 11 added lots grand elaborations in their descriptions, even so that does not negate the possibility that this person did exist(barring the elaborations) and could be considered Jesus.

It is not safe to argue from the "Jesus did not exist" standpoint. Even fingering the incorrect person as Jesus could seriously undermined such an argument.

Oh, by the way--if you consider the OT false, then where is the discussion?

OT false-->There is no Jewish God-->There is no immaculate conception-->There is no Jesus/christian messiah.

No one can say Jesus didn't exist or there is no god. You would have to have been there to know if he existed and you would have to be a god to know if god exists. You would have to be able to be in all places at all times because he could be hiding from you. But why would he hide? He's freaking god.

 

[sealybobo]

I just thought of something

If we start with the assumption "the OT is false" it does not invalidate Judaism because Judaism is not a universal religion.

However

OT false --> Christianity is invalidated(because it is a universal religion)--> Islam is invalidated(because it too is a universal religion)

In short, if you wish to invalidate Christianity or Islam, one method is to demonstrate that the OT is false. Hence why we have Young earth creationists. The OE'ers don't realize what they have admitted to.

I'm lost. I dont buy any of the Abraham religions. What am I admitting?

 

[guno]

The nativity yarn is a concatenation of nonsense. The genealogies of Jesus, both Matthew's version and Luke's, are pious fiction. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century CE – the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs.

With multiple authors behind the original gospel story it is no surprise that the figure of "Jesus" is a mess of contradictions. Yet the story is so thinly drawn that being a "good Christian" might mean almost anything.

The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimize the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin, that idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses. The pagan world knew all about virgins getting pregnant by randy gods: The Mythical "Virgin Mother".

Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road.

"Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure"? Don't believe a word of it. Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence.

 

[guno]

5 reasons to suspect that Jesus never existed
A growing number of scholars are openly questioning or actively arguing against Jesus’ historicity

5 reasons to suspect that Jesus never existed - Salon.com

 

[amrchaos]

I don't think the issue of Jesus existing or not is the problem. However, a simple trap exists if you claim Jesus did not exist despite if Jesus existed or not.

Better is to concede the idea that there is someone that can be construed as Jesus and argue from OT scriptures that the Jesus is not the messiah.

Then take it up with the OP
It is the title's claim that He didn't exist

All speculation and opinion.....

What is that saying about a lack of evidence is not evidence for a lack of? Applies greatly here. especially with a plethora of hearsay and the possibility of several individuals that can fit some description of Jesus existing around/near the time frame in question.

This story was literally spread by 11 people. Judah didn't get to spread the word.

Yes, the core to whether or not Jesus actually do rest on the (sometimes contradictory)words of several men. However, it is difficult to show that these men did not have a central figure they were talking about.

It is even possible that the 11 added lots grand elaborations in their descriptions, even so that does not negate the possibility that this person did exist(barring the elaborations) and could be considered Jesus.

It is not safe to argue from the "Jesus did not exist" standpoint. Even fingering the incorrect person as Jesus could seriously undermined such an argument.

Oh, by the way--if you consider the OT false, then where is the discussion?

OT false-->There is no Jewish God-->There is no immaculate conception-->There is no Jesus/christian messiah.

No one can say Jesus didn't exist or there is no god. You would have to have been there to know if he existed and you would have to be a god to know if god exists. You would have to be able to be in all places at all times because he could be hiding from you. But why would he hide? He's freaking god.

Hey

If we start thinking about the fundamental concepts of these religion, you are going to realize these religions are too convoluted and philosophically self contradictory to serve any functional purpose for the God they proposed..

No need to get into that, as simple as it really is, because that is no fun!

 

[guno]

JESUS CHRIST - NO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

IN ONE OF THE MOST CAREFULLY DOCUMENTED PERIODS OF ROMAN AND ANCIENT HISTORY

The time that Jesus Christ supposedly existed is one the most heavily documented periods in ancient history. Yet there is virtually zero historical evidence of his supposed existence in any contemporary historical record. It is also important to understand that an absolute reign of terror was instituted when Christianity seized power in the Roman Empire as documented in our Christian Totalitarianism Report. The Church appointed an official historian of dubious ethics, Eusebius, to write an official history. Meanwhile, Christian launched the largest book burning campaign in history, destroying a vast part of the wisdom and history of the ancient world forever.

The Account of Josephus is a Fraud

When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (Whitson, 379).

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church, and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

JESUS CHRIST - NO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

 

[sealybobo]

The nativity yarn is a concatenation of nonsense. The genealogies of Jesus, both Matthew's version and Luke's, are pious fiction. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century CE – the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs.

With multiple authors behind the original gospel story it is no surprise that the figure of "Jesus" is a mess of contradictions. Yet the story is so thinly drawn that being a "good Christian" might mean almost anything.

The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimize the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin, that idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses. The pagan world knew all about virgins getting pregnant by randy gods: The Mythical "Virgin Mother".

Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road.

"Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure"? Don't believe a word of it. Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence.

Yea. Plenty of evidence Ceasar existed but not the son of god? That's odd. 11 guys had to go tell people who didn't see Jesus about him. Why didn't the church start from the 5000 people that feasted with him. Where is the church they built or the shrines they erected for Jesus.

People came from near and far to hear him preach but their kids werent christians. Jesus' 11 went to pagans and Greeks who already believed in Zeus and Hercules.

 

[sealybobo]

The Greeks built a temple to Apollo. What did the new christians do for Jesus other than make him a martyr.

 

[sealybobo]

Then take it up with the OP
It is the title's claim that He didn't exist

All speculation and opinion.....

What is that saying about a lack of evidence is not evidence for a lack of? Applies greatly here. especially with a plethora of hearsay and the possibility of several individuals that can fit some description of Jesus existing around/near the time frame in question.

This story was literally spread by 11 people. Judah didn't get to spread the word.

Yes, the core to whether or not Jesus actually do rest on the (sometimes contradictory)words of several men. However, it is difficult to show that these men did not have a central figure they were talking about.

It is even possible that the 11 added lots grand elaborations in their descriptions, even so that does not negate the possibility that this person did exist(barring the elaborations) and could be considered Jesus.

It is not safe to argue from the "Jesus did not exist" standpoint. Even fingering the incorrect person as Jesus could seriously undermined such an argument.

Oh, by the way--if you consider the OT false, then where is the discussion?

OT false-->There is no Jewish God-->There is no immaculate conception-->There is no Jesus/christian messiah.

No one can say Jesus didn't exist or there is no god. You would have to have been there to know if he existed and you would have to be a god to know if god exists. You would have to be able to be in all places at all times because he could be hiding from you. But why would he hide? He's freaking god.

Hey

If we start thinking about the fundamental concepts of these religion, you are going to realize these religions are too convoluted and philosophically self contradictory to serve any functional purpose for the God they proposed..

No need to get into that, as simple as it really is, because that is no fun!

Religion or god is all about worrying what happens after you die. Does no good here. Good things happen to bad people and bad things happen to good people here.

Better appreciate the time you have here and now not wait for an afterlife.

 

[HaShev]

Yeah about the eleven guys, none of the books were writen by those they were named of.
Even the church has admited this.
That's because many of those apostles are converged thus given new names.
Writing books in others names after they die and can't refute what you place in their name is wrong in so many levels...in this case would be liken to followers of David Koresh dying and having books in their name writing about David being Christ, it's to late for them to say oops he was not the one he claimed and he failed us, dooped us. However in the case of the NT there were commentaries removed conveniently from the gospels stating in Thomas and even Luke that they realized *Jesus (*which ever christ figure they are attributed to that became converged to the image named Jesus)
was not who they thought him to be as he failed to liberate and deliver them. Even John recanted and turned away after Jesus when placing himself higher then God.
In fact the followers of John state Jesus stole many of his flock and was the false prophet while stating John was the righteous one. This could have been either Yeshu of 100bc or Theudas of 45 ad, but how would we ever know since Jesus is but a plagiarism converged and fictitious figure with only portions of real figures to make it seem historical and real, mixed with mythical ones and borrowed biblical characters and roles.
Even Rome couldn't keep their own mish modh straight.
As seen by how they had to move back his birthdaye which still didn't fit their time line.
They mixed up the sequence deaths of the 2 other Christs in Acts, used for creating Jesus image and accounts and also messed up big time when you realize Lysanias died in 35bc and Herod in 4bc a far cry from an AD era christ which mention these 2 existing in Jesus era.