Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed

Status
Not open for further replies.
On being repudiated, I decided against that for Napoleon and Hitler, despite their being defeated. Napoleon's followers helped him get into power a second time after his first defeat, and Hitler's followers only deserted him as they saw Germany getting conquered. Some of them considered who they might want to surrender to, and others stayed loyal to the bitter end.


An interesting feature about these comparisons is what Jesus Christ has in common with mythical people and not with historical people, at least as a general rule.

Like someone trying to kill him when he was a baby. That is a common part of legendary people's biographies, but it is rare in biographies of well-documented people. In fact, with well-documented people, there is no hint at all that they were coming, let alone someone trying to kill them in their infancy because of it. We don't see:
  • Psychiatrists vs. baby L. Ron Hubbard
  • A cabal of rabbis, Jewish bankers, and Jewish revolutionaries vs. baby Adolf Hitler
  • Slaveowners vs. baby Abraham Lincoln
  • Fundamentalists vs. baby Charles Darwin
  • Oil-company executives vs. baby Muammar Khadafy
  • ...
 
Ah well, you see how differently people approach things! For me, the inconsistencies indicate that there was somebody real, since it is notorious that for example, witnesses to a crime given wildly inconsistent versions of it. Why would a made up myth show such differences? I suppose it might happen, if different versions of the myth were circulating, but this seems to redouble the ifs - if there was a Jesus myth, and if there were different versions of it.

The other point is quite weird, since it seems to be an argument against fundies and evangelicals, not historians. Isn't this the old confusion between HJ and gospel Jesus? Which is being argued against?

Assuming that the stories of Jesus were told by eyewitness of Jesus begs the question of his existence.
 
This argument from witnesses of a crime or an accident ignores something crucial: how good a look would the witnesses have had. If it's something quick, then it would be difficult to get a good look at it. If it's something slow, then it would be much easier.

Furthermore, the argument from crime/accident seems like a way of destroying the village in order to save it, of attacking the reputation of the Bible as a way of rescuing it. If nobody agrees on what went on, then their accounts cannot all be presumed to be letter-perfect documentaries.
 
Again, the Pauline Corpus, along with Acts and the Gospels are sources of forgeries, fiction and without external non-apologetic corroboration so for you to rely on the very worst sources for your Jesus is just laughable.

You must find external non-apologetic corroboration for your Jesus or else you might as well stop talking.
Thank you for these observations. If I must, I suppose I must. But I think I'll just keep on talking anyway, Comrade Commissar.
 
This argument from witnesses of a crime or an accident ignores something crucial: how good a look would the witnesses have had. If it's something quick, then it would be difficult to get a good look at it. If it's something slow, then it would be much easier.

Furthermore, the argument from crime/accident seems like a way of destroying the village in order to save it, of attacking the reputation of the Bible as a way of rescuing it. If nobody agrees on what went on, then their accounts cannot all be presumed to be letter-perfect documentaries.

It does seem a lot like saying that we know eyewitnesses are wrong that's why we know these eyewitnesses got it right.
 
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.

E


I've only just hit this thread, and this may have already been posted - if so, my appologies.

The essential parts of Fitzgerald's book is available on the net. Put "Ten Beautiful Lies about Jesus" into Google and get it.

It makes entertaining reading for some of us, but I can just hear some of my acquaintances. Trouble is, a childhood and adolescence in a god-bothering environment means I can quote more of the bible than many "christian evangelists". Great fun!
 
Last edited:
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.
Strange hobby you have.

Why would you do something just to be annoying?

Do these people believe (in whatever they do) just to annoy you? :boggled:
 
I've only just hit this thread, and this may have already been posted - if so, my appologies.

The essential parts of Fitzgerald's book is available on the net. Put "Ten Beautiful Lies about Jesus" into Google and get it.

It makes entertaining reading for some of us, but I can just hear some of my acquaintances. Trouble is, a childhood and adolescence in a god-bothering environment means I can quote more of the bible than many "christian evangelists". Great fun!

Sorry, it is difficult to take an article seriously when the first "beautiful lie" isn't even a lie
 
I told them I was an atheist. Since then they've been suggesting I should hurry up and die so I can I'm wrong. And they've offered to help expedite that.

They only have your best interests in mind. After you die, they can pray you to heaven.
 
I told them I was an atheist. Since then they've been suggesting I should hurry up and die so I can I'm wrong. And they've offered to help expedite that.
That's not being religious just to annoy you. If they became religious because of your comment then, yes.

Why did you feel the need to tell (obviously) religious people that you are an atheist? Sounds confrontational to me?
 
That's not being religious just to annoy you. If they became religious because of your comment then, yes.

Why did you feel the need to tell (obviously) religious people that you are an atheist? Sounds confrontational to me?

I like to tell them right away so they don't expect me to give them any money. Plus, I think it colors their world with a bit of fear and excitement.

I also try to do math in front of them if I get a chance.
 
Last edited:
I like to tell them right away so they don't expect me to give them any money. Plus, I think it colors their world with a bit of fear and excitement.

I also try to do math in front of them if I get a chance.

Personally no one has ever asked me and I couldn't really care what anyone else believes.

I liked the implication that I should have lied to them.

The implication is only in your mind. I'm an agnostic. I couldn't care less what you believe. ;)
 
The implication is only in your mind. I'm an agnostic. I couldn't care less what you believe. ;)

You agnostics. Pfft. When will you embrace the true light of atheism? I shall not-pray with you in mind, hoping that the random forces of a chaotic universe will set you straight. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom