R. G. Price - On the Mythic Jesus

[Angrboda]

I'll have to devote some time to reading this thread, but in the meantime I want to add my two cents worth.

First, I don't have a problem with a real Jesus, even with the paucity of literary reference (akin to the doubts about King David prior to discovering a stelae referring to such a one). However, I have a little different take on exactly who this man was. I think it's all too likely, given the commonness of charlatans of the time living by fooling ignorant peasants, that this is a much more likely scenario. Jesus and his disciples would be what in modern parlance are termed grifters. Jesus likely kept them spellbound while the merry band picked pockets or something even more outrageous. Jesus wasn't God. Jesus was a con man. Unfortunately, Jesus or the combined lot decided that they were tired of settling for small scores, and decided to try their act in 'the big tent'. As a result of Jesus' rather obnoxious and preposterous behavior (and likely claims of divinity), he was arrested and summarily executed. His disciples, stunned and fearing that their gravy train had run dry, invented an even more preposterous lie to sell to the gullible. Apparently meeting success with this new act, they and their wild tale went on to great popularity, being spread from village to village by travelers' word of mouth (and their own "road shows"). As Thomas Paine has noted, given the story of a miracle, the most likely story is a lie. Jesus and his band weren't holy men, but professional liars -- con men, whose only real claim to fame is the gullibilty and a fascination with the unusual that is shared by most ordinary folk, traits amply demonstrated everywhere they looked.

ETA: A couple minor flourishes. First is the question of Judas Iscariot. I suspect that either Judas himself was under the eye of the authorities following Jesus' big act -- perhaps Judas was even a part of it, having the job of stealing something valuable while people were distracted with Jesus' bizarre behavior; or perhaps, he didn't want to go along with the resurrection story and his fellows turned against him, painting him a snitch, and attempting to distance themselves from him lest he really start talking. I'm sure multiple scenarios are viable. Second, it's not uncommon among religious and philosophical literature for followers to write 'in the name of' their founder. It's entirely possible that Jesus was not one man, but rather that the group took turns playing the part, each adding their own ad libs to the part. It would go a long way to explaining the supposed richness of the story if it was a collaborative effort. They may have even "kept Jesus alive" long after his death, no pun intended.