The Jesus Myth Theory

[Albion]

You can't believe in the resurrection without believing in alien abductions because the evidence for the latter is vastly superior. And I'm not convinced that aliens have visited us. Your position is therefore biased and unscholarly.

I just now came upon this thread, and although the topic is interesting, this statement of yours shows me that you are not actually "exploring Christianity," but are merely taking advantage of the forum to lecture the readership on your views. That being so, it immediately casts doubt on the whole of your thesis.

Beyond this, it's true that it once was popular to say that the whole of the story of Jesus and his miracles is fiction but, also, that this thinking has since been discredited and that POV is no longer considered credible in the scholarly community.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

When I hear somebody coming up with Mithras as a parallel to Jesus, which I have heard out of Mr Carrier's mouth, I just think, "Not that one again."

The fact that he writes off people like D M Murdock, as being even worse than himself, is neither here nor there.

What's wrong with the comparison?

There was once a deity who underwent a struggle wherein he defeated death and shared that victory with his followers. Later, they wrote about him as a historical figure.

Now please tell me, am I talking about Mithras or Jesus?

 

[Albion]

...or a dozen other deities.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I just now came upon this thread, and although the topic is interesting, this statement of yours shows me that you are not actually "exploring Christianity," but are merely taking advantage of the forum to lecture the readership on your views. That being so, it immediately casts doubt on the whole of your thesis. Beyond this, it's a fact that it once was popular to say that the whole of the story of Jesus and his miracles is fiction but that this thinking has been discredited by the facts and that POV is no longer considered credible in the scholarly community.

Casts doubt on the whole of my thesis? Where did I say I'd become a Christian if someone could disprove the Myth Theory? I will simply become an atheist who believes Jesus was a historical person. If I am to be converted, you need to explain why I should accept the resurrection while rejecting alien abduction claims. That is a fully reasonable request.

 

[lesliedellow]

What's wrong with the comparison?

"Later, they wrote about him as a historical figure"

Well that will do for a start. There are no surviving scriptures for Mithraism. Possibly there were none to start with, because it was a mystery religion, which did its best to keep its beliefs and practices away from the prying eyes of outsiders. Everything we think we know about Mithraism is based upon archaeological reconstruction. Educated guesswork, in other words.

 

[Albion]

Casts doubt on the whole of my thesis? Where did I say I'd become a Christian if someone could disprove the Myth Theory?

No one was demanding that of you. But OTOH, are you telling me that you're actually "Exploring Christianity" when you say it's a myth and nothing is going to change your mind about that?

 

[Blondepudding]

Read "The Historical Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas. I have done so and am convinced - as are the majority of scholars whose expertise is in this area - that Jesus was a real figure in history. Why you would think I ought to wade through multiple hours of convoluted denials of this fact is rather beyond me.

It's beyond you?

How so?Motives are aligned in a forum like this that invites the motivated. It's called atheist proselytizing. The dedicated motivated intent to lead your kind of people away from your faith. Or, toward the outskirts of doubt.

It's like The Jesus Seminar years ago.
If the man didn't exist why are so many men dedicated for years to the intention to say he wasn't real? What would it matter to those kind of people that what would then constitute delusion is active in society worshiping someone that never was?

My advice? Don't pay attention much to irrationality. How someone pursues revocation of a thought process dedicated to what that pursuer claims is nothingness is beyond irrational.
I'm Ignostic. See the label? But even I know there was an itinerant rabbi named Yeshua bin Yoseph living in what was ancient Palestine centuries ago. God incarnate? Dunno. Being in my view it is hubris to imagine we can conceive an absolute about something that must be beyond our comprehension.

 

[Blondepudding]

Lincoln is dead, but thousands saw the Risen Christ and it was recorded in Gods Holy Scriptures!

There are extra-biblical accounts as well. Not Josephus of course but others besides.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

No one was demanding that of you. But OTOH, are you telling me that you're actually "Exploring Christianity" when you say it's a myth and nothing is going to change your mind about that?

Show me where I said that "it's a myth and nothing is going to change [my] mind about that." If you are unsure about what someone has said, it's rude to put words in their mouth. I am here specifically asking all of you to help me research the Myth Theory claims. I believed in a historical Jesus while being an atheist for a long time. I do not find the position to be untenable. But now that I've seen evidence that Jesus never existed, I'm indeed exploring Christianity to try to find what is likely to be the truth.

 

[lesliedellow]

There are extra-biblical accounts as well. Not Josephus of course but others besides.

What's wrong with Josephus, as if I can't guess?

http://standpointmag.co.uk/jesus-in-the-eyes-of-josephus-features-jan-10-geza-vermes

The author is (or was) a Jewish scholar, with no particular axe to grind with regard to the historicity of Jesus.

You shouldn't believe everything you hear from atheists. The consensus of scholarly opinion is that the passage in Antiquities is basically authentic, but that it has been embellished by a Christian scribe.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Christianity has been discredited as rubbish for centuries. Your position deviates from that of the scholars more than mine.

Only if you never wander out of the Atheist aisle in your local library.......

 

[Albion]

I am here specifically asking all of you to help me research the Myth Theory claims. I believed in a historical Jesus while being an atheist for a long time. I do not find the position to be untenable. But now that I've seen evidence that Jesus never existed, I'm indeed exploring Christianity to try to find what is likely to be the truth.

I suppose that comments like the one in bold font above and this one below gave me a different impression. They do not indicate to me that the speaker is a person who is keeping an open mind about this matter.

You can't believe in the resurrection without believing in alien abductions because the evidence for the latter is vastly superior. And I'm not convinced that aliens have visited us. Your position is therefore biased and unscholarly.

 

[lesliedellow]

I suppose that comments like the one in bold font above and this one below gave me a different impression. They do not indicate to me that the speaker is a person who is keeping an open mind about this matter.

He thought he was going to wheeze in here, soon disabuse all those gullible Christians of their superstitious beliefs, and then wheeze out again.

 

[Blondepudding]

What's wrong with Josephus, as if I can't guess?

So you can't guess?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

"Later, they wrote about him as a historical figure"

Well that will do for a start. There are no surviving scriptures for Mithraism. Possibly there were none to start with, because it was a mystery religion, which did its best to keep its beliefs and practices away from the prying eyes of outsiders. Everything we think we know about Mithraism is based upon archaeological reconstruction. Educated guesswork, in other words.

Nice catch. I forgot that all we have of Mithras is that non-narrated, sculpted comic. Between that and the fact that Mithras did not die and rise from the dead, Mithras is probably the weakest connection to Jesus as a myth among the other Hellenistic deities. Dr. Carrier does point that out.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

What's wrong with Josephus, as if I can't guess?

http://standpointmag.co.uk/jesus-in-the-eyes-of-josephus-features-jan-10-geza-vermes

The author is (or was) a Jewish scholar, with no particular axe to grind with regard to the historicity of Jesus.

You shouldn't believe everything you hear from atheists. The consensus of scholarly opinion is that the passage in Antiquities is basically authentic, but that it has been embellished by a Christian scribe.

What's wrong with Josephus? Why do scholars think there is a forgery there? Well for starters, he was a traitor. Please explain to me why he would defect to the Romans, record history under their authority, and then write so glowingly about Jesus. The Christian position is nearly unanimous in that their persecution complex has the Romans slaughtering Christians by the thousands. It is inconceivable that Josephus would say what he is purported to have said. You tell me what part of this the Romans would publish (I'm guessing you would have the red parts removed):

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I suppose that comments like the one in bold font above and this one below gave me a different impression. They do not indicate to me that the speaker is a person who is keeping an open mind about this matter.

You accused me of saying something. I asked you to tell me where I said it. So instead of going back and finding such a quote, you quote what I said in response to your accusation. In pursuit of the principal of charity I'll assume you're not being dishonest here. Therefore I conclude you are confused and unable to answer basic questions. Between this and your unwillingness to investigate the claims in the OP, I don't think there's any value in a continued discourse between us.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

He thought he was going to wheeze in here, soon disabuse all those gullible Christians of their superstitious beliefs, and then wheeze out again.

No. Re-read the OP. Or maybe I should say to read it for the first time.

 

[lesliedellow]

Why do scholars think there is a forgery there?

Scholars think the passage has been doctored, because Josephus was not a Christian, so he is highly unlikely to have referred to Jesus as the Messiah. He is even more unlikely to have slipped in a phrase suggesting that Jesus was more than a man - I.e. God.
It has nothing to do with his having changed sides during the Jewish War.

It is inconceivable that Josephus would say what he is purported to have said. You tell me what part of this the Romans would publish (I'm guessing you would have the red parts removed):

I will give you one of the scholarly reconstructions; the one which comes from Geza Vermes:

"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man...For he was one who performed paradoxical deeds and was the teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews [and many Greeks?]. He was [called] the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him...And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared."

The phrase "and many Greeks" is bracketed because he is dubious about it, but not certain enough to delete it. The word "called" is bracketed because he has inserted it as something which was probably in the original.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Scholars think the passage has been doctored, because Josephus was not a Christian, so he is highly unlikely to have referred to Jesus as the Messiah. He is even more unlikely to have slipped in a phrase suggesting that Jesus was more than a man - I.e. God.
It has nothing to do with his having changed sides during the Jewish War.




I will give you one of the scholarly reconstructions; the one which comes from Geza Vermes:

"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man...For he was one who performed paradoxical deeds and was the teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews [and many Greeks?]. He was [called] the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him...And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared."

The phrase "and many Greeks" is bracketed because he is dubious about it, but not certain enough to delete it. The word "called" is bracketed because he has inserted it as something which was probably in the original.

A reconstruction? Can we mythicists do that too, LoL?