Can you still be an atheist after this?

[Statler Waldorf]

Is that right? Then where do all those 'Jesus is a myth' theories come from? Sports psychologists?

Close…the Jesus Myth was popularized by George Albert Wells who was a professor of German not a historian.

I think one of the most popular theories is that there was a man, or perhaps several men, who said or did SOME of the things described, with the rest tacked on either from pre-existing myths or for dramatic effect, or to retroactively prove the OT correct. This would make him (at least partially) a myth.

Evidence? Actually the most popular theory is that the gospels accurately describe the historical figure of Jesus.

Certainly no historian who didn't have a vested interest in the Bible being true has ever suggested there was anything other than circumstantial evidence for things such as the resurrection. And yet historians of all walks have confirmed the existence of figures such as Genghis Khan, Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Pizarro, Hitler, Tutankhamun and The Incredible Hulk. ISN'T THAT WEIRD?

---

Not weird at all, can you name a historian who does not have a vested interest in scripture being untrue who denies the resurrection of Christ?

You're right Stat, I had a really hard time finding a historian who thought Jesus was a myth. I might need to lie down.

You found an 18th century French philosopher who thought Jesus may have been a myth, wow very impressive. Here is where Rhythm is supposed to chastise you for using too old of sources; of course he won’t because he likes double standards.

---

“This sceptical way of thinking reached its culmination in the argument that Jesus as a human being never existed at all and is a myth.... But above all, if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. Certainly, there are all those discrepancies between one Gospel and another. But we do not deny that an event ever took place just because some pagan historians such as, for example, Livy and Polybius, happen to have described it in differing terms.... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serous scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.”

- Michael Grant, historian and atheist

“The Christian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul. Some of these are of uncertain authorship; several, antedating A.D. 64, are almost universally accounted as substantially genuine. No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in his flesh. The accepted epistles frequently refer to the Last Supper and the Crucifixion.... The contradictions are of minutiae, not substance; in essentials the synoptic gospels agree remarkably well, and form a consistent portrait of Christ. In the enthusiasm of its discoveries the Higher Criticism has applied to the New Testament tests of authenticity so severe that by them a hundred ancient worthies, for example Hammurabi, David, Socrates would fade into legend. Despite the prejudices and theological preconceptions of the evangelists, they record many incidents that mere inventors would have concealed the competition of the apostles for high places in the Kingdom, their flight after Jesus' arrest, Peter's denial, the failure of Christ to work miracles in Galilee, the references of some auditors to his possible insanity, his early uncertainty as to his mission, his confessions of ignorance as to the future, his moments of bitterness, his despairing cry on the cross; no one reading these scenes can doubt the reality of the figure behind them. That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel. After two centuries of Higher Criticism the outlines of the life, character, and teaching of Christ, remain reasonably clear, and constitute the most fascinating feature of the history of Western man.”

- Will Durant, historian and atheist

“Of course the doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the Palestinian community.”

- Rudolf Bultmann, historian and atheist

“Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely. The theory of Jesus' nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question.”

-Robert Van Voost, historian and secularist

“Today, nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which as to be weighed and assessed critically. There is general agreement that, with the possible exception of Paul, we know far more about Jesus of Nazareth than about any first or second century Jewish or pagan religious teacher. “

“Given the broad consensus against the Jesus Myth, it has been left to a few non-professional commentators, such as Earl Doherty and GA Wells to question Jesus' existence. Despite their vigorous efforts, they have failed, and continue to fail, to even give their position respectability in the broader academic community.”


- Graham Stanton, Chair of New Testament Studies at Cambridge University

---

Why would I even bother.

Well usually when you make a claim it’s proper to try and back it up with at least something, but for a liar such as yourself I know very well why you won’t back it up, you can’t.

Classic Stat - turning a phrase so that it looks like I said one thing when my entire point was in a completely different direction.

Classic Cinjin, unable to articulate his arguments to save his life.

you have never won a debate on this site.

According to whom? You? LOL

and I was merely pointing out that you were the Pot calling the Kettle black with that absurd claim that atheists throw out ridiculous comparisons hoping that one sticks. Go play in your pen, sheep.

You didn’t point out anything, you merely asserted something and then failed to provide any evidence to back it up you dishonest goat.

As a result, some critics argue that Biblical scholars have created the historical Jesus in their own image.

What critics?

All the historians who seem to agree about Jesus are Christian scholars.

Wrong, see above I cited several atheist historians who think the Jesus Myth crowd are loons.