• 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.
Gawdzilla said:
It would be tough to sell him as the savior of the Jews if he was Greek, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

This is what stunned me and husband. I only wish I'd jotted down the verse etc but I will borrow the bible again to find the verse
 
mstricky said:
This is what stunned me and husband. I only wish I'd jotted down the verse etc but I will borrow the bible again to find the verse
Click to expand...
The bit about why wasn't he born in Galilee is reminiscent of John 7:
40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet. 41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? 42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was? 43 So there was a division among the people because of him. 44 And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him.
Click to expand...
John never tells us Christ was born in Bethlehem. But the issue here is not Jesus being Greek: it's whether or not he was a Galilean, which meant he couldn't be descended from the House of David according to the ideas of the time, because David had been born in the other end of the country.

ETA A woman did approach Jesus but not because he was Greek. In fact she was the Greek. It's in Mark 7:
25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.
Click to expand...
I think you might have put together these two passages by mistake, and concluded that Jesus was Greek. But I can't think of any NT passage that says that.
 
Last edited:
Foster Zygote said:
Who (other than Christian fundamentalists) makes anything like the above claims? They are not representative of the scholarly arguments that Jesus likely existed as an historical figure in the early 1st Century. In fact, every scholar I've read on the subject, who thinks that he probably did exist, would dispute every single one of those ten claims.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's curious that this confusion between historical Jesus and the gospel Jesus, which as you say is characteristic of both fundies and evangelicals, is repeated sometimes in these discussions.

If they are myths, then how would they discredit an argument using historical method, which will not use myths as evidence?

It's almost as bad as the crass 'Jesus is said to walk on water, therefore didn't exist'.
 
Foster Zygote said:
Who (other than Christian fundamentalists) makes anything like the above claims? They are not representative of the scholarly arguments that Jesus likely existed as an historical figure in the early 1st Century. In fact, every scholar I've read on the subject, who thinks that he probably did exist, would dispute every single one of those ten claims.
Click to expand...

At least two of those myths are mainstream:
- Myth 1 - The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculous: many mainstream scholars do deride the idea of a mythical Jesus as ridiculous
- Myth 3 - Ancient Historian Josephus wrote about Jesus: many mainstream scholars think there is a kernel of truth to the Testimonium Flavianum; and think that Josephus describes the death of James, the brother of Jesus Christ, though the description is fundamentally at odds with that one in Acts.
 
Craig B said:
The bit about why wasn't he born in Galilee is reminiscent of John 7: John never tells us Christ was born in Bethlehem. But the issue here is not Jesus being Greek: it's whether or not he was a Galilean, which meant he couldn't be descended from the House of David according to the ideas of the time, because David had been born in the other end of the country.

ETA A woman did approach Jesus but not because he was Greek. In fact she was the Greek. It's in Mark 7: I think you might have put together these two passages by mistake, and concluded that Jesus was Greek. But I can't think of any NT passage that says that.
Click to expand...

No I definitely didn't. A woman said to him...... But you are a Greek it is said that the son of God comes from the Gallilea area. Jesus was visiting another town and I can't recall that either.
I think it was in Luke but not sure. I remember thinking why would 'Luke' write that (i've only just recently found out that the gospels weren't written by the desciples!)
 
^
Memory is very imprecise, mstricky.
I'll put my money on Craig B's explanation.

Foster Zygote said:
Who (other than Christian fundamentalists) makes anything like the above claims? They are not representative of the scholarly arguments that Jesus likely existed as an historical figure in the early 1st Century. In fact, every scholar I've read on the subject, who thinks that he probably did exist, would dispute every single one of those ten claims.
Click to expand...

Foster Zygote, could you give me a link to a coherent resumen of the scholarly arguments Jesus likely existed, please? Yes, I know we've had scads of them here, but I'm interested in what you find most compelling

ddt said:
Or Iason.

ETA: or Hercules Heracles.

ETA2: or Agamemnon. Or Aigisthos (by proxy).
Click to expand...

Iason?
Driven out of Corinth after Medea killed his young bride and her father, then struck down by the prow of the Argus, carved in the form of Athene.

Heracles?
Died in agony caused by donning a poisoned shirt given him by his jealous wife.

Agamemnon?
Axed by Clytemnestra.


Craig B said:
There was Medusa the Gorgon. But he got to her before she got to him.
Click to expand...
That would be Perseus, AFAIK.
 
Last edited:
I don't think any Historians that I've heard of really think Jesus was Greek. The Gospels were written in Greek, but I believe that's what the educated of the area wrote in. Jesus also wasn't believed to of actually spoken in Greek. And as far as I can tell, there are no passages that state Jesus was Greek in Luke or any of the other gospels. You can use Biblegateway to search for terms. Nor do I think it would particularly matter if it did say in Luke that Jesus was Greek. Luke has his own spin on the Jesus story and his own audience, was the third gospel written, and was of course based very much on the previous two Mark and Mathew.

Lastly, I dont think "oh I remember reading this somewhere in there I think" is really a good reason to truly think Jesus was Greek. Memory is very fallible, and its not as if everything in the Gospels are true particularly if its only supposedly in on of them.
 
Too true.
I spend 40 minutes everyday going over the basic routines of my work, before I start doing my job!
 
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...

First of all most Christians wouldn't accept the proof,

Second the "Jesus Christ"* that most Christians believe in has been discarded by historians with no discernible result.

*Son'o'God, Born of a Virgin, Water walking, food replicating, reincarnating, ect. ect. ect.
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
Oh yeah, agreed. But if the resurrection was proven not to have happened (yeah I know, it can't be) then the church would surely collapse.

Anyway, my main point was that the central tenets of Christianity are very fragile, unlike other religions which do not depend on the reality of their founder.
Click to expand...

You totally misjudge believers and the tenacity they will cling to their beliefs.

They didn't arrive at their belief by facts so facts cannot sway their belief.
 
pakeha said:
Foster Zygote, could you give me a link to a coherent resumen of the scholarly arguments Jesus likely existed, please? Yes, I know we've had scads of them here, but I'm interested in what you find most compelling
Click to expand...

The apocalyptic content of many of the sayings attributed to Jesus, for one.

The way Paul goes out of his way to explain why his readers should believe him even though people who actually knew Jesus in life are saying that he's wrong about his message, for another.
 
tsig said:
You totally misjudge believers and the tenacity they will cling to their beliefs.

They didn't arrive at their belief by facts so facts cannot sway their belief.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Look at the claims of Joseph Smith regarding the Book Of Mormon and the Book Of Abraham:

The former is flat out contradicted by archaeology, paleontology, linguistics and genomics, and the latter is shown to be a complete fraud by actual egyptological translation of the Egyptian funerary text from which it was "translated". These facts have barely put a dent in Mormonism.
 
Foster Zygote said:
Indeed. Look at the claims of Joseph Smith regarding the Book Of Mormon and the Book Of Abraham:

The former is flat out contradicted by archaeology, paleontology, linguistics and genomics, and the latter is shown to be a complete fraud by actual egyptological translation of the Egyptian funerary text from which it was "translated". These facts have barely put a dent in Mormonism.
Click to expand...

Yes. ETA:Joe Smith is proven by court records to be a con artist but that doesn't matter to one who has spiritual indigestion.

In some cases having your belief proved wrong just makes you double down.

When prophecy fails:

A UFO cult who's leader had predicted the destruction of Earth preceded by the arrival of an alien at 12:00

12:05 A.M., December 21. No visitor. Someone in the group notices that another clock in the room shows 11:55. The group agrees that it is not yet midnight.

12:10 A.M. The second clock strikes midnight. Still no visitor. The group sits in stunned silence. The cataclysm itself is no more than seven hours away.

4:00 A.M. The group has been sitting in stunned silence. A few attempts at finding explanations have failed. Keech begins to cry.

4:45 A.M. Another message by automatic writing is sent to Keech. It states, in effect, that the God of Earth has decided to spare the planet from destruction. The cataclysm has been called off: "The little group, sitting all night long, had spread so much light that God had saved the world from destruction."

Afternoon, December 21. Newspapers are called; interviews are sought. In a reversal of its previous distaste for publicity, the group begins an urgent campaign to spread its message to as broad an audience as possible.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails


Sounds similar to Pentecost.
 
Last edited:
Brainache said:
The earliest gospel (Mark) has been dated by Scholars to just after 70 CE, so thats about 40 years, not 100.

He's too Jewish to be all Greek, sorry.
Click to expand...

No, No!!! You are promoting Chinese Whispers. Which Scholar or Historian has presented the evidence that was used to date gMark just after 70 CE. These magical invented dates of authorship can no longer be accepted without the supporting evidence.

The first writing to mention gMark C 180 CE also claimed Jesus was crucified at around c 50 CE--under Claudius. See Against Heresies 2.22

Plus, the author of gMark was NOT a Jew. He did not know that Jews do not anoint the body of a dead with spices three days after burial. See Mark 16.
 
lionking said:
Oh yeah, agreed. But if the resurrection was proven not to have happened (yeah I know, it can't be) then the church would surely collapse.

Anyway, my main point was that the central tenets of Christianity are very fragile, unlike other religions which do not depend on the reality of their founder.
Click to expand...

Christianity must collapse the very same way as the belief in the Myth Gods of the Greek and Romans eventually disappeared.

The mythological fable called Jesus has no historical and theological value in the 21st century and beyond.

If Jesus of Nazareth was not a real God and did not exist what is the purpose of NT and the Church?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom