Ledo, I think I agree (partly) with your opinion. Although I have never researched the Jesus Tomb (do you have a link?), I have read deeply into the subject matter(early Christian theology is a little pet project of mine). After reading the link chatpilot gave me, I must say that I agree that the evidence does not seem terribly concrete for a forgery.
Anyway, I have never really bought in to the orthodox view of Christ. I mean the thought that he was celibate for his entire life seems terribly unrealistic given the time and society he lived in-I mean it was considered odd if you reached 21 without a wife, never mind into your 30's- and chances are that Mary (the mother) was raped rather than impregnated by the divine spirit. This comes from the fact that at the time of Christ's birth, his homeland was being sacked by the Romans. Some scholars think that the census story was invented to diverge attention away from the fact that the Christ family were actually refugees. The idea that Christ was a bastard son of a roman soldier was not quite ideal material to launch a new religion with, especially if you wanted to attract anti-roman Jews.
Giff your argument is compelling, but I must disagree. The works of the apostles and their followers are far too well documented for this to hold much water. These men (and women) said they saw and were taught by Christ. This would mean that, if Christ was pure fiction, they would have to be lying. Whilst this does not rule out the possibility of a fictional Christ, it does mean that a spontaneous legend becomes impossible (e.g. the apostles must be in on the trick hence we are back to the conspiracy). Also, the material for Hercules was compiled over centuries. The material for Christ was largely all there by the 120's. I think this leaves too small a time frame for spontaneous collection of legends (only about 50 years or so). This only leaves the conspiracy theory, and for that you must state who, why and how before I will be convinced of a fictional Christ.
Anyway, I have never really bought in to the orthodox view of Christ. I mean the thought that he was celibate for his entire life seems terribly unrealistic given the time and society he lived in-I mean it was considered odd if you reached 21 without a wife, never mind into your 30's- and chances are that Mary (the mother) was raped rather than impregnated by the divine spirit. This comes from the fact that at the time of Christ's birth, his homeland was being sacked by the Romans. Some scholars think that the census story was invented to diverge attention away from the fact that the Christ family were actually refugees. The idea that Christ was a bastard son of a roman soldier was not quite ideal material to launch a new religion with, especially if you wanted to attract anti-roman Jews.
Giff your argument is compelling, but I must disagree. The works of the apostles and their followers are far too well documented for this to hold much water. These men (and women) said they saw and were taught by Christ. This would mean that, if Christ was pure fiction, they would have to be lying. Whilst this does not rule out the possibility of a fictional Christ, it does mean that a spontaneous legend becomes impossible (e.g. the apostles must be in on the trick hence we are back to the conspiracy). Also, the material for Hercules was compiled over centuries. The material for Christ was largely all there by the 120's. I think this leaves too small a time frame for spontaneous collection of legends (only about 50 years or so). This only leaves the conspiracy theory, and for that you must state who, why and how before I will be convinced of a fictional Christ.
