AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
I admit that I have never understood what 'mythical Jesus' means. Maybe someone could start by trying to define the term.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Could Jesus Have Been Simply a Fraud?
- Thread starter The Sum of Awe
- Start date
I admit that I have never understood what 'mythical Jesus' means. Maybe someone could start by trying to define the term.
Oh?
How do you falsify that which you cannot test?
Its really a judgement call.
If everything we can verify about a series of witnesses indicates that they are indeed telling the truth (about everything we CAN verify), why then does it make more sense to believe that the claims they make that we cannot verify are false rather than true?
Honest men lie?
Honest men with perfect ability to judge what you can discern and cannot discern, who then begin to lie only at the point where you can longer discern whether or not their are lying?
Interesting thought isn't it?
Here is a basic outline of Christ myth theory pasted from wiki:
"The Christ myth theory (also known as the Jesus myth theory or Jesus mythicism) is the proposition that the Jesus of Nazareth as depicted in the gospels never existed, but was invented by the early Christian community. Many proponents use a three-fold argument first developed in the 19th century that the New Testament has no historical value, non-Christian writers of the first century failed to mention Jesus, and that Christianity had pagan and mythical beginnings.
"In recent years, there have been a number of books and documentaries on this controversial subject. Some concede the possibility that Jesus may have been a real person, but that the biblical accounts of him are untrue and based on myths. Others believe in a spiritual Christ, but that he never lived. Still others, including some atheists, believe Jesus was neither historical nor divine.
"Despite arguments put forward by authors who have questioned the existence of a historical Jesus, there remains a strong consensus agreement among historical-critical biblical scholarship that Jesus lived, but they differ about the accuracy of the accounts of his life. The only two events subject to almost universal assent among biblical scholars are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. However, certain scholars, particularly in Europe, have recently made the case that there should be more scholarly research and debate on this topic." More at:
Christ myth theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
First, I doubt that Christianity had Pagan and mythical beginnings, I think its mythology was of Jewish origin. It's not all that far fetched but we are writing of a religious figure here so the subject is a charged one.
Last edited:
What can be verified?
Well, as I have stated repeatedly, as every period scholar begins with in his assessment, it BEGINS with the Pauline Epistels - many of which we can, and have, verified as substantially genuine.
And that begins the authentication process ...
Which is supported by extra Biblical sources ...
Which is in turn supported by archeology ...
And you doubt this record, the unanimous record of ALL period scholars based on ... the deliberate rejection of history? Or scholarship? Of your faith?
What you ask is called the question of absurdity. Its exactly what GA Wells tried, and he had to retract it when confronted. You?
You will eventually make a case in support of your claim rather than just ask meandering questions whose sole goal is to reject anything?
By all means, examine the record. Examine the record and see for yourself ... as I did.
Just don't ask me to abandon academics, logic, research, truth seeking ... based on a silly question that logic should have precluded ever being asked.
If you don't know what can be verified then just say so.
Stop pretending, you obviously don't know what G.A Wells' view is.
VocoInDubium
Member
Was Jesus real? That is a loaded question. Was there a son of god who rose from the dead or turned water to wine? We can clearly say no. These are impossible fantasy acts that are unproven and not easily replicated in labs. Clearly no miraculous son of the creator of everything has ever existed any more than older gods like Ra or Thor or what have you. Still you are always free to believe what you will but to claim its logical or realistic is anything but.
The stories in the bible are stories... Noah lived to be 100s of years old and built an ark with his 100 year old kids because crazy god was upset with what he created so he decided to kill every baby, toddler, adult and animal Noah didn't choose to save is a ludicrous story but many people believe this as fervently as they think Jesus walked on water and rose from the dead.
Personally I think maybe some tale existed that people spun their tales to coincide with but that is a far cry from the fantasy most people casually accept.
The stories in the bible are stories... Noah lived to be 100s of years old and built an ark with his 100 year old kids because crazy god was upset with what he created so he decided to kill every baby, toddler, adult and animal Noah didn't choose to save is a ludicrous story but many people believe this as fervently as they think Jesus walked on water and rose from the dead.
Personally I think maybe some tale existed that people spun their tales to coincide with but that is a far cry from the fantasy most people casually accept.
outhouse
Atheistically
Seriously?
How many times have I said to start with the Pauline Epistles?
Conspiracy theorists ... rejecting even English all the time.
So, the story of Jesus is fake because ... of your faith.
... And because of Noah.
Makes perfect sense.
CADRE Comments: Scientifically Documented Miracles
Top 10 Astonishing Miracles - Listverse
So, everything we CAN verify about the New Testament, with extra Biblical Sources, archeology, etc. is all true. All of it (which is why we are appealing to Noah ... and a book written centuries earlier and filled with the renditions of oral history).
So, we have men who a proven to be honest.
We have modern recurrences of the the very things these guys reported, which ARE documented.
Yet what they report is DEFINITELY false ... because ...
Honest men lie about things we see today when atheist faith is on the line?
Again, its one thing to disagree.
Its quite another to make the claim that something is DEFINITELY false on faith ... the very kind of reasoning that many atheists say they absolutely hate in religion (which is then oddly found in their religious analysis ...)
Really, it boils down to a judgement call.
Do you believe that men of proven honor are lying about something you cannot verify or not?
I mean take is somewhere else, would 100,000 witnesses make it credible? Or would the mere nature of what they report just keep it AUTOMATICALLY false?
The faith of denial vs. the faith of affirmation.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Short, sweet and accurate post.
For believing in the individual investigation of truth you now may well be dumped into the 'uneducated, un-scholarly' class.
These people have a new religion...... scholarship and academia, much of which is contested by other scholars!
Indeed it would be.
An individual exploration of evidence, in which the resulting conclusion is based upon the examined evidence, which is itself referenced for others to examine and verify the veracity of the supporting documents and examined evidence in support of a conclusion - the more exhaustive the examination of the evidence the better, and then submit these findings to a body of experts for examination, fact checking, and certification.
That would indeed be a good thing.
I fact that would be what scholarship and academia is.
And it stands in SHARP contrast to simple appeal to emotion that just claiming to be a truth seeker who has clearly NOT conducted any kind of scholarly examination, much less submitted it for examination, MUST be the better assessment.
Scholars do indeed disagree about things. The Jesus Myth is not one of them. The opinion of historical Jesus is unanimously supportive, as is the dismissal of Jesus Mythers, despite their appeals to 'truth', as utterly bizarre.
The anatomy of conspiracy.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Well known in Galilee. Crowds gathered to see, watch and hear him.
He sometimes went just offshore in boats for security and to be heard by more folks, more easily.
Yep...... would have read about him. He may have been the basis for some of Christianity all on his own.
Correct. He knew little about Yeshua. He cared even less about Yeshua.
Well known in Galilee. The priesthood was concerned about him, as well as JtB.
But not a bad post, overall.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Suggested reading:
The Changing Faces of Jesus.
Geza Vermes.
Doctor of Theology Budapest.
Chairs at Newcastle
Oxford, 1st Professor of Jewish Studies.
1991. Professor Eneritus.
Fellow of the British Academy.
Hon Doctorates Edinburgh, Durham and Sheffield.
The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls into English1997.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Snap! It seems to have a few meanings.
There are atheist mythers, Christian mythers, etc.....
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Amongst the few lines I have read from you, mostly rubbish, this wins my
'OldBadger' Weekly Waffle Award.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
....they won't let me frubal you.....
Can somebody give a frubal to Steeltoes? :bow:
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
