Arguments from embarrassment disprove Jesus?
July 22, 2024 at 5:28 pm
(This post was last modified: July 22, 2024 at 5:30 pm by Fake Messiah.)
You've heard it before that some of the claims and stories in the gospels are too embarrassing to be fabricated, so therefore they uncover some truthful lines from the life of historical Jesus.
But aside from the fact that many fictional characters and other gods also have embarrassing elements, I would rather concentrate on the fact that it seems to me that those embarrassing moments actually prove even more that Jesus was fabricated. So I would like to hear your opinion.
#1 Jesus had to be from Nazareth because it is a small, obscure village, so there is no reason why someone would put Jesus there, but they would rather put him in a bigger respectable town.
But placing Jesus in Nazareth makes sense precisely because it is a little-known village, because if someone had placed him in Jerusalem or Bethlehem or in the city of Rome itself where he talked with the emperor in the palace, it would be easier to verify whether it is true.
#2 the gospels describe that the people and his own family did not accept Jesus and that he was not welcome in many places such as Nazareth, Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum, etc., which the writers and tradition certainly would not have invented.
it makes sense if you're inventing some very popular character who performed huge miracles, but no one has heard of. They invented this rejection as the reason why no one heard about him because the Jews and similar people supposedly covered it up, so it was forbidden to even talk about him. So you could have even lived in Nazareth your whole life and never heard of him.
A similar, if not the same, technique is used by ufologists who invent encounters with extraterrestrials that no one has heard of. Here is the alleged Roswell spaceship crash in 1947: an alien spaceship crashed near a small rural town and the aliens were talking to people, but no one heard about it for decades because the US government covered it up and the soldiers threatened the locals to keep quiet.
And then of course there are contradictions because in one part of the Gospels the angel announces to Mary that she will give birth to a god, and later she thinks that Jesus is crazy, and then she accepts him again; people don't want him in some places, and then they celebrate and follow him again, and then again those same people don't want to save him from death.
#3Jesus talked to women, madmen, and beggars, which was a shame, so surely no one would have invented that.
That's exactly what someone would make up if he was trying to push a non-existent character because these are all people who leave no written trace nor does anyone talk to them, so you can't confirm it, because if the gospels claimed that Jesus talked to some famous intellectual and convinced him of his "philosophy", then people would ask why that intellectual did not write it down. Moreover, if Jesus really had an important message for humanity, then it would have been more logical if he had gone to some intellectual centers (such as Alexandria, Rome, Athens) and convinced the intellectuals there, because he would have become famous that quickly.
Indeed, if someone decided to investigate and thus went to Nazareth and talk to mad people, the chances are very good that he would get an affirmative answer if he asked some random madman if he talked to the "son of god".
But aside from the fact that many fictional characters and other gods also have embarrassing elements, I would rather concentrate on the fact that it seems to me that those embarrassing moments actually prove even more that Jesus was fabricated. So I would like to hear your opinion.
#1 Jesus had to be from Nazareth because it is a small, obscure village, so there is no reason why someone would put Jesus there, but they would rather put him in a bigger respectable town.
But placing Jesus in Nazareth makes sense precisely because it is a little-known village, because if someone had placed him in Jerusalem or Bethlehem or in the city of Rome itself where he talked with the emperor in the palace, it would be easier to verify whether it is true.
#2 the gospels describe that the people and his own family did not accept Jesus and that he was not welcome in many places such as Nazareth, Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum, etc., which the writers and tradition certainly would not have invented.
it makes sense if you're inventing some very popular character who performed huge miracles, but no one has heard of. They invented this rejection as the reason why no one heard about him because the Jews and similar people supposedly covered it up, so it was forbidden to even talk about him. So you could have even lived in Nazareth your whole life and never heard of him.
A similar, if not the same, technique is used by ufologists who invent encounters with extraterrestrials that no one has heard of. Here is the alleged Roswell spaceship crash in 1947: an alien spaceship crashed near a small rural town and the aliens were talking to people, but no one heard about it for decades because the US government covered it up and the soldiers threatened the locals to keep quiet.
And then of course there are contradictions because in one part of the Gospels the angel announces to Mary that she will give birth to a god, and later she thinks that Jesus is crazy, and then she accepts him again; people don't want him in some places, and then they celebrate and follow him again, and then again those same people don't want to save him from death.
#3Jesus talked to women, madmen, and beggars, which was a shame, so surely no one would have invented that.
That's exactly what someone would make up if he was trying to push a non-existent character because these are all people who leave no written trace nor does anyone talk to them, so you can't confirm it, because if the gospels claimed that Jesus talked to some famous intellectual and convinced him of his "philosophy", then people would ask why that intellectual did not write it down. Moreover, if Jesus really had an important message for humanity, then it would have been more logical if he had gone to some intellectual centers (such as Alexandria, Rome, Athens) and convinced the intellectuals there, because he would have become famous that quickly.
Indeed, if someone decided to investigate and thus went to Nazareth and talk to mad people, the chances are very good that he would get an affirmative answer if he asked some random madman if he talked to the "son of god".
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
