Best analysis EVER on how Jesus is clearly a MYTH!
Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2014 4:01 am
We Know From Hard Evidence Dinosaurs Existed 66 Million Years Ago Yet We Have No Objective Evidence Jesus Existed Just 2 Thousands Years Ago
A. We have no firsthand testimony from anyone who knew Jesus or wrote anything about him during his life time. (All the Gospels are late and anonymous). No person living in Roman Palestine neither saw, knew of, nor heard of either Jesus or his followers.
B. We have nothing written by Jesus himself. Ironically, Jesus is portrayed as highly educated speaking Hebrew (Luke 4: 16 – 20), Aramaic (Matt. 27: 46), Greek (Matt. 16: 6) and Latin (Matt. 8: 5 -13), yet he remained unable to write anything. (The story of Jesus writing in the sand in John 8: 2 – 11 is textually late and begs the question as to why Jesus wrote nothing. This could be because the author(s) of these forged accounts didn’t know either Hebrew or Aramaic.) (1) Even Jesus’ contemporary, the itinerant miracle working Apollonius of Tyana had works ascribed to him. (2) In short, the lack of Jesus having left anything in writing could be due to the fact that the forgers of the Gospel traditions viewed their detailed verbatim creations as totally sufficient.
C. The Jesus of the Gospels cannot be separated from the context of myth and theology. Jesus will (and must) remain an integrated part of myth and faith joined at the head just as Siamese twins who share vital organs are joined. To remove some type of reconstructed “Historical Jesus” from his world of faith and myth will only destroy both.
D. The Gospels don’t tell us where they were composed. However, the fact they were composed in Greek and not a Semitic language which was native to Roman Palestine (such as Aramaic or Hebrew) points to their composition outside of Palestine. (See point, H)
E. While Roman Palestine is center-stage for the Gospels events, there has never been found any early manuscript of any Gospels or section of any Gospel or wall graffiti to validate Jesus ever lived in the entire country from Galilee to Jerusalem. In short, when scholars look to first century Roman Palestine for any evidence for the Gospel Jesus, they find totally nothing!
F. The early (65 -90 CE) traditional dates for the Gospels or purely based on conjecture and faith.
G. Philo (the only contemporary source during Jesus life time) doesn’t mention Jesus although Philo was acutely interested in the Jerusalem Temple and anything that happened there. A Jesus who fought with the Temple Priest and Jewish leaders in Jerusalem would have mostly likely caught Philo's attention.
H. Josephus’s account of Jesus (as well as his account of James and John the Baptist) is little more than Greek stories which tell us no more than what is stated in the Gospels composed outside of first century Palestine. These Gospels accounts were composed in Hellenistic Greek most likely in Asia Minor or somewhere around Alexander Egypt. (3) So far facts point to the case that early papyri such has P52, P45, P46, P47, P66, P72, and P75 (all found disposed of in Egypt) were likely also composed in Egypt. If this fact is correct, the statements by Josephus used to support a Historical Jesus have totally nothing to do with Roman Palestine, but Christian Egypt. This can be supported by the fact that most all quotations cited by the Old Testament are taken from the LXX ; a text which, like Jesus, never uses God’s personal name (Yahweh / Jehovah), but Theos. This very likely gives us a hint of the Gnostic theological beliefs of the composers as well as a location somewhere in Egypt for the creation of the Gospels traditions. (4)
I. I have discussed Josephus’s often wild and unreliable fabrications dealing with the Bible stated as history HERE Regardless, Josephus NEVER said he had any firsthand knowledge of these three Gospel events nor does he tell us how he got his information. His use of this material (that which a Christian did not interpolate) in his Jewish Antiquities has more to do with the embellishment of his work (a standard ploy of Josephus in his Antiquities) than with truth.
J. St. Paul NEVER saw or met any earthly Jesus. Paul’s letters are little more than theological discussions. If Paul had the Gospels at hand, why does he know so little about Jesus? It has long been known among scholars that the account of Paul’s life in the latter half of the Book of Acts and his Epistles can’t be reconciled. Moreover, like the Gospels themselves, neither Paul’s letters nor the New Testament as a whole can textually be dated with any certainty prior to 200 CE as there is no manuscript evidence.
K. None of the original apostles (be they 12 (Mark 6:7) or 72 (Luke 10: 1) or 120 (Acts 1: 15) left us anything. 1 and 2 Peter knows little of any Historical Jesus, but is highly theological.
L. The so-called Historical Jesus is nothing more than a straw man. To construct a so-called "Historical Jesus" out of the myth and theology of the Gospels is purely conjecture rebuilt on subjective ideas using the conflicting and contradicting Gospel accounts. There have been several dozen Historical Jesus figures created to vindicate anything that can come close to reality. When cut out of the mythical environment of the Gospels, we have nothing but a straw man created in the scholars own image. The Historical Jesus created by Bart Ehrman carries no more value that the Historical Jesus created by Thomas Jefferson after he took a knife to the Gospels stories in his Bible.
M. The use of “Jesus” by the Early Church Fathers is purely theological and used for rhetorical purposes. The confession of Jesus Christ is a statement of faith and not history.
N. While Christianity is mentioned by ten pagan writers, Jesus never is. (5)
O. Jesus is not mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Though we have about 930 texts and fragments of scrolls preserved by the dry climate of Palestine (often under bat dung), we find no Christian textual material from the first two centuries CE in Palestine. (6) Yet, with similar climate conditions in Egypt, the textual traditions of has left us with fifty-two texts, most dealing with Gnosticism.
P. The idea that Jesus was an itinerant non-literary prophet preacher is modeled after the same theory that Elijah and Elisha were also itinerant, non-literary prophets / preachers, but whose lives we now know are based entirely in fiction.
Q. Josephus, as governor of Galilee, had firsthand knowledge of the area and tells us that Galilee had “two hundred and four cities and villages” (7), yet he knows nothing about any town or village in lower Galilee called Nazareth . . . a place so important to Jesus in the Gospels. Neither is Nazareth mentioned in the Old Testament, nor in the Talmud nor in the Midrash.
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.c ... e.html?m=1
A. We have no firsthand testimony from anyone who knew Jesus or wrote anything about him during his life time. (All the Gospels are late and anonymous). No person living in Roman Palestine neither saw, knew of, nor heard of either Jesus or his followers.
B. We have nothing written by Jesus himself. Ironically, Jesus is portrayed as highly educated speaking Hebrew (Luke 4: 16 – 20), Aramaic (Matt. 27: 46), Greek (Matt. 16: 6) and Latin (Matt. 8: 5 -13), yet he remained unable to write anything. (The story of Jesus writing in the sand in John 8: 2 – 11 is textually late and begs the question as to why Jesus wrote nothing. This could be because the author(s) of these forged accounts didn’t know either Hebrew or Aramaic.) (1) Even Jesus’ contemporary, the itinerant miracle working Apollonius of Tyana had works ascribed to him. (2) In short, the lack of Jesus having left anything in writing could be due to the fact that the forgers of the Gospel traditions viewed their detailed verbatim creations as totally sufficient.
C. The Jesus of the Gospels cannot be separated from the context of myth and theology. Jesus will (and must) remain an integrated part of myth and faith joined at the head just as Siamese twins who share vital organs are joined. To remove some type of reconstructed “Historical Jesus” from his world of faith and myth will only destroy both.
D. The Gospels don’t tell us where they were composed. However, the fact they were composed in Greek and not a Semitic language which was native to Roman Palestine (such as Aramaic or Hebrew) points to their composition outside of Palestine. (See point, H)
E. While Roman Palestine is center-stage for the Gospels events, there has never been found any early manuscript of any Gospels or section of any Gospel or wall graffiti to validate Jesus ever lived in the entire country from Galilee to Jerusalem. In short, when scholars look to first century Roman Palestine for any evidence for the Gospel Jesus, they find totally nothing!
F. The early (65 -90 CE) traditional dates for the Gospels or purely based on conjecture and faith.
G. Philo (the only contemporary source during Jesus life time) doesn’t mention Jesus although Philo was acutely interested in the Jerusalem Temple and anything that happened there. A Jesus who fought with the Temple Priest and Jewish leaders in Jerusalem would have mostly likely caught Philo's attention.
H. Josephus’s account of Jesus (as well as his account of James and John the Baptist) is little more than Greek stories which tell us no more than what is stated in the Gospels composed outside of first century Palestine. These Gospels accounts were composed in Hellenistic Greek most likely in Asia Minor or somewhere around Alexander Egypt. (3) So far facts point to the case that early papyri such has P52, P45, P46, P47, P66, P72, and P75 (all found disposed of in Egypt) were likely also composed in Egypt. If this fact is correct, the statements by Josephus used to support a Historical Jesus have totally nothing to do with Roman Palestine, but Christian Egypt. This can be supported by the fact that most all quotations cited by the Old Testament are taken from the LXX ; a text which, like Jesus, never uses God’s personal name (Yahweh / Jehovah), but Theos. This very likely gives us a hint of the Gnostic theological beliefs of the composers as well as a location somewhere in Egypt for the creation of the Gospels traditions. (4)
I. I have discussed Josephus’s often wild and unreliable fabrications dealing with the Bible stated as history HERE Regardless, Josephus NEVER said he had any firsthand knowledge of these three Gospel events nor does he tell us how he got his information. His use of this material (that which a Christian did not interpolate) in his Jewish Antiquities has more to do with the embellishment of his work (a standard ploy of Josephus in his Antiquities) than with truth.
J. St. Paul NEVER saw or met any earthly Jesus. Paul’s letters are little more than theological discussions. If Paul had the Gospels at hand, why does he know so little about Jesus? It has long been known among scholars that the account of Paul’s life in the latter half of the Book of Acts and his Epistles can’t be reconciled. Moreover, like the Gospels themselves, neither Paul’s letters nor the New Testament as a whole can textually be dated with any certainty prior to 200 CE as there is no manuscript evidence.
K. None of the original apostles (be they 12 (Mark 6:7) or 72 (Luke 10: 1) or 120 (Acts 1: 15) left us anything. 1 and 2 Peter knows little of any Historical Jesus, but is highly theological.
L. The so-called Historical Jesus is nothing more than a straw man. To construct a so-called "Historical Jesus" out of the myth and theology of the Gospels is purely conjecture rebuilt on subjective ideas using the conflicting and contradicting Gospel accounts. There have been several dozen Historical Jesus figures created to vindicate anything that can come close to reality. When cut out of the mythical environment of the Gospels, we have nothing but a straw man created in the scholars own image. The Historical Jesus created by Bart Ehrman carries no more value that the Historical Jesus created by Thomas Jefferson after he took a knife to the Gospels stories in his Bible.
M. The use of “Jesus” by the Early Church Fathers is purely theological and used for rhetorical purposes. The confession of Jesus Christ is a statement of faith and not history.
N. While Christianity is mentioned by ten pagan writers, Jesus never is. (5)
O. Jesus is not mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Though we have about 930 texts and fragments of scrolls preserved by the dry climate of Palestine (often under bat dung), we find no Christian textual material from the first two centuries CE in Palestine. (6) Yet, with similar climate conditions in Egypt, the textual traditions of has left us with fifty-two texts, most dealing with Gnosticism.
P. The idea that Jesus was an itinerant non-literary prophet preacher is modeled after the same theory that Elijah and Elisha were also itinerant, non-literary prophets / preachers, but whose lives we now know are based entirely in fiction.
Q. Josephus, as governor of Galilee, had firsthand knowledge of the area and tells us that Galilee had “two hundred and four cities and villages” (7), yet he knows nothing about any town or village in lower Galilee called Nazareth . . . a place so important to Jesus in the Gospels. Neither is Nazareth mentioned in the Old Testament, nor in the Talmud nor in the Midrash.
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.c ... e.html?m=1
