The Jesus Myth

[fallingblood]

Thank you, Blood. I feel like someone has finally addressed my issue head on. And I'll take your word for the tracked language, pending verification later.

So we are agreed that -- at least so far -- the only place we can find this tracked language from book to book is in the Bible. And only in two places in the Bible.

As I say, the only other place I've found this phenomenon is in the back of fictionalist's closets.

I can't agree on that. I simply used the Bible to provide additional evidence for this "phenomenon" as it is the text I am most acquainted with. However, if we do take the Bible as an example, it does show that this phenomenon does exist within historical stories.

As for the only places in the Bible, not quite so. The Torah was composed of 4 separate sources, and then later edited together by one other (or a group of others). There, we can see the same phenomenon existing in at least three sources again. That is why we have the same stories (doublets), being told in books such as Genesis. Two early sources, in this case, were copied and edited into a new source.

But if you want to repost my Item #2 with your rebuttal, I'll address it. I'm not much good at navigating the forum yet, or I'd try to reconstruct it.

Here. You're question is bolded.
2) The human passion for heroes, leading a reasonable person to doubt that Jesus is any more 'historic' than Robin Hood or Merlin.

Let's just start with a basic. Both Robin Hood and Merlin are suspected to be based off an actual historical figure. One that has been embellished, but still an actual historical figure.

As for the human passion for heroes, you have to prove that. More so, you have to show that this passion would cause a person to create Jesus.

The problem is that a hero does not need to be a fictional character. There are various historical figures who were also considered heros. Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Harry Houdini, etc are historical figures who have been considered by different people to be heros. We can go back to the time of Jesus and find that Augustus or Alexander the Great were both considered heros as well. A hero does not have to be a fictional character.

The second problem is that Jesus does not fit the hero character for the culture that supposedly created him. If Jesus is a fictional character, one must assume that Jews were the ones who created him. The reason being that we see him first in the Jewish culture, and no where else. Yet, Jesus does not conform to the typical Jewish hero that he was supposed to be (the Messiah). The fact that he died, would have just ruled him out as one more failed Messianic figure. There would have been no reason for the Jews to create such a failing figure.

At the same time, the Jews had various different people they could look to for their hero. They could focus on ancient heros, such as Moses, or Elijah. They could focus on contemporary religious leaders such as John the Baptist. They could focus on various Messianic claimants, or other religious leaders. There were many different individuals that a Jew could focus on as their hero. There was no reason to create an individual who, like many of the religious leaders of his time, and messianic claimants, ended up dying at the hands of their enemy, the Romans.

The idea that Jesus was created in order to fulfill the desire of having a hero simply does not stand questioning.

 

[jelly]

...Exact numbers are debatable....

is that why you think your story is believable?

As for 60k Jews in Jerusalem, that would not mean they would all meet Jesus. I live in a town of about 100k. I have only met a small minority of the people who live here. And that is even with me doing entertainment shows. One will not meet everyone in their city.

As for 60k entering Jerusalem, they also would not have all met Jesus. I think the rally in Sturgis, SD is a great example there. Over the years, I have done various performances during the motorcycle rally in Sturgis. There we are talking about 800,000 people who visited last here. On average, it has been above half a million visitors in the last few years.

Now, even during performance, and having a steady crowd in my audience, I did not even meet a minority of the people who came to the rally. It simply is too many people. The same would have been true for Jesus. It's just too many people, and many of those people would have had little interest in Jesus.

As for your numbers, I would say they are quite off. Tacitus put the population at around 600,000, and Josephus put it at around 1.1 million. Now, those numbers are debatable, and most likely are not accurate. However, they do suggest a population much greater than 60k. As for people entering into Jerusalem for the festival, that can be increased as well. So there would have been a lot more people in Jerusalem for the event. Meaning, Jesus would just be one more religious preacher who got lost in the crowd.

except there is a problem, jesus didn't have to meet them peoples neither would you.
for one jesus supposedly would have been dead on a cross and two how many people met you?.... meaning how many people saw you or the character jesus not how many people you remember or jesus would have remembered if the character really existed.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Let's just start with a basic. Both Robin Hood and Merlin are suspected to be based off an actual historical figure. One that has been embellished, but still an actual historical figure.

OK. If your 'historical Jesus' is as historical as Merlin, then I'm not really interested in arguing with you about whether Jesus was historical. I'm pretty sure there was an historical cricket behind Jiminy Cricket... but arguing about the nature of that cricket? Spending our lives trying to suss out the actual, physical cricket?

Nah.

As for the human passion for heroes, you have to prove that.

I'm sorry but that really is the most bizarre request that anyone has ever made of me. You might as well ask me to prove that men lust after women. How could I possibly prove that to you?

I could point to men chasing women and even paying money to have sex with them, as I've pointed to readers chasing after hero stories and paying money to experience them (movie tickets, book sales, etc.) ... but you don't accept that. You continue asking me to prove it.

Frankly, that you would make such a demand of me makes me think that you are either 1) an insincere debater, or 2) somehow displaced from normal human feelings.

I can't think of any other reason why you would ask such a thing.

More so, you have to show that this passion would cause a person to create Jesus.

I've already shown that, of course.

The problem is that a hero does not need to be a fictional character. There are various historical figures who were also considered heros.

That's your problem, not mine. I'm fine with the idea, for example, that some minor preacher lived in 100BC somewhere around Jerusalem, about whom stories arose and grew.

And there was probably a cricket who inspired Disney to write about Jiminy.

Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Harry Houdini, etc are historical figures who have been considered by different people to be heros. We can go back to the time of Jesus and find that Augustus or Alexander the Great were both considered heros as well. A hero does not have to be a fictional character.

OK. I have no idea why you are delivering me such a elementary-school lecture, but I suppose you have your reasons.

The second problem is that Jesus does not fit the hero character for the culture that supposedly created him. If Jesus is a fictional character, one must assume that Jews were the ones who created him. The reason being that we see him first in the Jewish culture, and no where else. Yet, Jesus does not conform to the typical Jewish hero that he was supposed to be (the Messiah). The fact that he died, would have just ruled him out as one more failed Messianic figure. There would have been no reason for the Jews to create such a failing figure.

What you fail to understand is that Jesus was not created by Jews. He was created by an extremist sect of religionists who happened to have Jewish parents. Look at it that way, and you might understand it better.

Think cults. Was Jim Jones a typical 20th-century American Christian?

No. It would be a mistake to think of him that way. Just as it would be an error to think of Jesus as being creating by mainstream Jews.

 

[doppelganger]

Just as an aside, I find it dubious that anyone could honestly doubt there is a powerful human passion for superhero stories - making them, reading/hearing them, and relating to them. There rather obviously is such a passion common to our species.

 

[fallingblood]

is that why you think your story is believable?

Why would that make my story believable?

except there is a problem, jesus didn't have to meet them peoples neither would you.
for one jesus supposedly would have been dead on a cross and two how many people met you?.... meaning how many people saw you or the character jesus not how many people you remember or jesus would have remembered if the character really existed.

So lets take the idea Jesus is dead on the cross. Most Jews, going to Jerusalem for the Passover, did so over a week before in order so they could go through the purification rituals.

Jesus was crucified outside the city. So very few Jews would have been coming into the city, and thus saw Jesus on the cross. Fewer would have been able to recognize him because of the condition he would have been in. So that really reduces the number to virtually none (especially since Jesus was crucified on Passover).

As for people in town, they also would not have gone out to see Jesus crucified. It was Passover. So really, we are basically getting to virtually no one seeing Jesus when he was on the cross.

So how many would have remembered Jesus there, a handful at most.

 

[doppelganger]

Oh and I also disagree with the assertion that Jesus was created by religious extremists. Sophisticated students of Greek Philosophy who knew their Judaism is a much more likely explanation.

 

[fallingblood]

Just as an aside, I find it dubious that anyone could honestly doubt there is a powerful human passion for superhero stories - making them, reading/hearing them, and relating to them. There rather obviously is such a passion common to our species.

One would have to show that that passion existed throughout all history. More so, one would have to show that passion would mean that people had to create mythical figures, and not just simply look at people who were already thought to be heros.

It is not an obvious passion common to our species.

 

[outhouse]

Just as an aside, I find it dubious that anyone could honestly doubt there is a powerful human passion for superhero stories - making them, reading/hearing them, and relating to them. There rather obviously is such a passion common to our species.

I follow what your saying and believe it to be true.


thats why historical jesus and biblical jesus are night and day different

 

[doppelganger]

One would have to show that that passion existed throughout all history. More so, one would have to show that passion would mean that people had to create mythical figures, and not just simply look at people who were already thought to be heros.

It is not an obvious passion common to our species.

That's easy to show. Unless you're showing it to someone who specifically will not look in order to maintain their argument. But that's intellectually dishonest.

Read all four volumes of Joseph Cambell's "Masks of God" and then we can talk.

 

[outhouse]

One would have to show that that passion existed throughout all history. More so, one would have to show that passion would mean that people had to create mythical figures, and not just simply look at people who were already thought to be heros.

It is not an obvious passion common to our species.

did not much of the hellenistic period do just that????

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

One would have to show that that passion existed throughout all history.

Blood, I don't know what training you might've had in literature, but type "oldest English story" into google.

Beowulf.

More so, one would have to show that passion would mean that people had to create mythical figures, and not just simply look at people who were already thought to be heros.

No. It really doesn't matter much. Put on your thinking cap and become the writer of a hero story. No... really... try to imagine it.

Is your hero story based on a physical human being? Well, maybe or maybe not. You might remember some story from your childhood which your father told you. You might misremember the story, but you're pretty sure that your dad had a buddy during the war who performed many outstanding feats of courage.

So is your story based on an historical figure?

What could such a question possibly mean.

It is not an obvious passion common to our species.

OK. And young men feel no particular passion for young women.

Whatever we want to say, we can say.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I'm fine with the idea, for example, that some minor preacher lived in 100BC somewhere around Jerusalem, about whom stories arose and grew.

Agreed.

The bulk of what is known about him comes from the NT. That's not without its share of problems right there. Outside of the NT even less is known. Even as complete as the NT is there isn't much known about his life. The stories about him contained in the 4 gospels reads like a fictional story with each of the gospels after Mark embellishing more and more about the man.

 

[doppelganger]

For starters, the earliest human religious imagery was not based on historical persons at all, but on animal figures and personifications of other natural forces - the things that sustained life and brought death before the dawn of civilization. Where particular persons became mythologized later, they picked up these attributes from a deeper level of the human psyche.

"Jesus" is full of both Sun God and Vegetal rebirth/spring fertility imagery from deep, deep down in the collective subconscious.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

The bulk of what is known about him comes from the NT. That's not without its share of problems right there. Outside of the NT even less is known. Even as complete as the NT is there isn't much known about his life. The stories about him contained in the 4 gospels reads like a fictional story with each of the gospels after Mark embellishing more and more about the man.

Yeah, and I've come up with a theory which is fairly radical. I think there's a good chance that the gospels were written as fiction and then began to be taken seriously, as non-fiction.

The tipping point would've been the straight-faced claim that Jesus lived in 30ad Jerusalem.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Oh and I also disagree with the assertion that Jesus was created by religious extremists. Sophisticated students of Greek Philosophy who knew their Judaism is a much more likely explanation.

That question would be outside my area of expertise.

Still, I think it's an error to think that traditional Jews started the Jesus movement. No Jewish messiah claimant has ever been embraced by traditional Jews.

Except maybe Jesus, but I doubt it.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

thats why historical jesus and biblical jesus are night and day different

Let me say again that I've never encountered any debater who argued that historical Jesus and biblical Jesus must be the same.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

For starters, the earliest human religious imagery was not based on historical persons at all, but on animal figures and personifications of other natural forces - the things that sustained life and brought death before the dawn of civilization. Where particular persons became mythologized later, they picked up these attributes from a deeper level of the human psyche.

"Jesus" is full of both Sun God and Vegetal rebirth/spring fertility imagery from deep, deep down in the collective subconscious.

I agree. Some people don't accept this and seem to think he was a real person.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Yeah, and I've come up with a theory which is fairly radical. I think there's a good chance that the gospels were written as fiction and then began to be taken seriously, as non-fiction.

The tipping point would've been the straight-faced claim that Jesus lived in 30ad Jerusalem.

Right. Paul seem to not know the man and seemed to get his information from those who said they knew him or was related to him. But there really doesn't seem to be anything in Paul's letters that give us any sense that he was aware of any details in Yeshua's life.....then the gospels start getting written (i.e. Mark)...which seems like a play...but written in a way to try and create a story around the man/myth in order to give it credibility. Matthew and Luke, later gospels, embellished this work of fiction and then John takes it even a step further sensationalizing the story even more. Various elements seem to be pulled from the OT as well as small bits pulled from other pagan religions of the area. I know....that's my mythicist side showing but regardless of what the apologist say I think it's plausible for the biblical Yeshua to have been a totally made up character.

 

[waitasec]

i think jesus represented something real...the tension between the jews and the romans...

 

[doppelganger]

.then the gospels start getting written (i.e. Mark)...which seems like a play...but written in a way to try and create a story around the man/myth in order to give it credibility.

There's pretty good evidence that "Mark" was written perhaps in part as allegorical fiction meant to memorialize the important events of the Jewish cyclical year. It may have been a teaching story meant to help young Jewish students remember their liturgy. This argument and the evidence for it is summarized in Bishop Spong's Jesus for the Non-Religious.