• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kapyong

Graduate Poster
K
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,034
Location
Perth, Australia
Greetings all,

A recent short book summarises the Jesus Myth theory by listing 10 myths about Christianity that turn out not to be true. That book is :

"Nailed - 10 Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed at all."
by David Fitzgerald.

Earl Doherty says of this book :
"Fitzgerald's is possible the best 'capsule summary' of the mythicist case I've ever encountered ... with an interesting and accessible approach."
Click to expand...

Robert M. Price says :
"Fitzgerald summarises a great number of key arguments concisely and with new power and original spin. I really learned something from him. Recalls classical skeptics and biblical crictics. A surprising amount of new material."
Click to expand...

Richard C. Carrier says :
"Say what you will about the overall conclusion that Jesus never existed, but you can't deny that when it comes to the 10 modern myths about Jesus dissected here, Fitzgerald has hit the nail on the head. All 10 points are succinct and correct. A nice readable introduction to the top ten problems typically swept under the rug by anyone insisting it's crazy to even suspect Jesus might not have existed."
Click to expand...


The ten myths are :
  • Myth 1 - The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculous
  • Myth 2 - Jesus was wildly famous - but ...
  • Myth 3 - Ancient Historian Josephus wrote about Jesus
  • Myth 4 - Eye-witnesses wrote the Gospels
  • Myth 5 - The Gospels give a consistent picture of Jesus
  • Myth 6 - History confirms the Gospels
  • Myth 7 - Archeology confirms the Gospels
  • Myth 8 - Paul and the epistles corroborate the Gospels
  • Myth 9 - Christianity began with Jesus and his apostles
  • Myth 10 - Christianity was totally new and different

I will probably follow later with summaries of some of these points, depending on which points readers draw attention to.

Kapyong
 
Sorry Brainache, the Jesus Myth's time has come - it will never stop :-)

Myth 1 -
Comparing Jesus resurrection to Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon - a popular internet meme lately - Fitzgerald says :

First, we have Caesar's own account (not directly we don't - Caesar's account does not specifically refer to the Rubicon - but at one stage in his account he is north of it, later he is south of it.) But we have nothing from Jesus's own hand, and we do not really know who wrote any of the Gospels.

Second, many of Caesar's enemies reported the crossing of the Rubicon, but we have no hostile or even neutral mentions of the resurrection until over a 100 years after the alleged event, when Christian beliefs were well known.

Third, there are numerous inscriptions, coins, mentions of battles, conscriptions and judgements, which form an alsmost continuous chain of evidence of Caesar's march. But there is no physical evidence of any kind for Jesus.

Fourth, almost every historian of the period mentions the crossing, often naming and quoting their sources and known to be reliable. But for Jesus we have no historians mentioning the resurrection till centuries later - and they are Christian historians.

Finally, the civil war could not have proceeded as it did if Caesar had not crossed the Rubicon with his army and captured Rome. By contrast the only thing necessary for Christianity is a belief.

Carrier says :
"In fact, when we compare all five points, we see that in four of the five proofs of an event's historicity, the resurrection has no evidence at all, and in the one proof that it does have, it has not the best, but the very worst kind of evidence - a handful of biased, uncritical, unscholarly, unknown, second-hand witnesses. Indeed you really have to look hard to find another event that is in a worse condition than [the resurrection] as far as evidence goes."
Click to expand...

Kapyong
 
Coincidentally, Tim O'Neill just posted on the book yesterday, an update to his review and Fitzgerald's response to his review. I'll find the links and post them here.
 
Wow, that amateur researcher and full time atheist activist can really knock down those straw men.

I like "myth" one the best. The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculous is a myth! Lolz.
 
(1) Tim O'Neill's original blog review of David Fitzgerald's "Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that Show Jesus Never Existed at All by David Fitzgerald":
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2011/05/nailed-ten-christian-myths-that-show.html

Comments from O'Neill:

Verdict?: 0/5 A tragic waste of probably rather nice trees...

I have chosen to go into some detail with this one because it strikes me as encapsulating most of what is hopelessly wrong about the Myther thesis and its manifestations online and in self-published books like this one.​

(2) David Fitzgerald's blog reponse to O'Neill's review: "Nailed: Completely Brilliant or a Tragic Waste of Trees? YOU be the Judge... "
http://davefitzgerald.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/nailed-completely-brilliant-or-tragic.html

Comments from Fitzgerald:

That said, there is one review that I do want to respond to here; not simply because it’s almost completely wrong, but because it’s often so ass-backwards wrong in ways that actually prove the points I argue.​

(3) O'Neill's blog response to Fitzgerald's blog response (which O'Neill only posted yesterday): "The Jesus Myth Theory: A Reponse to David Fitzgerald"
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/the-jesus-myth-theory-reponse-to-david.html

O'Neill's comments:

His response was pretty much what I would have expected, with precisely the contrived counter-arguments we see from the Jesus Mythers in any number of online debates on the topic.​

---------------

Each of the articles above are many thousands of words long, and make for interesting reading! The question is... are Fitzgerald's counter-arguments really "contrived"? Or is O'Neill's review wrong "in ways that actually prove the points Fitzgerald argues"? Anyone want to analyse their responses?
 
Last edited:
What I find so amusing about this debate is that Christianity would be mortally wounded if it could be proven that Jesus Christ did not exist. Buddhists would shrug and laugh if Buddha never existed. What a fragile belief system Christianity is.
 
The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculous
Click to expand...

Say what?

Is that a myth?

If it is truly a myth then what does it say about whether Jesus existed or not. I am completely confused.
 
I just bought the book. It was only a few dollars as a Kindle edition. I just hope to get a few debating points to annoy Christian family and work mates.
 
lionking said:
What I find so amusing about this debate is that Christianity would be mortally wounded if it could be proven that Jesus Christ did not exist. Buddhists would shrug and laugh if Buddha never existed. What a fragile belief system Christianity is.
Click to expand...

It's not so bad.

For a start, it is nice that Christianity at least has a falsifiable claim; i.e that Jesus is the Son of God. If Jesus never existed then according to logic he cannot really have been the Son of God, therefore Christianity is false.

It would actually be worse if Christians moved the goalposts by saying, "Sure, Jesus never existed but Christianity is still correct; it's a miracle!"

(In fact, there are some Christians who even believe that God is not real. I think they only exist in the Church of England though which is pretty relaxed about doctrine.)
 
Kapyong said:
Greetings all,

A recent short book summarises the Jesus Myth theory by listing 10 myths about Christianity that turn out not to be true. That book is :

"Nailed - 10 Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed at all."
by David Fitzgerald.

Earl Doherty says of this book :


Robert M. Price says :


Richard C. Carrier says :



The ten myths are :
  • Myth 1 - The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculous
  • Myth 2 - Jesus was wildly famous - but ...
  • Myth 3 - Ancient Historian Josephus wrote about Jesus
  • Myth 4 - Eye-witnesses wrote the Gospels
  • Myth 5 - The Gospels give a consistent picture of Jesus
  • Myth 6 - History confirms the Gospels
  • Myth 7 - Archeology confirms the Gospels
  • Myth 8 - Paul and the epistles corroborate the Gospels
  • Myth 9 - Christianity began with Jesus and his apostles
  • Myth 10 - Christianity was totally new and different

I will probably follow later with summaries of some of these points, depending on which points readers draw attention to.

Kapyong
Click to expand...


I'm so impressed with your opening salvo that I'm speechless.
 
GDon said:
(1) Tim O'Neill's original blog review of David Fitzgerald's "Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that Show Jesus Never Existed at All by David Fitzgerald":
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2011/05/nailed-ten-christian-myths-that-show.html

Comments from O'Neill:

Verdict?: 0/5 A tragic waste of probably rather nice trees...

I have chosen to go into some detail with this one because it strikes me as encapsulating most of what is hopelessly wrong about the Myther thesis and its manifestations online and in self-published books like this one.​

(2) David Fitzgerald's blog reponse to O'Neill's review: "Nailed: Completely Brilliant or a Tragic Waste of Trees? YOU be the Judge... "
http://davefitzgerald.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/nailed-completely-brilliant-or-tragic.html

Comments from Fitzgerald:

That said, there is one review that I do want to respond to here; not simply because it’s almost completely wrong, but because it’s often so ass-backwards wrong in ways that actually prove the points I argue.​

(3) O'Neill's blog response to Fitzgerald's blog response (which O'Neill only posted yesterday): "The Jesus Myth Theory: A Reponse to David Fitzgerald"
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/the-jesus-myth-theory-reponse-to-david.html

O'Neill's comments:

His response was pretty much what I would have expected, with precisely the contrived counter-arguments we see from the Jesus Mythers in any number of online debates on the topic.​

---------------

Each of the articles above are many thousands of words long, and make for interesting reading! The question is... are Fitzgerald's counter-arguments really "contrived"? Or is O'Neill's review wrong "in ways that actually prove the points Fitzgerald argues"? Anyone want to analyse their responses?
Click to expand...

Tim Oneill's review is a failure of facts and logic. There is simply no corroborative evidence for an historical Jesus of Nazareth in the time of Pilate.

There is an eleventh myth that shows Jesus was myth.

11. The idea that the historical Jesus has history is a myth.
 
lionking said:
What I find so amusing about this debate is that Christianity would be mortally wounded if it could be proven that Jesus Christ did not exist. Buddhists would shrug and laugh if Buddha never existed. What a fragile belief system Christianity is.
Click to expand...
I wonder. If Genesis and Adam and Eve can be an allegory, why not Jesus? Could not an allegorical man die for the allegorical original sin of humanity?
 
lionking said:
I just bought the book. It was only a few dollars as a Kindle edition. I just hope to get a few debating points to annoy Christian family and work mates.
Click to expand...

Make sure you read the critiques as well that show it is poorly written and reasoned.

The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculous is a myth.

Cripes that is *********** beautiful.
 
The idea that historical Jesus has a history myth is ridiculous is a myth.

I can think like the author of Nailed!
 
angrysoba said:
It's not so bad.

For a start, it is nice that Christianity at least has a falsifiable claim; i.e that Jesus is the Son of God. If Jesus never existed then according to logic he cannot really have been the Son of God, therefore Christianity is false.

It would actually be worse if Christians moved the goalposts by saying, "Sure, Jesus never existed but Christianity is still correct; it's a miracle!"

(In fact, there are some Christians who even believe that God is not real. I think they only exist in the Church of England though which is pretty relaxed about doctrine.)
Click to expand...

I did know that some Christian clergy think of the resurrection, and trans-substantiation, fir example, as not literally true but allegories. Which is why I used the word "wounded". There would be some remnants of Christianity left, but most would disappear, particularly the evangelical churches.
 
GDon said:
I wonder. If Genesis and Adam and Eve can be an allegory, why not Jesus? Could not an allegorical man die for the allegorical original sin of humanity?
Click to expand...

As I just posted, some would be comfortable with this. Most wouldn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom