- Oct 11, 2019
- 806
- 678
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Decided to continue a series of posts I started last year because I really enjoyed reading the answers y'all came up with. Find the first post here: (Atheist Arguments from History: 2#) The gospels were not eyewitness accounts
EDIT: I see there's been some confusion--I am not the one who wrote the text below. I'm just reposting the content of a popular ex-christian/atheist on instagram because I'm interested in reading the rebuttals to his writing XD Sorry for any confusion.
----
"The gospels are not historical texts.
Read Josephus or Tacitus, historians
from first century Rome.
Their writings are nothing at all like
what we see in the gospels.
The genre of the gospels do, however,
line up perfectly with mythical narratives
of the time..."
This is an issue that needs deep consideration by those who consider themselves Christians. It may be difficult.
.
Whether or not a “historical” (non biblical/non mythical) Jesus existed or not isn’t the point here and I’ve discussed that at nauseating lengths in other posts.
.
The purpose of the gospels was NOT to create a historical account (though the author of Luke attempts to say he did despite failing miserably). The purpose was to show a grand story and each gospel has a different purpose. Mark, for example, is also very similar to a Greek tragedy in both content and style.
.
Mark specifically uses brilliant writing structures within other writing structures to create what is honestly a literary masterpiece. Of course, historians then had no need for such writing structures- they simply wanted to write down the facts. Where do we see these writing structures? Fiction, poetry and mythical narratives.
.
The most classic example of a Roman mythical narrative is the legend of Romulus and Remus- founders of Rome. One may also want to check out the myths around Hercules/Zeus.
.
An interesting aspect is that the gospels sometimes have elements showing Jesus being superior or the pagan Gods- can walk on water (Poseidon), Turn water into wine (Dionysus), ascended into heaven (Romulus), son of God chosen by God (Hercules). There are countless examples. Yet this is precisely the games and “one-up-manship” we see played at the time with these stories- essentially saying “my god is better than your god.” Guess how many historians cared about that?...
.
I still believe a [historical] Jesus existed but I have no confidence that the gospels paint anywhere near a picture of reality of who this man was. If we’re lucky, maybe 5-10% of the words attributed to him were his own. We may even be able to catch glimpses of his character through these myths... who knows?
.
If that little amount of words of wisdom and romanticized ideas of Jesus is good enough for the Christian then who am I to judge? They’re amazing stories with much we can learn from them- but they are, in fact, myths & legend.
EDIT: I see there's been some confusion--I am not the one who wrote the text below. I'm just reposting the content of a popular ex-christian/atheist on instagram because I'm interested in reading the rebuttals to his writing XD Sorry for any confusion.
----
"The gospels are not historical texts.
Read Josephus or Tacitus, historians
from first century Rome.
Their writings are nothing at all like
what we see in the gospels.
The genre of the gospels do, however,
line up perfectly with mythical narratives
of the time..."
This is an issue that needs deep consideration by those who consider themselves Christians. It may be difficult.
.
Whether or not a “historical” (non biblical/non mythical) Jesus existed or not isn’t the point here and I’ve discussed that at nauseating lengths in other posts.
.
The purpose of the gospels was NOT to create a historical account (though the author of Luke attempts to say he did despite failing miserably). The purpose was to show a grand story and each gospel has a different purpose. Mark, for example, is also very similar to a Greek tragedy in both content and style.
.
Mark specifically uses brilliant writing structures within other writing structures to create what is honestly a literary masterpiece. Of course, historians then had no need for such writing structures- they simply wanted to write down the facts. Where do we see these writing structures? Fiction, poetry and mythical narratives.
.
The most classic example of a Roman mythical narrative is the legend of Romulus and Remus- founders of Rome. One may also want to check out the myths around Hercules/Zeus.
.
An interesting aspect is that the gospels sometimes have elements showing Jesus being superior or the pagan Gods- can walk on water (Poseidon), Turn water into wine (Dionysus), ascended into heaven (Romulus), son of God chosen by God (Hercules). There are countless examples. Yet this is precisely the games and “one-up-manship” we see played at the time with these stories- essentially saying “my god is better than your god.” Guess how many historians cared about that?...
.
I still believe a [historical] Jesus existed but I have no confidence that the gospels paint anywhere near a picture of reality of who this man was. If we’re lucky, maybe 5-10% of the words attributed to him were his own. We may even be able to catch glimpses of his character through these myths... who knows?
.
If that little amount of words of wisdom and romanticized ideas of Jesus is good enough for the Christian then who am I to judge? They’re amazing stories with much we can learn from them- but they are, in fact, myths & legend.
Last edited: