The Historical Christ

[dagda]

Ledo, I think I agree (partly) with your opinion. Although I have never researched the Jesus Tomb (do you have a link?), I have read deeply into the subject matter(early Christian theology is a little pet project of mine). After reading the link chatpilot gave me, I must say that I agree that the evidence does not seem terribly concrete for a forgery.

Anyway, I have never really bought in to the orthodox view of Christ. I mean the thought that he was celibate for his entire life seems terribly unrealistic given the time and society he lived in-I mean it was considered odd if you reached 21 without a wife, never mind into your 30's- and chances are that Mary (the mother) was raped rather than impregnated by the divine spirit. This comes from the fact that at the time of Christ's birth, his homeland was being sacked by the Romans. Some scholars think that the census story was invented to diverge attention away from the fact that the Christ family were actually refugees. The idea that Christ was a bastard son of a roman soldier was not quite ideal material to launch a new religion with, especially if you wanted to attract anti-roman Jews.

Giff your argument is compelling, but I must disagree. The works of the apostles and their followers are far too well documented for this to hold much water. These men (and women) said they saw and were taught by Christ. This would mean that, if Christ was pure fiction, they would have to be lying. Whilst this does not rule out the possibility of a fictional Christ, it does mean that a spontaneous legend becomes impossible (e.g. the apostles must be in on the trick hence we are back to the conspiracy). Also, the material for Hercules was compiled over centuries. The material for Christ was largely all there by the 120's. I think this leaves too small a time frame for spontaneous collection of legends (only about 50 years or so). This only leaves the conspiracy theory, and for that you must state who, why and how before I will be convinced of a fictional Christ.

[chatpilot]

Ledo regarding the Jesus family Tomb I think that that too was later shown to be an innaccurate location since till this day the so called tomb of Christ has never been found.Just like the Garden of Eden.If you use the bible as a map trust me my friend you will get lost.

[dagda]

But, surely if the Garden existed, it is a pre-industrial society without even basic tools or living accommodation situated somewhere in the Middle East. Even if the Garden did exist, there would be no evidence to be found even if you did look. Quite frankly, within those parameters, it is impossible to say with any certainty if something like Eden ever did exist-I am saying this on a secular view point, taking God out of the picture to prevent the argument sliding into a 'science disproves God' thing.

Anyway, as you do not think Christ existed in real time, Chatpilot, tell me where the 'legend' comes from. (I beg you not to allow the argument to shift to Old Testament historical accuracy!)

[Kyuuketsuki]

Does the grave of James count as evidence, or are we just passing that one by? What about his writings? Or maybe he was part of the grand conspiracy that faked Christ?

As far as I am aware there is no validated evidence of such a grave.

Again I say, if Christ is fake then who faked him (and maybe the disciples?), why did they bother and how did they manage to pull it off?

Why does it have to be as old as the claimed disciples?

Kyu

[chatpilot]

I have said this many times that the whole Jesus myths is nothing more than a collections of plagiarized myths that have predated christianity.Do the reseach I get tired of talking about the same thing over and over.

[LEDO]

Ledo regarding the Jesus family Tomb I think that that too was later shown to be an innaccurate location since till this day the so called tomb of Christ has never been found.Just like the Garden of Eden.If you use the bible as a map trust me my friend you will get lost.

I am not sure how a tomb can be in an "innaccurate location." It is where it is. If you say it doesn't conform to folklore in the Bible, that may be so, but doesn'e make it any less a possible tomb and an ossuary for an historical Jesus.

DAGDA- The Garden of Eden in its earthly sense was based on Dilmun. The story combines the historical Dilmun with a cosmic myth centered around Leo and Virgo.

I have no "links" about the Jesus tomb, I simply read books on the topic and talked to one of its authors at length. Sorry, I still do a lot of stuff the old fashion way. There is a burial stone with the name of the Roman Centurian who was supposedly Jesus' father. The dates and information on the stone line up, and like the Jesus tomb could all be coincedental. There is no body to test and match DNA with Jesus' ossuary.

James has an epistle to his name. He is also mentioned by Josephus and by Paul. There are also numerous other references to him.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

DAGDA- The Garden of Eden in its earthly sense was based on Dilmun.

I'm not entirely sure that claim may be made as fact. I think it's fair to say the known facts allow a conclusion of "might have been" or even "probably" but not "was definitely". Certainty is rare in ancient history. Perhaps partly because the discipline of history as we know it did not exist in any consistent way before Gibbon.

I haven't read anything about the tomb of Jesus. I DID see an interesting documentary about an ossuary possibly containing the bones of Jesus' family.This claim was made due to the name combinations. I think from memory,it may have been James, Joseph and Mary. It was explained that the names we translate as Jesus, Mary Joseph and James were quite common at the time ,although not so common within one family. Considering that statement, I found the idea of any link to Jesus to be tenuous.

The other problem I have is using the gospels as the premise for any serious archeological or historical claims. I have seen no evidence which convinces me the gospels are more than myth. The commonly held belief that most myths have some truth is not supported by evidence.--SOME myths are loosely based on some actual person(s) or events. Most are not. (Anthropology 101)

[chatpilot]

"I DID see an interesting documentary about an ossuary possibly containing the bones of Jesus' family."

Padraic they dont put entire families in an ossuary it is just a cement box that is used after someone dies.Traditionally after about a year they disenter the body and collect the bones and put them in the ossuary.

Ledo I agree with Padraic I dont like the idea of using the gospels as historical evidence for serious archealogical studies since I too beleive they are nothing more than myths and totally unreliable.

Here is a decent article on the Jesus family tomb:
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2007...heory.html

[dagda]

'Why does it have to be as old as the claimed disciples? '




James, Peter, John et al are well documented figures. They were talking about Christ by at least 50AD and probably before. This means that, unless they are make-believe, the 'legend' must be as old as the disciples or they would not be able to talk about it, would they?



'I have said this many times that the whole Jesus myths is nothing more than a collections of plagiarized myths that have predated christianity.Do the reseach I get tired of talking about the same thing over and over.'


How arrogant. Do you assume that anyone who disagrees with you has not done as much research or they would have come to the same conclusion? As I have said to Giff, the speed that the Christ myth formed rules out the possibility of a spontaneous legend. If Christ was make believe, then human hands have created him. Again I give my as yet un-answered question; who, why and how?

I assume you are talking about Mithras, Sol Invictus etc. Yes these myths could be used to combat the idea that Christ did all the things the Bible says he did (I think the Herod killing the infants in Matthew was a fable which tried to attach Christ to the earlier Moses myth and the Pharaoh's extermination of the Hebrew children). However, this does not suggest that Christ did not exist, only that a form of Chinese whispers has formed around his ministry. Chatpilot, don't assume the person with the opposite view is stupid, its rude.

[Darwinian]

I far as I know, the Romans were scrupulous record keepers and documented practically everything. It seems strange then that the only record of Jesus appears in the Bible.