For People Who Think There Was No Historical Jesus

[Confused Ape]

Tacitus, Tacitus, Tacitus...... I get so tired of people dredging up fucking Tacitus.

I didn't feel like typing this out again but here I reply to a question about why I "distrust" the Tacitus reference.

You still haven't suggested how and why Christianity could have got started without any real man being behind all the myths and legends. Tacitus reported what Christians were saying in 64 AD - where did they get their ideas from?

The problem with your selections regarding the christ is that none of them would have had first hand knowledge of such a person

This topic isn't about whether Tacitus's report proves that an historical Jesus existed. From my opening post -

The object of the exercise is to explain how Christianity started when it did and why when there wasn't a real man who was obscured by all the Christian myths and legends.

I'm going to use Tacitus's report as a way of showing the kind of questions which need to be answered. (Most scholars agree that Tacitus's report of what Christians believed in during his lifetime is genuine.)

His reporting what the Christians believed in isn't the same thing as the Christian beliefs being true.

OF course - the major reason why nothing you write about the actual existence of the christ is of use is because the christ NEVER actually existed - there is simply no way a single being could have completed all of the varied and contradictory things in the bible - it is a buch of fairy tales.

So can you come up with an explanation for how and when Christianity got started and why Christians in 64 AD believed that a Messiah had been executed in Pontius Pilate's time? (The execution they believed in was supposed to have been between AD 26–36). Who started the fairy tales, when were they started and how did these fairy tales get to Greek speaking gentiles and then to the Romans?