Jesus.
- This topic has 92 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 2 hours, 43 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I am really dismayed that atheist academics of renown are saying there is lots of evidence for an historical Jesus. This translates to the like “fact” on internet searches too about the “proven existence of Jesus.”
These academics then quote Paul’s epistles as proof! They also rehash the Josephus interpolations, and the remarks on Christians in Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius. All these do is report the existence of Christians, not of Jesus.
How can such bright people repeat the claim of “lots of evidence” for Jesus?
It has been proven that Jesus only existed as a myth; it is a product of human imagination. There is a book written by an expriest titled. Jesus 3000 years before Christ, which proves that Jesus is an Egyptian myth, an Egyptian god, and that he is the only historical figure that has ever existed.
The book The Bible Unearthed, written by a Hebrew anthropologist, proves that everything in the Bible did not take place and the personalities mentioned in the Bible did not exist. He denied the existence of Noah, Moses, the Exodus and Israel, and the apocalyptic was a type of literature that existed at that time, and instead of calamity, it provided hope. The writer ( John ) of the book Apocalipsis, as an apostle of Jesus, never existed, and neither one of his apostles; es, the cult ot his mother Mary is a creation of the Catholic Church
The Old Testament was written by jews priests to provide hope to the Hebrew peoples, but everything is a product of the human imagination and copied and adapted from different ancient world events. The Pentateuch ( The Torah ) was not written by Moses, and Joshua never existed.
Paul was only a liar; he never met Jesus, and he did not know anything about the gospel; he was a Herodian; that is the reason why he was killed, and everything that he wrote contradicts the New Testament.
Not all his letters were written by him, and he suffered from syphilis, and hashish was the medication that he was taking for the pain, which produced hallucinations.
Personally, I prefer the narratives of Federik Engels and Karl Kautsky. Christianity existed before the New Testament, and Paul existed before the New Testament too, and he did not know the Gospel; his letters contradict many ideas that were expressed in the New Testament
.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_UnearthedAnd yet mainstream academia, and even atheists, insist Jesus was a real person, with denyers called “a fringe.”
AI Overview +2 “Virtually all historians and scholars of antiquity agree that a historical Jesus of Nazareth lived in first-century Roman Judea. While the supernatural claims in the Bible are matters of faith, the scholarly consensus overwhelmingly concludes that an actual, flesh-and-blood person named Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and crucified under Pontius Pilate.The belief that Jesus is a complete myth is a fringe theory in academic circles. Historians establish his existence using multiple independent sources that date to within a few decades of his life, which is more contemporary evidence than we have for many other accepted ancient figures.These independent sources include:The Apostle Paul: Paul’s letters, written within 20 to 30 years of Jesus’s death, mention knowing Jesus’s brother, James.Roman Historians: Writers like Tacitus recorded the execution of “Christus” by Pontius Pilate in the early second century.Jewish Historians: First-century writer Flavius Josephus twice references Jesus in his historical works.To dive deeper into how historians use these and other texts to separate fact from myth, you can explore the Historical Jesus overview on Wikipedia or watch Bart Ehrman’s lecture on Did Jesus Even Exist?.”
AI Overview +8 “Dr. Bart Ehrman, a prominent New Testament scholar, argues that the historical existence of Jesus is beyond reasonable doubt. Despite being an agnostic and highly critical of the New Testament’s religious claims, he maintains that denying Jesus existed is a fringe theory rejected by virtually all historians of antiquity.Ehrman outlined his comprehensive case in his 2011 book, Did Jesus Exist?. His arguments rest on several key pillars of historical evidence:Independent Early Sources: The Gospels are not the only accounts. Historians can identify multiple independent written sources—such as the Q document and the early writings of the Apostle Paul—that predate the Gospels and corroborate key details.The Testimony of Paul: Paul personally knew Jesus’ closest associates, including his brother James (Galatians 1:19) and the disciple Peter. Ehrman argues it is historically implausible that Paul could have spent time with a man’s actual brother without the man himself having existed.Criterion of Embarrassment: Early Christians would not have invented a messiah who was publicly executed by the Romans. Because crucifixion was a humiliating and cursed death in the ancient world, the narrative of Jesus’s crucifixion strongly points to an authentic historical event.Corroboration by Non-Christian Writers: First-century Roman and Jewish historians, such as Flavius Josephus and Tacitus, independently mention Jesus and his execution under Pontius Pilate within decades of his lifetime.Ehrman has firmly stated that the “mythicist” claim that Jesus was entirely fabricated is not taken seriously by academic scholars. He frequently emphasizes that ancient historians have far more abundant and independent evidence for the existence of Jesus than they do for many prominent political or military figures of the exact same era.You can explore his detailed historical defense directly on The Bart Ehrman Blog, or check out his published Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth book to dive deeper into his methodology.”
It is like saying that the Jews are the chosen people of god; it is only mentioned in the Bible, and the writers of the bibles were Jews. It was a book written to give hope to the Jews tribes, and Jesus was not a messaic or a prophets, they were thousands of messiahs and prophets at that time from different places, including the Sumerians and the Chaldeans.
It has not been mentioned by any serious historian as an outside source, and there are no serious historian that have proven the existence of Jesus. Josephus was interpolated, and he did not mention Jesus; he mentioned the existence of the Christians, and in Rome there were many Christian sects and Christs. None of the Roman historians mentioned Jesus.
Before the Bible (the Torah) started to be written in Babylon, the belief was that the Egyptians were the chosen people, and it was also written by the Rosacrucian who wrote their own Genesis.
Another myth was written by the Rosacrucians, saying that Jesus was in a coma, and their doctors took him, and he left toward Kashemere with his mother, and he died in Kashemere. According to the Rosacrucians, he did not die on the cross or stauros.
If Jesus was a white man like many priests are saying and the pictures are showing him like a white man, how did he fit within the African Egyptians? Egypt was not completely a slave society, and it was a brilliant empire with sciences, architecture, philosophers and priests, and they were the founders of monotheism
If he ever existed, he was a Jewish zealot, and his apostles were jews zealots that opposed the Roman Empire. He was a peasant who did not know how to read and write like many people in that time, and carpenters were very poor people, and he had several brothers, andJoseph was his real father, and a married woman is not a virgin, and she died like any other human being; the asuncion was a myth created by the catholic church to accumulate profits
I know, but I cannot understand why atheists like Bart Ehrman and others say there is lots of evidence for him, when there is none, and why most classicists are saying the same, and calling the minority who say otherwise a fringe few.
And yet mainstream academia, and even atheists, insist Jesus was a real person, with deniers called “a fringe.”
—————————————————–Most atheists do not know the real origin of religions; they do not know that it was a progressive creation of mankind to explain nature, life and society; it was not created to kill human beings and to conquer.
Jesus did not create any religion; Jesus was glorified by the writers of the New Testament ( Greek scriptures ) who did not exist. According to the narrative, he opposed the Roman Empire oligarchs and the religious leaders of his time; it is also the conclusion made by some followers of the so-called liberation theology ( wrongly called a Marxist tendency ) founded by Gustavo Gutierrez.
I have read his books, and he was not a Marxist; he influenced the Argentine priests who worked in the poor neighbourhoods and were killed when Francisco was the bishop of Buenos Aires, but they were not Marxist either
Human beings did not have physics, scientific medicine, biology and anthropology to explain the world; therefore, it was the only solution for them.
The concept of the devil was taken by the jews from the Persians, and the serpent was an Egyptian god.
If Moses existed, he was an African Egyptian, a gentile, and there are many blacks Africans who are jews too.
The whole bible is a spider web created by human beings’ imagination, as well as all the other so-called sacred books
Of course, when people say “the Catholic Church” prior to 1054 they should be aware that what they mean is the Orthodox Church – the Athanasian Church, which emerged the victor from the early Christian controversies.
The Roman Catholic Church did not become independent until 1054. The popes participated in the Church councils but they were not in charge of them, although prominent.
I know, but I cannot understand why atheists like Bart Ehrman and others say there is lots of evidence for him, when there is none, and why most classicists are saying the same, and calling the minority who say otherwise a fringe few.
Karl Kautsky’s Foundations of Christianity (1908) is a materialist-conception-of-history study of the origins of Christianity.
By analysing the irrational (whitewashed) biblical accounts of the arrest, trial and execution of “Jesus” for their rational kernel, Kautsky unearths evidence that points to a rebel leader of a failed attack (coup d’etat) on Jerusalem against Roman domination.
The God Who Wasn’t There.
The Roman Empire used crucifixion against its political opponents, and they were exposed to the public for several days until their lower extremities were fractured and people died from asphyxiation.
Jesus did not fulfil the so-called prophecies, as he stayed only a few hours on the cross and a few hours in the grave.
During that time, many people believed in reincarnation, and only the Pharisees believed in the resurrection.
According to the narratives, women were the first witnesses of his resurrection, and they were not included as apostles; most men ran away
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.