For People Who Think There Was No Historical Jesus

[DeistPaladin]

Didn't stop another group of ingrates railing against the empire they lived under in 1776. those colonists were some of the most lightly taxed people in the empire.

Indeed. Perception is everything.

Of course, all colonies eventually break from the mother country once they reach a certain critical mass of population, size and industry. At least that's my theory. Sometimes it happens peacefully as with Canada and sometimes in a revolution but it eventually happens assuming a large enough size.

Here's a "what if" I've wondered about. If England had prevailed in the Revolutionary War, would we be "The United States of Canada" now? The reason we're two separate countries was because Canada remained loyal to Britain during the Revolutionary War. Once Canada was granted independence in the 80s, we'd have no reason to be two separate nations. My wife might be getting affordable health care now.

Sorry, topic drift.

[Minimalist]

[Zone]

The Jews hated being ruled by foreign heathen powers, they saw it as punishment from God for their lack of devotion/worship of false idols. The Messiah was meant to free them from, though of course Jesus didn't, nor did he bring world peace another prophecy. It seems like Jesus didn't fulfil prophecies that couldn't just be written into the narrative.

[ThomM]

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

The most major reason why the "christ" did not exist is that the christ of the NT would have been a complete heretic to the Jewish religion and would have been stoned to death long before any teaching - which would NOT have been allowed. He certainly could NOT have been the jewish messiah - who was supposed to rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem for the third time - the temple was not destroyed yet. The jewish messiah was to be a human of the line of david (Who actually might have existed) - not the son of the god. In fact -to claim that he was the son of god alone would have had him stoned to death.

Tacitus did not live during the supposed life of the christ (Although he probable lived during the time the MYTH was created) - and is of no use.

The New Testament was not written during the supposed time of the christ - and is NOT identifiable as to author with the exception of some things from LUKE and PAUL - neither of which would have ever met the christ either.

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.

[Zone]

and would have been stoned to death long before any teaching - which would NOT have been allowed.

They did pick up some stones to throw at one point when he came out with the "I am" line, meaning he and God were one.

He certainly could NOT have been the jewish messiah - who was supposed to rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem for the third time

Ah yes but when he said the Temple would be rebuilt after three days he really meant the Temple of his body.

[Minimalist]

The Jews hated being ruled by foreign heathen powers

That's the story but the story is what is under the microscope. The plain fact is that once you discount the bible bullshit you are left with the fact that the "jews" (whatever they were) spent the bulk of the first millenium BC under the rule of someone. Initially it was the Assyrians who controlled them as a vassal state until a brief rebellion by Hezekiah who got his ass kicked and the Assyrians resumed their overlordship until the Babylonians came along. BTW, their participation in the Assyrian economic system was a time of great prosperity for Judah. The Babylonians sacked and burned the city in 586 but they maintained control of the region until the Persians captured Babylon and inherited the Babylonian empire in 539. Persia retained control until Alexander came through in 332 and then it was either Alex, the Ptolemies or Seleucids (all Greeks ) until 141 when the Maccabaean revolt drove the Seleucids out. Finally, you have an independent "jewish" state under the Hasmoneans which lasted for a grand total of 78 years until Pompey the Great overran the whole area in 63 BC. The last 20 years of Hasmonean rule was a state of constant civil war/dynastic strife and would hardly have been regarded by anyone as some kind of golden age.

So, they may have "hated" foreign rule....but they sure as shit had enough practice at it.

[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?

[Minimalist]

You still haven't suggested how and why Christianity could have got started without any real man being behind all the myths and legends.

Are you suggesting that there was a real "Osiris?" Or "Zeus?" Or "Odin?" Or "Marduk?" Or "Quetzlcoatl?" Or "Shiva?"

Mankind has concocted thousands of myths of gods. If you are asserting that jesus has to be different you are merely engaging in special pleading.

Tacitus reported what Christians were saying in 64 AD - where did they get their ideas from?

Tacitus was not writing in 64 AD....he was 8 years old. At best, Tacitus reflects a second century viewpoint but the fact remains that this passage in the Annales was unknown to any other ancient writer which leads strongly to the idea that it was a (much) later xtian interpolation.

[Zone]

But to be fair Zeus and Quetzlcoatl weren't humans but fully mythical creatures in the same realm as dragons and unicorns. I don't think there Jesus existing should be some kind of threat to anyones deeply held atheistic values anymore than the existence of Joesph Smith.

[Cyberman]

But to be fair Zeus and Quetzlcoatl weren't humans but fully mythical creatures in the same realm as dragons and unicorns.

Just like JC in the earliest stories before the character was brought down to Earth and humanised.