Could Jesus Have Been Simply a Fraud?

[oldbadger]

I believe most do.

Most Claim he was a unknown author writing about past events he knew nothing about.

...... can you show any evidence that would support their reasoning? The book itself shows that this is a compilation of witness accounts in many parts.

Why Scholars Doubt the Traditional Authors of the Gospels |

“Neither the evangelists nor their first readers engaged in historical analysis. Their aim was to confirm Christian faith (Lk 1.4; Jn 20.31). Scholars generally agree that the Gospels were written forty to sixty years after the death of Jesus. They thus do not present eyewitness or contemporary accounts of Jesus’ life and teachings.”

......... boring...... to attack Mark you jumble it up with the other gospels, srtuff them all in a blender, treat em all the same. Sad.

The mainstream scholarly view is that the Gospels are anonymous works, written in a different language than that of Jesus, in distant lands, after a substantial gap of time, by unknown persons, compiling, redacting, and inventing various traditions in order to provide a narrative of Christianity’s central figure, Jesus Christ, to confirm the faith of their communities.

..... stuff em all in a blender. Mix it all up. Muddle it all together. This is muddled.

Stop hiding behind your 'scholar of the moment' and debate for yourself. Either that or pick a scholar and stick to her/him.

Right now this happens to stand as the knowledge taught in every credible university around the world as common knowledge.

And you have failed miserably to refute it

..... in twenty years, or less..... your scholars will be somewhere else.....
..... and No...... there is no universal opinion abot any of it.

 

[oldbadger]

Finding your Jesus is wholly a subjective exercise, everyone has their own opinion, and it is easy to see the various Jesus' in the examples below, but which one is the real Jesus is anyone's guess,

so,

Find your Jesus:


Jesus the Myth: Heavenly Christ

• Earl Doherty
• Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy

Jesus the Myth: Man of the Indefinite Past

• Alvar Ellegård
• G. A. Wells

Jesus the Hellenistic Hero

• Gregory Riley

Jesus the Revolutionary

• Robert Eisenman

Jesus the Wisdom Sage

• John Dominic Crossan
• Robert Funk
• Burton Mack
• Stephen J. Patterson

Jesus the Man of the Spirit

• Marcus Borg
• Stevan Davies
• Geza Vermes

Jesus the Prophet of Social Change

• Richard Horsley
• Hyam Maccoby
• Gerd Theissen

Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet

• Bart Ehrman
• Paula Fredriksen
• Gerd Lüdemann
• John P. Meier
• E. P. Sanders

Jesus the Savior

• Luke Timothy Johnson
• Robert H. Stein
• N. T. Wright

Oh my God......
What a feast.
Thank you so much.

Of course, this is how you get rid of debaters!
You give 'em so much to read that they're never seen again!

 

[oldbadger]

Jesus took over JtB teaching, Jesus did not teach until JtB was dead is the expected reality here.

Herod was surprised that someone was teaching so similar to JtB he thought JtB had risen.

........ wake up.....
........ that's what I copied, straight out of G-Mark. You just mis-read it.
....... but if Josephus is correct (he was not always accurate) then JtB might have still been in prison whilst Yeshua was crucified..... or the gospel accounts about this are simply wrong.

3 possibilities..... or more.

 

[Thief]

No he does not


It is told in time just not in detailed time. As we would expect from someone not witness to anything.

Jesus took over JtB teaching, Jesus did not teach until JtB was dead is the expected reality here.

Herod was surprised that someone was teaching so similar to JtB he thought JtB had risen.


What cant you wrap your head around exactly?


The NT is not going to go into detail about Jesus being JtB student, because it lessens jesus divinity. The NT goes into great deal to hide this embarrassment.

There are differences between gospels....take your pick.
John has the Carpenter with disciples three days after His baptism....

 

[steeltoes]

Oh my God......
What a feast.
Thank you so much.

Of course, this is how you get rid of debaters!
You give 'em so much to read that they're never seen again!

I see these different Jesus' as I read the different analysis, I agree with them all to an extent but they all can't be true, so I would conclude that we are engaged in a truly subjective exercise. Which is the real (non) historical Jesus, who knows? Do all these differing conclusions demonstrate that we can't know?

 

[outhouse]

There are differences between gospels....take your pick.
John has the Carpenter with disciples three days after His baptism....

The unknown authors had no clue, what really happened.

Its why I stated they have no detailed time, they could not, They did not know it.

 

[outhouse]

.....


......... boring...... .

Was the refutation you tried to do.


Do you think the gospels were written to confirm Christian faith?

you jumble it up with the other gospels

Isn't that what the unknown authors did?


Mark was a compilation, so was Luke and Matthew. Mark was jumbled up with the other gospels.

And finding two passages that confirm Christian faith is not jumbling up anything.


Why don't you read the whole article and try and find a mistake and then we can debate properly, instead of you just throwing out unsubstantiated comments that do not apply.

 

[steeltoes]

The unknown authors had no clue, what really happened.

Its why I stated they have no detailed time, they could not, They did not know it.

Oh, so this is why we have forums like this, so posters can tell us what really happened.

 

[oldbadger]

I see these different Jesus' as I read the different analysis, I agree with them all to an extent but they all can't be true, so I would conclude that we are engaged in a truly subjective exercise. Which is the real (non) historical Jesus, who knows? Do all these differing conclusions demonstrate that we can't know?

I opened the first 'lead' and discovered that I already had these intros to the various scholars..... all but 'Price'. But I appreciate the trouble you took.

Because the available evidence is so secondary, tertiary and indirect, opinions must be subjective. But that is true of a lot of history.

What it clearly shows is that with such diversity of conclusions amongst the academics, it might be best to snatch their discoveries whilst leaving their opinions safely in their own pockets.

And so all we can do is 'take interest', 'discuss' and even 'argue' over the threadbare details, and some can choose to come to a belief or opinion about HJ.

Only one thing is sure; we come back to it. We keep following it. We can't seem to keep away from it. All sides of the debate seem locked into it, much to the impatience of some other members.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

What it clearly shows is that with such diversity of conclusions amongst the academics, it might be best to snatch their discoveries whilst leaving their opinions safely in their own pockets.

But what fun would it be if we could not beat our opponents upon the head with the 'scholarly consensus'?

 

[outhouse]

But what fun would it be if we could not beat our opponents upon the head with the 'scholarly consensus'?

Yes because appealing to ignorance is so much fun. :ignore:

 

[oldbadger]

But what fun would it be if we could not beat our opponents upon the head with the 'scholarly consensus'?

............ consensus...? If there was some consensus of opinion it might help, but there are as many ideas as blooming scholars. If I ruled the world I might allow scholar hunts, rather like the old witch-hunts. They would have to hide out in scholar-holes. He he..... we could breed scholar-terriers and packs of scholar-hounds. Wonderful sport. There would be a closed season, of course, so they could breed, I mean, you wouldn't want them to become completely extinct!

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Yes because appealing to ignorance is so much fun. :ignore:

Really? Why is it fun?

The whole HJ thing is just a game for you?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

............ consensus...? If there was some consensus of opinion it might help, but there are as many ideas as blooming scholars.

More. Put three scholars in a room and pretty soon you'll have 18 opinions being fiercely contested.

 

[oldbadger]

More. Put three scholars in a room and pretty soon you'll have 18 opinions being fiercely contested.

..... only 18? That's too simplistic for 'em.

 

[outhouse]

More. Put three scholars in a room and pretty soon you'll have 18 opinions being fiercely contested.

Yet a historical core will not be disputed or argued.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Yet a historical core will not be disputed or argued.

What is an 'historical core'? Can you define and explain that for me?

 

[steeltoes]

What is an 'historical core'? Can you define and explain that for me?

It's probably along the lines of reading The Bible as if Jesus is historical.

 

[outhouse]

What is an 'historical core'? Can you define and explain that for me?

Baptism by JtB and Crucifixion on a cross. That is the factual historical core at this point and time.

Then we can add as most probable to the point of certainty. He was a Galilean from Nazareth who was a traveling apocolyptic teacher who made at least one visit to the temple where he caused a disturbace and was placed on a cross when Pilate and Caiaphas were in charge.

Both of the above, is the basic historical core not in dispute.


After that there are different degrees of probability.

 

[steeltoes]

In other words, it's in The Bible, I believe it, that settles it.

What else is new? It's a good thing we can trust outhouse to know the historical facts otherwise we would be at a loss.