Why the Jesus Myth is illogical.

[Quagmire]

My point was that we don't have birth stories for most famous people and it's usually safe to assume we don't (Winston Churchill was just an unlucky choice off the top of my head).

 

[dogsgod]

Why don't you just tell us the evidence you have for an historical Jesus.

 

[Quagmire]

Why don't you just tell us the evidence you have for an historical Jesus.

When did I say I had any? All I've been doing in this thread is trying to show you and another person why your arguments to the contrary don't work.

Besides, quite a few people in here who know a lot more about this stuff than I do have tried to present you with the evidence. You're usual reply is to take something from those posts out of context and try to use some completely unrelated argument to discredit it.

I'm not gong to play that game with you.

Maybe when you start replying to people's posts in context and in total.

 

[dogsgod]

When did I say I had any? All I've been doing in this thread is trying to show you and another person why your arguments to the contrary don't work.

Besides, quite a few people in here who know a lot more about this stuff than I do have tried to present you with the evidence. You're usual reply is to take something from those posts out of context and try to use some completely unrelated argument to discredit it.

I'm not gong to play that game with you.

Maybe when you start replying to people's posts in context and in total.

The core of the gospel story is a Jewish mythology drawn from earlier Hebrew scriptures and stories, and to deny this is to deny that Jews wrote mythologies. If you believe there is an historical Jesus behind this mythical savior and redeemer of mankind, then by all means share as to why you believe so that I can believe too. I've offered that, there was most probably a historical Galilean Jesus at the bottom of the hypothetical Q document back in post 66 which has been totally ignored. Why? Because nobody wants to believe it. They want one Jesus that is responsible for absolutely everything.

 

[Quagmire]

The core of the gospel story is a Jewish mythology drawn from earlier Hebrew scriptures and stories,

No: what the core of the story is is what we're debating here. The mythology is what grew around that core.

and to deny this is to deny that the Jews wrote mythologies.

Sorry, don't see the connection here. Are you saying that unless we dismiss everything ever written by Jewish authors and scholars as myth we're denying that some of it was?

(oh wait: that sentence ended in a question mark which means you'll ignore it)

If you believe there is an historical Jesus behind this mythical savior, redeemer of mankind, then by all means share as to why you believe so that I can believe too.

Again: when did I say anything like that in this thread?

(damn. Another question mark. Guess that was a wasted post too).

I've offered that, there was most probably a historical Galilean Jesus at the bottom of the hypothetical Q document back in post 66

For craps sake: that's all that anyone in this thread and all the threads like this one have been trying to tell you for the last 3 years, ie., that there was most likely an historical figure behind the myths. What did you think they were trying to say?

which has been totally ignored. Why? Because nobody wants to believe it. They want one Jesus that is responsible for absolutely everything.

What makes you think that that's what anyone wants?

 

[fallingblood]

Simple propaganda to control the masses. the amount of influence they have and still hold is unimaginable. People live their whole lives based on this character.

Control what masses? The fact that they have power now means nothing. If you look at the early Christians, they didn't have power. They were persecuted by the Jews, and the Romans. They had no power.

More so, those Jews would have created a false messiah. Why? What type of power could they have gained from that? There were literally dozens of false messiahs running around during that time. So why would some Jews create another one?

The power thing simply does not make sense in a historical context. Especially in Palestine.

 

[Oberon]

Control what masses? The fact that they have power now means nothing. If you look at the early Christians, they didn't have power. They were persecuted by the Jews, and the Romans. They had no power.

More so, those Jews would have created a false messiah. Why? What type of power could they have gained from that? There were literally dozens of false messiahs running around during that time. So why would some Jews create another one?

The power thing simply does not make sense in a historical context. Especially in Palestine.

What you don't understand is that this was a vaste conspiracy in which the earliest christians thought that maybe if they built a religion around this myth then, a few centuries later when they had power, they could use these texts to contol the masses. So yes, they didn't have power, but the knew that others would carry on once they started the myth, and then they would have power. Or something.

 

[fallingblood]

Actually his story is drastically different from that of Jesus Christ, do you want to stay on track?

Augustus we can prove existed as a person. There are eye witnesses to him and his events. They were documented when they happend. If you're making a point here I am obviously missing it. Where is there any proof of Jesuses existence? And please don't patronize me by using gospels to prove this, Jesus cannot prove his own existence. You're going to need actual proof.......

Moving the bar a little?


Quagmire- You've made some great points in this thread. I've enjoyed reading your posts. Also, you're right that it is probably hopeless though.


For those who want to continue pulling up the idea that Jesus is based off of other god-men, check this out:Investigating the Similarities between Jesus and Pagan Figures

For the Josephus passage: Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


If I didn't address what you said, either it was because Quagmire did a great job of already doing it, or your post had nothing to do with the OP and I've deemed it a waste of time to respond then

 

[waitasec]

What you don't understand is that this was a vaste conspiracy in which the earliest christians thought that maybe if they built a religion around this myth then, a few centuries later when they had power, they could use these texts to contol the masses. So yes, they didn't have power, but the knew that others would carry on once they started the myth, and then they would have power. Or something.

i don't know if it was a conspiracy...
remember the temple was destroyed and there were a lot of people that were utterly confused and desperate. maybe it wasn't for control but for comfort, however i do flirt with the conspiracy idea

they had no idea constantine was going to turn the tide hundreds of years later, that's a reason the conspiracy theory doesn't stick with me
all i know is someone told a little white lie, in order to comfort the people and now look what happened
one person resurrects now everybody wants to...:sarcastic

 

[Oberon]

i don't know if it was a conspiracy...

I was being sarcastic.

 

[waitasec]

I was being sarcastic.

sorry...

 

[MW0082]

Control what masses? The fact that they have power now means nothing. If you look at the early Christians, they didn't have power. They were persecuted by the Jews, and the Romans. They had no power.

More so, those Jews would have created a false messiah. Why? What type of power could they have gained from that? There were literally dozens of false messiahs running around during that time. So why would some Jews create another one?

The power thing simply does not make sense in a historical context. Especially in Palestine.

Really...? You may want to research that again. The dark ages are a direct effect of Christianity, after the fall of the Roman Empire. Which was helped by the Christian movement.

Yes there have been and were many messiahs, but at the end of the day the Christian movement was the most bloody and aggresive of them all. I cannot tell you why they made a false messiah, or why people pretend to be false messiahs. I can tell you they have power and influence. They always have, and they have committed more atrocities in the name of Jesus than any other name ever....
Inquisition anyone...

Do you even know what Christians did to those that would not convert? I assume not....

 

[MW0082]

Moving the bar a little?


Quagmire- You've made some great points in this thread. I've enjoyed reading your posts. Also, you're right that it is probably hopeless though.


For those who want to continue pulling up the idea that Jesus is based off of other god-men, check this out:Investigating the Similarities between Jesus and Pagan Figures

For the Josephus passage: Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


If I didn't address what you said, either it was because Quagmire did a great job of already doing it, or your post had nothing to do with the OP and I've deemed it a waste of time to respond then

Really? Wikipedia is a credible a source.......

I think you've proven here that you go off more faith/opinoin then actual proof on anything....

 

[Oberon]

Really...? You may want to research that again. The dark ages are a direct effect of Christianity, after the fall of the Roman Empire. Which was helped by the Christian movement.

Not really. We're well beyond Gibbons. And the point is that it took a few centuries for the early christians to have any power. You can't controll the masses while being a persecuted minority.

Do you even know what Christians did to those that would not convert? I assume not....

"The pagan Roman Empire, as mentioned earlier, executed hundreds of Christians for refusing to endorse the validity of its system of religion. There is no doubt from the sources that it did so in appalling ways, including burning alive, drowning and throwing them to hungry beasts; young girls were sent to brothels. All this was judicial atrocity, and in addition pagan mobs murdered some of the followers of Christ without any official sanction. By contrast, once in power the Christians tended to attack deities but spare humans; they destroyed images and wrecked holy places while leaving the worshippers alone. There is no recorded case of an execution of a person for following the older religions in the first two centuries of the Christian Roman Empire."
- Professor Ronald Hutton p. 257 in
Hutton, R. (1991). The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles: Their nature and legacy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Now, of course later on the christians did terrible things to Jews, heretics, and many other groups. This was hardly any deviation from the norm.

Really? Wikipedia is a credible a source.......

Not really.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

There is no recorded case of an execution of a person for following the older religions in the first two centuries of the Christian Roman Empire."
- Professor Ronald Hutton p. 257 in
Hutton, R. (1991). The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles: Their nature and legacy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

I find that difficult to believe. Maybe he's talking about just the British Isles??

 

[MW0082]

Not really. We're well beyond Gibbons. And the point is that it took a few centuries for the early christians to have any power. You can't controll the masses while being a persecuted minority.

Yet they knew they could gain control, and it took what 4-5 centuries to do so.... pretty impressive to turn the tables around so fast.

"The pagan Roman Empire, as mentioned earlier, executed hundreds of Christians for refusing to endorse the validity of its system of religion. There is no doubt from the sources that it did so in appalling ways, including burning alive, drowning and throwing them to hungry beasts; young girls were sent to brothels. All this was judicial atrocity, and in addition pagan mobs murdered some of the followers of Christ without any official sanction. By contrast, once in power the Christians tended to attack deities but spare humans; they destroyed images and wrecked holy places while leaving the worshippers alone. There is no recorded case of an execution of a person for following the older religions in the first two centuries of the Christian Roman Empire."
- Professor Ronald Hutton p. 257 in
Hutton, R. (1991). The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles: Their nature and legacy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Now, of course later on the christians did terrible things to Jews, heretics, and many other groups. This was hardly any deviation from the norm.

For the most part agreed, it only took the Christians 4-5 centuries to out-power all other religions and sweep the world. This shows the aggressiveness and almost political drive it seemed to have. The Christian smear campaign is extremely shameful for the human race....

Not really.

agreed, I lose all respect for anyone who uses this as their credible source...

 

[Oberon]

I find that difficult to believe. Maybe he's talking about just the British Isles??

Nope. He goes on to talk about events in rome and whatnot. I was suprised too when I read that ages ago. I was looking into the history of witches. Another interesting fact is that the two largest witch trials in recorded history occured in pre-christian rome, and that for several hundred years christians actively stopped pagan witchhunts.

 

[Oberon]

Yet they knew they could gain control

How would they know that? The gospel texts were likely all written in the first century, although John may be early 2nd (I find that hard to believe, given that p52 is generally dated to around 125 CE). It wasn't until hundreds of years later that christianity was even legal. How could they possibly predict that?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Nope. He goes on to talk about events in rome and whatnot. I was suprised too when I read that ages ago. I was looking into the history of witches. Another interesting fact is that the two largest witch trials in recorded history occured in pre-christian rome, and that for several hundred years christians actively stopped pagan witchhunts.

Have you found other support for this in your reading?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Nope. He goes on to talk about events in rome and whatnot. I was suprised too when I read that ages ago. I was looking into the history of witches. Another interesting fact is that the two largest witch trials in recorded history occured in pre-christian rome, and that for several hundred years christians actively stopped pagan witchhunts.

OK, if you have the time, I found evidence to the contrary:

Lambs into Lions: Explaining Early Christian Intolerance
H. A. Drake
Past & Present, No. 153 (Nov., 1996), pp. 3-36

Drake cites the persecution of the philosopher Hypatia in Alexandria to be the first Christian persecution of pagans.