Could Jesus Have Been Simply a Fraud?

[steeltoes]

All this criticism (and support) of G A Wells has caused me to be interested. One of his books , something like 'The Jesus of the early Christians' is offered on ebay. But what I need to know is:- What is the title of his book that is being rubbished (by some) on this thread?

I think I need to read it.

Wells inspired Doherty who then wrote The Jesus Puzzle, and that book in turn convinced historian Richard Carrier that Christianity may have begun with a mythical Christ. I've read three of Wells' books and I would suggest reading Wells but I think it is Doherty's, The Jesus Puzzle that is most responsible for the current rise in internet discussions as it concerns Jesus' history or lack there of. Doherty and Wells see a preacher type Jesus in Q but view the gospels as a work of fiction. They both see Paul's Christ as mythical but they differ in that Doherty views Paul's Christ as a heavenly figure with no earthly past while Wells thinks that Paul's heavenly Christ may have lived on earth in Pauls' distant past, probably in the first century BCE.

 

[oldbadger]

Wells inspired Doherty who then wrote The Jesus Puzzle, and that book in turn convinced historian Richard Carrier that Christianity may have begun with a mythical Christ. I've read three of Wells' books and I would suggest reading Wells but I think it is Doherty's, The Jesus Puzzle that is most responsible for the current rise in internet discussions as it concerns Jesus' history or lack there of. Doherty and Wells see a preacher type Jesus in Q but view the gospels as a work of fiction. They both see Paul's Christ as mythical but they differ in that Doherty views Paul's Christ as a heavenly figure with no earthly past while Wells thinks that Paul's heavenly Christ may have lived on earth in Pauls' distant past, probably in the first century BCE.

I must find out how much 'The Jesus Puzzle' costs.

The above description is not that far away from where I have anchored.

I believe that there was a Yeshua, the person that most scholars call Jesus and propose to have lived, been baptised and executed, as described in G-Mark (with embellishments) and somewhat evangelised in Matthew and Luke..... but that Jesus the Christ was developed by Paul (and others) and given Gospel foundations by G-John, that book withdrawing from Healing and Demon casting (not healthy) to teaching, and being a victim of those nasty Jews facepalm, none of which was supported by the Synoptics and none which I trust at all.

Whilst many scholars do feel that G-John is more likely to have described the chronology of the Passover feast and execution accurately, I do not trust any of it. So I don't think that Yeshua was a Fraud at all....... just a very beautiful man with natural healing talents. I do not think Jesus was a Fraud, for I do not think that he existed. So the Frauds (in my opinion) were Paul and G-John, and the evangelists who believed that it was right to fiddle with the Synoptics.

All I am left with is a dim outline of a man in the deepest mists of history who was a natural healer, well loved around his chosen home, Capernaum, who went to see and meet with John the Baptiser....

What else to say?

 

[steeltoes]

The above description is not that far away from where I have anchored.

Wells and Doherty see a preacher type Jesus in Q but they view the gospel account as a work of fiction.

Wells and Doherty view Paul's Christ as distinct from Jesus of Nazareth.

They note that Paul's Christ was not crucified by Pilate judging by what Paul has to say about rulers.

Romans 13:3-4

New International Version (NIV)

3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

 

[steeltoes]

Stop being a pain, before you go to ignore.

Promises, promises.

Just becuase we dont kow exactly what said, DOES NOT mean we dont generally know what he taught.

Really, we don't know what he said but we can know what he taught. We are truly amazing. :bow:

 

[Thief]

Are we now closing to the conclusion....He was not a fraud?

 

[VocoInDubium]

Are we now closing to the conclusion....He was not a fraud?

In what sense?

That he rose from the dead and rose others from their otherwise dead state or that there is some tale of a man? I know you asked about Jesus and if he ever lied but did he? What do you think? There are so many odd statements to step around like here: Matthew 18:19-18:20 -

Really if Two people pray and agree than it should be so? That would be insanely bad IMHO and I don't know if a soul would be left on this planet... (It only takes two to mingle)

 

[outhouse]

In what sense?

That he rose from the dead and rose others from their otherwise dead state or that there is some tale of a man?

Except YOU don't know that he ever said that. All you know is some authors wrote it.

YOU don't even agree when they wrote about it.

 

[oldbadger]

Wells and Doherty see a preacher type Jesus in Q but they view the gospel account as a work of fiction.

Ok..... So they have stapled all the G-Books together and judged them 'together'? That's worrying. As you know D) I trust quite a bit a bit of G-Mark, and look for fictional edits within it. There might be some truths in G-Matthew and G-Luke but their fictional edits are so vast that I chucked then out as totally unsafe. G-John is fiction.

So, whilst I empathise with Wells' position I can't go all the way to his tenets.

Wells and Doherty view Paul's Christ as distinct from Jesus of Nazareth.

I love that. Happy. I describe Paul's Christ as Jesus, and Nazareth's Jesus as Yeshua, simply because it seems more clear. There's only one reason for scholars to debate, discuss and write about 'Jesus', and that can only be that they need the public's attention and money.... if they wrote a book about the life of Yeshua nobody would recognise the subject matter. Bloody money and qudos.... typical academics!

They note that Paul's Christ was not crucified by Pilate judging by what Paul has to say about rulers.

Romans 13:3-4

That is interesting..... It's almost as if Paul is condemning Yeshua's temple action..... 'See what you get?' stuff. Or..... denying that Yeshua ever caused the rumpus. I wonder which....? In this piece he seems to support the Invaders and their supporting priesthood etc.

 

[oldbadger]

Promises, promises.

Really, we don't know what he said but we can know what he taught. We are truly amazing. :bow:

Stop winding him up......... he'll ignore you..... and me!

 

[oldbadger]

Are we now closing to the conclusion....He was not a fraud?

Yes..... well, I am. We can say that he was no Fraud.

The man who worked around the Lake and could heal, who was attracted to JtB's mission, baptised, took up JtB's mission after his arrest and carried it on for nearly a year before being arrested for demonstrations in the Temple, who was crucified, was never a Fraud. Everything he did (as reported in G-Mark) is true or has genuine background.

I cannot comment about Paul or G-John, but then, that was not the question.

 

[oldbadger]

In what sense?

That he rose from the dead and rose others from their otherwise dead state or that there is some tale of a man? I know you asked about Jesus and if he ever lied but did he? What do you think? There are so many odd statements to step around like here: Matthew 18:19-18:20 -

Really if Two people pray and agree than it should be so? That would be insanely bad IMHO and I don't know if a soul would be left on this planet... (It only takes two to mingle)

I don't expect that he said that. I expect that some person fiddled with that.

 

[oldbadger]

Ohhhhhh !! He's gone away......
I so much enjoyed marking that member's posts............ :sad4:

Is there nothing left in this world to bring me joy? :sad:

 

[steeltoes]

That is interesting..... It's almost as if Paul is condemning Yeshua's temple action..... 'See what you get?' stuff. Or..... denying that Yeshua ever caused the rumpus. I wonder which....? In this piece he seems to support the Invaders and their supporting priesthood etc.

Paul and the other epistle writers know nothing of the gospel story, the temple action, Pilate, Mary, they were written after Paul was dead. None of the epistle writers mention disciples.

 

[steeltoes]

Stop winding him up......... he'll ignore you..... and me!

He will continue to do what he does best, remind us how ignorant we are for not bowing down to the real Jesus that he never tires of telling us about.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Paul and the other epistle writers know nothing of the gospel story, the temple action, Pilate, Mary, they were written after Paul was dead. None of the epistle writers mention disciples.

So do you think that Peter may have been an early leader of the Jerusalem church and that Mark tagged his name onto one of the twelve?

 

[steeltoes]

So do you think that Peter may have been an early leader of the Jerusalem church and that Mark tagged his name onto one of the twelve?

According to Doherty that may very well be the case for Peter, James, and John. He views them as apostles of a heavenly Christ that were portrayed as disciples of an earthly Jesus in the gospel fictions. According to Bart "oldschool" Erhman, Paul met the brother of Jesus and the disciples of Jesus. So by a reading of the same texts by different scholars and such, conclusions vary considerably.

 

[outhouse]

Everything he did (as reported in G-Mark) is true or has genuine background.



.

Can you prove it is not Unsubstantiated


Its why you have no sources to back you opinion.

 

[oldbadger]

Can you prove it is not Unsubstantiated

Its why you have no sources to back you opinion.

Well....... I have yours, don't I?

Part of Post 912
But not one source says the gospel of Mark is fiction, nor does anyone claim Jesus did not exist.

 

[oldbadger]

Paul and the other epistle writers know nothing of the gospel story, the temple action, Pilate, Mary, they were written after Paul was dead. None of the epistle writers mention disciples.

Can this ever be untangled....?

Was Paul's Jesus a different person to Yeshua?
Was Paul's Peter a different person to Cephas?
Was Saul/Paul originally contracted to put down various and differing sects and cults, including JtB's?

I disregard mostly all books after Synoptics, simply because of such significant differences. Are they two stories mashed up?

 

[steeltoes]

Can this ever be untangled....?

Was Paul's Jesus a different person to Yeshua?

There are no writings of a Yeshua as it concerns the Jesus we refer to. Yeshua is Hebrew.

Was Paul's Peter a different person to Cephas?

Some scholars claim that Cephas is not Peter while most claim that Cephas is Hebrew(?) for Peter.

Was Saul/Paul originally contracted to put down various and differing sects and cults, including JtB's?

Paul claimed to have once persecuted those of the church of God, whatever that means.

I disregard mostly all books after Synoptics, simply because of such significant differences.

Apparently most of the epistles including Paul were written before the gospels although they are placed after the gospels in the NT, and it is because the epistles were written before the gospels Paul is not aware of a Jesus of Nazareth. Doherty sees Paul's Christ as one that never lived on earth. Wells thinks Paul's Christ may have lived in Paul's distant past. If you mean that you disregard Acts because it is historically unreliable you would be in good company with some but not with the "old school."

Are they two stories mashed up?

They are mashed up in the sense that the author of Mark probably new of Paul and the Jerusalem group and/or had Paul's writings before him as he wrote his gospel. According to Doherty, the author of Mark portrayed the Peter, James, and John that Paul met as disciples of a Jesus of Nazareth. The epistles are not mashed up with the gospels but the gospels are mashed up with the epistles. Wells and Doherty sort that out, however Bart "old school" Erhman conflates them by reading the gospels into the epistles.