1 - The christ MYTH fails to fulfill the requirements IN THE BIBLE for the messiah to begin with - and it could not have actually done that for a number of reasons - all in the bible. Among them - he was to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem - which could not have happened because the temple had not been destroyed until after his supposed death. The bible also states the messiah would be a human of the line of David - and the christ - with no human blood father could not fulfill that.
2 - There are too many holes in the end of the life of the christ in the bible to be true. Among them - Pilate and Herod never found him guilty of a crime for which crucification was allowed - ie a Traitor - a Pirate - or an Enemy of the Roman state (HE was not considered to be that powerful) Pilate and Herod would have killed all of the Jews who argued - instead of turning the christ over to them. THE Romans did NOT return the bodies of the crucified - they were left on the cross to be scavenged by animals. The Romans did not crucify thieves - they sent them to the Arena. (HE was claimed to die crucified next to a thief)
Add to that - all of the things that do not agree in the bible -
1 - What were the christ's last words on the cross - so called eye witnesses do not agree
2 - Who went to see the open grave and who/what did they see - the stories may well have been of different people and places.
Sorry - but this was the golden age of rome - and Rome had laws - and followed them. This story simply has too many contradictions to be true.
The story of the christ is a MYTH -= a legend put together by a number of different people who wrote the bible - added and added more and more exaggeration (miracles?) that have no mention in the historical record. There remains not a single document - mention - writing - inscription - that can be dated to the time of the supposed christ - that even mentions his name - and YET - according to the bible - he was of wide reknown - Multitudes gathered where he spoke - even the Romans supposedly knew of him (Although they needed a rat to point him out).
Yet - the historian Philo - who actually lived in Jerusalem at the supposed time of the christ - not a mention. Justus of Tiberius - who also lived at the same time - and in Galilee as well - failed to mention him.
But this is supposed to be an almighty god come to earth - there should be LOTS of proof of his existence - yet NOT one thing from his own supposed time - NOTHING.
The romans did not crucify the christ - he never actually was a real person
THe claim is that he was both god and man - but if he was a god - he could not die anyway. It is nonsense
2 - There are too many holes in the end of the life of the christ in the bible to be true. Among them - Pilate and Herod never found him guilty of a crime for which crucification was allowed - ie a Traitor - a Pirate - or an Enemy of the Roman state (HE was not considered to be that powerful) Pilate and Herod would have killed all of the Jews who argued - instead of turning the christ over to them. THE Romans did NOT return the bodies of the crucified - they were left on the cross to be scavenged by animals. The Romans did not crucify thieves - they sent them to the Arena. (HE was claimed to die crucified next to a thief)
Add to that - all of the things that do not agree in the bible -
1 - What were the christ's last words on the cross - so called eye witnesses do not agree
2 - Who went to see the open grave and who/what did they see - the stories may well have been of different people and places.
Sorry - but this was the golden age of rome - and Rome had laws - and followed them. This story simply has too many contradictions to be true.
The story of the christ is a MYTH -= a legend put together by a number of different people who wrote the bible - added and added more and more exaggeration (miracles?) that have no mention in the historical record. There remains not a single document - mention - writing - inscription - that can be dated to the time of the supposed christ - that even mentions his name - and YET - according to the bible - he was of wide reknown - Multitudes gathered where he spoke - even the Romans supposedly knew of him (Although they needed a rat to point him out).
Yet - the historian Philo - who actually lived in Jerusalem at the supposed time of the christ - not a mention. Justus of Tiberius - who also lived at the same time - and in Galilee as well - failed to mention him.
But this is supposed to be an almighty god come to earth - there should be LOTS of proof of his existence - yet NOT one thing from his own supposed time - NOTHING.
The romans did not crucify the christ - he never actually was a real person
THe claim is that he was both god and man - but if he was a god - he could not die anyway. It is nonsense
