(June 19, 2012 at 12:45 am)gomtuu77 Wrote:

(June 9, 2012 at 11:06 pm)cratehorus Wrote: Jesus was not a real person, so where did this Jesus myth come from? Was it based on a single other faith? Was it a combination of other faiths? Or was it completely invented out of nothing?

The question is nonsensical. The vast majority of religious and secular scholarship for the last 2,000 years has not held the position that you assume in the question. That being the case, I would say that your ability to explain the Jesus Myth has probably failed befor it's begun. You've tied all useful limbs behind your back, shut your ears, plucked out your eyes, and become mute. If you want answers as to how the stories about Jesus came about, then I suggest you avoid assuming the nonexistence of the very events and corresponding material that might shed light on the origin of the stories.

What???

(June 19, 2012 at 12:54 am)cratehorus Wrote:

(June 19, 2012 at 12:45 am)gomtuu77 Wrote: The question is nonsensical. The vast majority of religious and secular scholarship for the last 2,000 years has not held the position that you assume in the question. That being the case, I would say that your ability to explain the Jesus Myth has probably failed befor it's begun. You've tied all useful limbs behind your back, shut your ears, plucked out your eyes, and become mute. If you want answers as to how the stories about Jesus came about, then I suggest you avoid assuming the nonexistence of the very events and corresponding material that might shed light on the origin of the stories.

What???

Let me see if I can put it differently. If one is wondering where the stories of Jesus came from, it is probably distinctly and obviously unhelpful to assume his nonexistence, a position not held by the vast majority of religous and secular scholarship for the last 2,000 years, including today. Rather, I would simply check out all primary source material that is available and attempt to answer the question; what best accounts for the existence of these stories or myths? The non-existence of such a person wouldn't be the first answer to the question that popped out at me. One might as well assume that the 60 million deaths between 1938 to 1945 had nothing to do with war and yet still attempt to answer the question..."what caused the 60 million deaths between 1938 and 1945?". Do you not see the problem?

The problem is, there is no reliable evidence for the existence of Jesus, let alone that he was the son of your god/your god. : )

cratehorus Wrote:Jesus was not a real person, so where did this Jesus myth come from?

Details about his life have been cherry-picked from the OT. Two examples to start you off:

Jesus being mistreated:

Matthew 27:30,31 Wrote:They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him.

Isaiah 50:6 Wrote:I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.

The words put into Jesus' mouth on the cross:

Matthew 27:46 Wrote:About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Psalm 22:1 Wrote:My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me,
so far from the words of my groaning?

Suspicious, I know.

Quote:Was it based on a single other faith?

Christianity isn't unique. Around the time of the supposed life of Jesus there were other mystery cults, such as Mithraism, who had identical beliefs to Christians today.

And this food is called among us Eucharistia, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body"; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood"; and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

-First Apology; Justin Martyr, 150 CE

Another interesting thing about the early Christians is that there were 6 different schools of thought:

Marcionism – Christ was a purely spiritual entity
Nestorianism – Jesus and Christ were two different entities
Docetism – Jesus appeared physical, but he was really incorporeal
Apollinarism – Jesus had a human body and human soul, but a divine mind
Arianism- Jesus was the son of God, not God himself
Catholicism – Jesus was fully human and fully divine, both God and the son of God

EDIT:

The funny thing with this is that it makes it clear who Paul was referring to when he would mention the heretics. Paul, being someone who always referred to a spiritual Christ (his confirmed letters predate the Gospels) was telling us to ignore the literalists that thought Jesus was a person i.e. all of Christianity today.

How did everything get flipped around so badly?

Quote:Or was it completely invented out of nothing?

There's actually nothing unique about it, so it wasn't invented. Ideas like the 'Son of God' were already in the minds of Greeks for ~2400 years prior to Christ with figures such as Heracles, Son of Zeus. Other details such as the Virgin Mary, Christmas and Easter all come from Pagan tradition (which mostly deals with the sun and moon).

Quote:How did everything get flipped around so badly?

Politics.

(June 19, 2012 at 2:02 am)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:How did everything get flipped around so badly?

Politics.

Ah of course... i.e. Roman Catholic Church...

Quote:Let me see if I can put it differently. If one is wondering where the stories of Jesus came from, it is probably distinctly and obviously unhelpful to assume his nonexistence, a position not held by the vast majority of religous and secular scholarship for the last 2,000 years, including today.

This is a very good point. Having said that, if you take the bulk of scholars over the past 2000, or 1600 years or so, the majority of these scholars have been infected with dramatic biases, on account of their preconceptions and beliefs, relating to their assessments of the issue. Further, we know that from the 4th century on, the Church was altering and destroying documents that would have stood in these belief-induced scholars way. I think we need some context with the statement you have made here.

You do make a good point though, especially when you argue that, to gain an adequate understanding, one should not assume that he did not exist. The converse of this is also true. And if we use the historical method in the strictest sense, we should begin with skeptism and lessen it by degrees with each peice of evidence that survives the various tests of historical analysis.

Quote:Rather, I would simply check out all primary source material that is available and attempt to answer the question; what best accounts for the existence of these stories or myths?

This is a very sound approach.

Further, we need to seperate the issue of the 'Christ Myth' from the 'Jesus Myth,' one being a matter to be resolved using comparative mythology, and the other by way of historical analysis, although there is some overplap, as the primary material we have for the Jesus of history, if such a person existed, comes from the Gospels, which are interwoven with obvious mythological components.

michaelsherlock Wrote:...as the primary material we have for the Jesus of history, if such a person existed, comes from the Gospels, which are interwoven with obvious mythological components.

Good post michael, but it just brings us to what I see as square one: who wrote the Gospels? Only then can you begin to answer the 'Jesus question'.

(June 19, 2012 at 1:01 am)gomtuu77 Wrote:

(June 19, 2012 at 12:54 am)cratehorus Wrote: What???

Let me see if I can put it differently. If one is wondering where the stories of Jesus came from, it is probably distinctly and obviously unhelpful to assume his nonexistence, a position not held by the vast majority of religous and secular scholarship for the last 2,000 years, including today. Rather, I would simply check out all primary source material that is available and attempt to answer the question; what best accounts for the existence of these stories or myths? The non-existence of such a person wouldn't be the first answer to the question that popped out at me. One might as well assume that the 60 million deaths between 1938 to 1945 had nothing to do with war and yet still attempt to answer the question..."what caused the 60 million deaths between 1938 and 1945?". Do you not see the problem?

Very good, all you need to do now is produce some contemporary accounts of his life and doings and we'll proceed from there.

Something actually written by JC himself would do for a kickoff. And I don't mean John Cleese, Jim Carrey or Jeremy Clarkson.