- Joined
- Nov 14, 2018
- Messages
- 5,685
- Reaction score
- 4,710
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
There's an old expression,”If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck then it's a duck.”
This expression is very applicable to Jesus Christ.
“If Jesus looks like a myth, and walks like a myth, and quacks like a myth then he is a myth.”
Disclaimer: When I speak of Jesus I am referring to the Jesus Christ of the gospels and Acts. I acknowledge there may have been an earthly character upon which the legend of Jesus Christ was based. Most scholars accept this although they have no historical proof for such.
I can give you a few dozen credible reasons—let's call them “facts” why the Jesus of the New Testament is a myth. Plain and simple, he never existed. That many credible reasons adds up to a mountain of proof.
Christians cannot give you a single credible reason why the Jesus of the New Testament was and is real. The one possible “fact” they can offer is that Josephus is reputed to have written a single phrase in his Antiquities of the Jews:
“...so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ...”
That's it. In the entire 1st century when Christianity was supposedly spreading like wildfire across the Mediterranean, a single historian supposedly says a single phrase about a Jesus so-called the Christ and Christians say “Ah ha! You see? That's proof Jesus was real.”
But there are a lot of problems with this phrase:
For brevity I've left off four other important reasons why it is wise to question the authenticity of this phrase as being written by Josephus. Most secular scholars believe it is an interpolation by Eusebius 4th century henchman to Constantine to make Jesus look real. Interested parties can read the other reasons here:
https://vridar.org/2010/02/13/that-b...ephuss-teacup/
Bart Ehrman, noted Bible historian had this to say about Jesus:
“In the entire Christian century, Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religious scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!”
— Bart Ehrman (c.2012)
John Remsburg, an American skeptic in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, in his 1909 book, The Christ, lists forty-two ancient writers who did not mention Jesus.
Barbara G.Walker, noted author:
"One of the problems faced by Christian scholars is that there is no record of Jesus' existence in any contemporary source."
__ Barbara G.Walker ("The Jesus Myth")
https://ffrf.org/about/getting-acqua...the-jesus-myth
Clement, Bishop of Rome c. 100 CE mentions not a single detail of Jesus' life in his 1st Epistle. His 2nd Epistle is a known forgery.
Paul, the apostle doesn't mention any details of Jesus earthly life prior to his supposed crucifixion.
That would be enough to make most sensible question whether the Jesus of the New Testament really existed, but there are more—many, MANY more reasons why I can definitively say the Jesus of the New Testament was a myth.
This expression is very applicable to Jesus Christ.
“If Jesus looks like a myth, and walks like a myth, and quacks like a myth then he is a myth.”
Disclaimer: When I speak of Jesus I am referring to the Jesus Christ of the gospels and Acts. I acknowledge there may have been an earthly character upon which the legend of Jesus Christ was based. Most scholars accept this although they have no historical proof for such.
I can give you a few dozen credible reasons—let's call them “facts” why the Jesus of the New Testament is a myth. Plain and simple, he never existed. That many credible reasons adds up to a mountain of proof.
Christians cannot give you a single credible reason why the Jesus of the New Testament was and is real. The one possible “fact” they can offer is that Josephus is reputed to have written a single phrase in his Antiquities of the Jews:
“...so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ...”
That's it. In the entire 1st century when Christianity was supposedly spreading like wildfire across the Mediterranean, a single historian supposedly says a single phrase about a Jesus so-called the Christ and Christians say “Ah ha! You see? That's proof Jesus was real.”
But there are a lot of problems with this phrase:
- It does not identify which Jesus is the brother of James, since Jesus was a common name in that era, (there are 20 so-named in Josephus), and no secular scholars believe Josephus ever wrote that any Jesus was “Christ”.
- It is inconsistent with the other non-Josephan accounts of James' death. In other accounts, historians write of a large gang of Jews collectively murdering him as well as their leaders (with no reference to Ananus as in Josephus).
- It would be one of only 2 places in the entire catalogue of Josephus’s works where he says someone was said to be a Messiah or Christ — not even other clearly would-be messiahs were so described by Josephus
For brevity I've left off four other important reasons why it is wise to question the authenticity of this phrase as being written by Josephus. Most secular scholars believe it is an interpolation by Eusebius 4th century henchman to Constantine to make Jesus look real. Interested parties can read the other reasons here:
https://vridar.org/2010/02/13/that-b...ephuss-teacup/
Bart Ehrman, noted Bible historian had this to say about Jesus:
“In the entire Christian century, Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religious scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!”
— Bart Ehrman (c.2012)
John Remsburg, an American skeptic in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, in his 1909 book, The Christ, lists forty-two ancient writers who did not mention Jesus.
Barbara G.Walker, noted author:
"One of the problems faced by Christian scholars is that there is no record of Jesus' existence in any contemporary source."
__ Barbara G.Walker ("The Jesus Myth")
https://ffrf.org/about/getting-acqua...the-jesus-myth
Clement, Bishop of Rome c. 100 CE mentions not a single detail of Jesus' life in his 1st Epistle. His 2nd Epistle is a known forgery.
Paul, the apostle doesn't mention any details of Jesus earthly life prior to his supposed crucifixion.
That would be enough to make most sensible question whether the Jesus of the New Testament really existed, but there are more—many, MANY more reasons why I can definitively say the Jesus of the New Testament was a myth.
