RE: Did Jesus Christ exist as a historical human or was he a theological construct?
June 17, 2010 at 12:07 pm
Returning to the original question.... On the balance of probabilities, I always assumed that there was actually a Jesus, son of Mary & Joseph. They were very common names so maybe there is simply lots of confusion. My reasons are/were:
1. The many gospels, not just Matthew, Mark, Luke & John - I mean all the Gnostic gospels which no one seems to have mentioned. Paul, Philip, Judas, Mary Magdelen, etc. I am unaware of any completely contemperaneous record but oral traditions usually have some factual elements.
2. Some Jewish theologians make the case that Jesus was executed for being a trouble making Zealot. Although he seems to me more likely to have been an Essene the groups are constantly being mixed up. I have no idea what 1st century Jewish records actually exist but just maybe that Jewish Theologian does. I find theologians even more difficult to pin down than theists.
3. The dead sea scrolls and other fairly recent finds record Jesus as being a Zealot which fits in with him telling his disciples to, "come with a sword, if you don't have one sell your cloak and buy one". Whether he was meek and mild or a trouble maker is another question.
4. The mixing up with the Mithras stories (if you have not read them, you really must) would have appealed to the Romans who had Mithras as the soldiers god for centuries but then banned other gods when they thrust Christuanity upon the unsuspecting world. Adding Mithras to the Jesus story in the religion that they created would have helped quell some of the uprisings - Jesus died for you, now behave yourself - it would also have kept some soldiers on side - sorry chaps, we got the name wrong, it was Jesus, not Mithras.
5. Anyone who challenged the strong Jewish traditions would have been a 'god send' to the Romans so if they did have early records of a peace loving rabbi or teacher challenging Jewish authority they are likely to have promoted him as much as they could. Far better to have the Jews fighting each other than fighting the Romans.
As a newcomer, I must say that I am very impressed by the (apparent) level of expertise on this web site, less impressed though with insults to anyone who holds a theist view or even has doubts. Surely better to convince them with logic than convince them that atheists are unpleasant louts and all to be avoided. Also, why does everyone seem to knock the poor Christians and not the other faiths? They are mostly as bad as one another - or are we no meant to upset Jews and Muslims etc?
One last point, in the early centuries of pilgrimages there were plenty of maps showing pilgrim routes. I don't think there were any early pilgrim maps showing the location of Nazareth but maybe someone will correct me.
1. The many gospels, not just Matthew, Mark, Luke & John - I mean all the Gnostic gospels which no one seems to have mentioned. Paul, Philip, Judas, Mary Magdelen, etc. I am unaware of any completely contemperaneous record but oral traditions usually have some factual elements.
2. Some Jewish theologians make the case that Jesus was executed for being a trouble making Zealot. Although he seems to me more likely to have been an Essene the groups are constantly being mixed up. I have no idea what 1st century Jewish records actually exist but just maybe that Jewish Theologian does. I find theologians even more difficult to pin down than theists.
3. The dead sea scrolls and other fairly recent finds record Jesus as being a Zealot which fits in with him telling his disciples to, "come with a sword, if you don't have one sell your cloak and buy one". Whether he was meek and mild or a trouble maker is another question.
4. The mixing up with the Mithras stories (if you have not read them, you really must) would have appealed to the Romans who had Mithras as the soldiers god for centuries but then banned other gods when they thrust Christuanity upon the unsuspecting world. Adding Mithras to the Jesus story in the religion that they created would have helped quell some of the uprisings - Jesus died for you, now behave yourself - it would also have kept some soldiers on side - sorry chaps, we got the name wrong, it was Jesus, not Mithras.
5. Anyone who challenged the strong Jewish traditions would have been a 'god send' to the Romans so if they did have early records of a peace loving rabbi or teacher challenging Jewish authority they are likely to have promoted him as much as they could. Far better to have the Jews fighting each other than fighting the Romans.
As a newcomer, I must say that I am very impressed by the (apparent) level of expertise on this web site, less impressed though with insults to anyone who holds a theist view or even has doubts. Surely better to convince them with logic than convince them that atheists are unpleasant louts and all to be avoided. Also, why does everyone seem to knock the poor Christians and not the other faiths? They are mostly as bad as one another - or are we no meant to upset Jews and Muslims etc?
One last point, in the early centuries of pilgrimages there were plenty of maps showing pilgrim routes. I don't think there were any early pilgrim maps showing the location of Nazareth but maybe someone will correct me.
Man cannot make a worm yet will make gods by the dozen. Michel de Montaigne
