Is the history of Jesus as indicated in the NT completely fabricated?

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: sandorski
it is quite possible

This.

Originally posted by: Colt45
Religion and logic are like water and oil. You're looking at this from the wrong angle.

And this. Humans are biologically identical now to 2000 years ago. Therefore you can attribute the same human tendencies you see in the present to the past. Therefore logically, it is almost certainly a collection of falsifications contrived to further personal and political agendas. However like Colt45 points out, logic isn't necessarily part of the equation and allowances for faith must be made.

 

[AreaCode7O7]

Originally posted by: RESmonkey
RELIGION IS FUCKING STOOPUD.

OMG, I have seen t3h light! This persuasive, intelligent argument has shown me the error of my ways and I have unconverted. Thank you! Thank you, RESmonkey, for the caring and effort you put in to help poor religious souls be free of their hellish and miserable belief in life after death.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Other than writing, there is not one piece of physical evidence Jesus even existed at all.

CSI much?

I have never ever seen, nor will I, over 10 seconds of this show at a time.

Has my pointing out of this fact offended you in some way?

No, but it's wrong. There's lots of historical documents about Jesus. There are Roman records of his execution, there has been pottery with inscriptions of him, there are paintings from the era depicting him...not sure where you got this idea that there is no evidence he existed.

However, the miracles (water to wine, healing, etc) don't have much proof behind them. They could be exaggerations, fables, or even made up situations. A recent piece of pottery found has an inscription "Jesus the Magician" (or Trickster) on it...meaning he may have been known as a mystical person at the time.

Can you point to some of this evidence? Link to pictures? Scholarly articles from non theistic sources?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Hay nice. You want a rabbit out of the hat trick. Look The HRCC has almost all scripture safely hidden away. They have no desire to show it as it moves away from rome and closer to the true teachings of Christ. As long as modern day Christians are linked to rome . Nothing good can come from it . As history clearly shows.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Your quick to point out my short comings which is fine with me. Yet at the same time I linked here.

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39847/113/

Are these not the lightbulbs amongst us. they write well talk well . Make lots of money yet they are clueless . Notice the last paragraph.

Any moren can struggle threw my writings and still get the meaning. Only educated snubs react differantly.

First thing I am only adding my 2cents. I not tring to change anyones mind about anything. But you people who write and spellw ell should research more and put the pin to work. Proper grammer and spelling has its place. Knowledge is discovered not given it requires hard work . Some should read . More on subjects they discuss.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Other than writing, there is not one piece of physical evidence Jesus even existed at all.

CSI much?

I have never ever seen, nor will I, over 10 seconds of this show at a time.

Has my pointing out of this fact offended you in some way?

No. Just pointing out your feeble attempt at sounding smart.
Physical evidence?
Why you suck

Were you hoping to reconstruct his DNA and bring him back like the Woolly Mammoth attempt?

I said physical evidence, because I meant physical evidence.

Why do you think there was such excitement, then furor, then excitement, then furor again over the Shroud of Turin? It would have been the first and ONLY tangible piece of evidence that JHC existed, except it turned out to be fake.

A pot, a claw hammer, a saw, a scrap of clothing, remnants of a home, anything would be more than what they have, which is zero.

Everything points to Jesus as nothing more than a collection of folk tales, fables, and parables. There is nothing to suggest that there was an actual man named Jesus, much less a virgin-birth son of god performing miracles and taking on the powerful and Romans.

 

[fishjie]

Originally posted by: OneOfTheseDays
It's not something I can prove or disprove, but one side of the argument to me sounds far more plausible and rational. And that is that the "story" of Jesus that is accepted today in the NT was completely fabricated. I'm also not claiming I know what the truth really is, all I'm claiming is that it is highly unlikely that what is in the NT is an accurate depiction of the history of Jesus.

While I was attending Catholic high school (which I did for 4 years), we often heard readings from the Epistles and the Gospels. Only once was I in a class where the students were told that the Epistles were the only existing Christian writings for the 40 years following the alleged death of Jesus (the earliest date on which scholars affix the writing of the Gospels was about 90 A.D.). Even more striking, it was never pointed out to the students that the Epistles failed to even mention Mary, Joseph, the birth of an historical Jesus, the miracles of Jesus or the teachings of an historical Jesus. This is rather incredible, given that an earth-residing Jesus was allegedly God.

Think about this: out planet was visited by God incarnate (Creator of the Universe), whose earthly life was snuffed out by a bloody crucifixion after He performed dozens miracles allegedly witnessed by thousands, and we get . . . silence. For 40 years. Imagine an event that is much less noteworthy, for instance imagine that San Francisco suffered a massive earthquake in 1906 but no one wrote anything about it for 40 years. Jesus did something even more amazing, it is claimed. Upon his death, the earth shook, tombs opened and dead people walked around the town. But no one wrote about this for 40 years. Or imagine Michael Jordan dazzling the basketball world for years, but no one writing about it . . . for 40 years.

I find these discussions to be fascinating. In fact, these sorts of discussions should really be one of the starting points for any thoughtful Christian?s education. Shouldn?t anyone who wants to follow the truth consider even those things that might appear inconvenient or even hostile to those beliefs? In the same vein, shouldn?t those who want to use the Bible itself as the starting point for their beliefs, consider the origin of the Bible writings, including the undeniable fact that numerous biblical writings have been tampered with over the years?

I?m not disparaging the teachings of Jesus. Many of those teachings are challenging, humanitarian, even revolutionary. We don?t need to believe in a flesh and blood Jesus in order to find value in those teachings that have value, right? Nor do we need to believe in a physical reality of Atticus Finch to be inspired by the kind of man he was portrayed to be. Therefore, I want to make it clear that I am raising the issue of the existence of a flesh and blood Jesus, but not contesting that many of his teaching were inspirational.

Nor am I raising alarm that many people are striving to seek out higher meaning in the absence of sufficient facts on which to base that meaning of life. All of us, those who believe in God and those who don?t, are all in the same boat in that respect. But I also think that beliefs should always be thoughtful, striving, humble and willing to consider all serious opposing views and consider where and when they don?t know what they don?t know.

I would just end this diatribe in asking what do you honestly believe is more likely given the facts we know?

i agree with your post but xtians are very good at rationalizing this kind of stuff

 

[child of wonder]

Considering the Bible says that the Earth shook, the dead rose from their graves, and the sky turned black at the moment Jesus died yet not a single historian of the time bothered to mention it is conspicuous. A local Jewish philosopher nearby named Philo wrote extensive historical texts, sometimes even devoting an entire page to a single thief, yet apparently did not find it important enough to document the dead rising from their graves and appearing to many.

One could argue that these parts of the Bible didn't really happen and that the writers embellished or fabricated things to make the events seem more extraordinary. However, this is admitting fallacy in the Bible itself and, therefore, one must hold the entire text under suspicion for if one word could fall into doubt then the entire text must be held in the same regard.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Other than writing, there is not one piece of physical evidence Jesus even existed at all.

CSI much?

I have never ever seen, nor will I, over 10 seconds of this show at a time.

Has my pointing out of this fact offended you in some way?

No, but it's wrong. There's lots of historical documents about Jesus. There are Roman records of his execution, there has been pottery with inscriptions of him, there are paintings from the era depicting him...not sure where you got this idea that there is no evidence he existed.

There are? Produce them, sir!

Seriously though, I think that if you take some time to research this, you will find that your above statement is wrong. There are no records. There are no paintings. There is no pottery. There is nothing from the time he supposedly lived. Everything regarding JHC comes later.

However you will find that there have been attempts to forge these items, create these records, to claim paintings and pottery depicting him were from his time, but the sources always turn out to be incredible, or the validation leaves much doubt.

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Other than writing, there is not one piece of physical evidence Jesus even existed at all.

CSI much?

I have never ever seen, nor will I, over 10 seconds of this show at a time.

Has my pointing out of this fact offended you in some way?

No, but it's wrong. There's lots of historical documents about Jesus. There are Roman records of his execution, there has been pottery with inscriptions of him, there are paintings from the era depicting him...not sure where you got this idea that there is no evidence he existed.

However, the miracles (water to wine, healing, etc) don't have much proof behind them. They could be exaggerations, fables, or even made up situations. A recent piece of pottery found has an inscription "Jesus the Magician" (or Trickster) on it...meaning he may have been known as a mystical person at the time.

Can you point to some of this evidence? Link to pictures? Scholarly articles from non theistic sources?

The sources are listed in the second half of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus Also, when you say non-theistic sources, you're saying it like the bible can't be used as a historical tool. The bible is actually fairly accurate in it's deprecations of life and history at the time from a non-religious stand point. It's no different of a tool than archeologists learning about an Egyptian king through hieroglyphics found on a cave wall...they don't take them literally, but get an idea of what happened at the time.

 

[fishjie]

no the bible is highly inaccurate as a historical tool. it contains tons of anachronisms, the archaeological evidence does NOT back it up, and there are tons of miracles in there. read the bible unearthed to see how archaeology shows that there was no exodus, no wandering for 40 years in sinai, how david and solomon's kingdoms were tiny and weak, and so on.

 

[randay]

no, its not completely fabricated. im sure there are some truth based stories in it.

 

[hans030390]

I skimmed through your post, and I think the book "Evidence for Christianity" does a better job answering your question than anyone else ever would (warning: the book is extremely dry).

 

[fishjie]

Originally posted by: hans030390
I skimmed through your post, and I think the book "Evidence for Christianity" does a better job answering your question than anyone else ever would (warning: the book is extremely dry).

there are tons of rebuttals of those books. i'm not familiar with that one, but stuff like case for a creator and etc get rebutted all the time for fun and they're all achived on the interwebs on sites such as infidel.org

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: hopeless74
another thing that might be worth noting

if the NT was just exaggerated stories and chinese whispers, the bible we'd be reading today, would have a jesus with a sword in one hand, lightning bolts in the other, slaying demons on his flying unicorn

but, the bible portrays jesus, as a humble carpenter, who preached tolerance, compassion and forgiveness, in a hostile world

...that does things just as improbable and far-fetched as slaying demons on a flying unicorn.

but that would be awesome.

and then the bible would become a comic book, and jesus would kick ass.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Other than writing, there is not one piece of physical evidence Jesus even existed at all.

CSI much?

I have never ever seen, nor will I, over 10 seconds of this show at a time.

Has my pointing out of this fact offended you in some way?

No, but it's wrong. There's lots of historical documents about Jesus. There are Roman records of his execution, there has been pottery with inscriptions of him, there are paintings from the era depicting him...not sure where you got this idea that there is no evidence he existed.

However, the miracles (water to wine, healing, etc) don't have much proof behind them. They could be exaggerations, fables, or even made up situations. A recent piece of pottery found has an inscription "Jesus the Magician" (or Trickster) on it...meaning he may have been known as a mystical person at the time.

Can you point to some of this evidence? Link to pictures? Scholarly articles from non theistic sources?

The sources are listed in the second half of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus Also, when you say non-theistic sources, you're saying it like the bible can't be used as a historical tool. The bible is actually fairly accurate in it's deprecations of life and history at the time from a non-religious stand point. It's no different of a tool than archeologists learning about an Egyptian king through hieroglyphics found on a cave wall...they don't take them literally, but get an idea of what happened at the time.

The bible has things in it which are KNOWN to be inaccurate. You can use the bible as a document to tell you what to look for, but the bible itself is absolutely not evidence for anything actually being real. Any claim otherwise is fallacious at best, and possibly intentionally disingenuous. To put it in scientific terms, the bible can be your hypothesis, but it can never be your experimental results.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: fishjie
no the bible is highly inaccurate as a historical tool. it contains tons of anachronisms, the archaeological evidence does NOT back it up, and there are tons of miracles in there. read the bible unearthed to see how archaeology shows that there was no exodus, no wandering for 40 years in sinai, how david and solomon's kingdoms were tiny and weak, and so on.

Actually the old testment amounts to the History of the Jewish people. The way its told is differant than anyother peoples. The Jews constantly putting themselves in a bad light. As far as history goes I trust the Jews more than anyother group.

Here is Ammo for non-believers.

What sin did Moses Commit in the dessert. Now read the Revelations of Paul.

Either God Changed or Paul is not whom you believe him to be its that simple. THE sin of Moses . What was it. How many times did Paul commit this sin . Many many times he did. Read the Revelation of Paul open your eyes. Read Peters Revelation . Than ask why they picked and choose who made the Big book.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Other than writing, there is not one piece of physical evidence Jesus even existed at all.

CSI much?

I have never ever seen, nor will I, over 10 seconds of this show at a time.

Has my pointing out of this fact offended you in some way?

No, but it's wrong. There's lots of historical documents about Jesus. There are Roman records of his execution, there has been pottery with inscriptions of him, there are paintings from the era depicting him...not sure where you got this idea that there is no evidence he existed.

However, the miracles (water to wine, healing, etc) don't have much proof behind them. They could be exaggerations, fables, or even made up situations. A recent piece of pottery found has an inscription "Jesus the Magician" (or Trickster) on it...meaning he may have been known as a mystical person at the time.

Can you point to some of this evidence? Link to pictures? Scholarly articles from non theistic sources?

The sources are listed in the second half of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus Also, when you say non-theistic sources, you're saying it like the bible can't be used as a historical tool. The bible is actually fairly accurate in it's deprecations of life and history at the time from a non-religious stand point. It's no different of a tool than archeologists learning about an Egyptian king through hieroglyphics found on a cave wall...they don't take them literally, but get an idea of what happened at the time.

Gee there's no bias in that article. Frankly I'm shocked there isn't a little wiki warning at the top of it, because it claims "most biblical scholars agree". LOL Clear bias.

The only thing there is evidence of is of many cults preaching things similar to what Jesus supposedly said, ALL OF WHICH are ideas that came well before the time anyway.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: fishjie
no the bible is highly inaccurate as a historical tool. it contains tons of anachronisms, the archaeological evidence does NOT back it up, and there are tons of miracles in there. read the bible unearthed to see how archaeology shows that there was no exodus, no wandering for 40 years in sinai, how david and solomon's kingdoms were tiny and weak, and so on.

Actually the old testment amounts to the History of the Jewish people. The way its told is differant than anyother peoples. The Jews constantly putting themselves in a bad light. As far as history goes I trust the Jews more than anyother group.

Here is Ammo for non-believers.

What sin did Moses Commit in the dessert. Now read the Revelations of Paul.

Either God Changed or Paul is not whom you believe him to be its that simple. THE sin of Moses . What was it. How many times did Paul commit this sin . Many many times he did. Read the Revelation of Paul open your eyes. Read Peters Revelation . Than ask why they picked and choose who made the Big book.

WOW!

The old testament is nothing more than a collection of popular nursery rhymes which had already been in existence for a very long time. Some of these were obviously re-written to include some popular figures of the then recent past.

Considering how little evidence there is for Jesus, it pales to how little there is for Bable, the flood, Jericho, Abraham, David, Moses, Sampson, Lot, etc.

I'm lolling over double here!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Strange how All these holy men threw time really never took time to look at the ugly slavery issue. Or did Christ adderess this issue more deeply but ROME covered up those teachings. 12 apostles only 4 gosphels . Something stinks in ROME. To me the fact there are only 4 gosphels and the writings of Paul take up most of the new Testment . A man who never met Christ. The trueth is out their but you will not find it in its whole in the BiBle.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Strange how All these holy men threw time really never took time to look at the ugly slavery issue. Or did Christ adderess this issue more deeply but ROME covered up those teachings. 12 apostles only 4 gosphels . Something stinks in ROME. To me the fact there are only 4 gosphels and the writings of Paul take up most of the new Testment . A man who never met Christ. The trueth is out their but you will not find it in its whole in the BiBle.

You're obsessed with the pope...are you from the 19th century or something? Whoop-de-fricking do, some guy with a hat that periodically says stupid things, and periodically apologizes for stupid things a previous guy in the hat said. I've never heard evidence that Jesus said anything specific to abolish slavery.

 

[FeuerFrei]

Generally with historical events, multiple independent eyewitness accounts of an event are sufficient to accept it as fact.
Why should Jesus' life and deeds be any different?

Presuming what the OP posted about the gospels is true -- Remember, Jesus largely spoke to the Jewish populace, and the Jews collectively rejected him (despite a degree of initial acceptance). Not too surprising his disciples didn't rush into releasing written personal accounts considering the persecution they faced. Good thing they authored some books before they died as martyrs.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: fishjie
no the bible is highly inaccurate as a historical tool. it contains tons of anachronisms, the archaeological evidence does NOT back it up, and there are tons of miracles in there. read the bible unearthed to see how archaeology shows that there was no exodus, no wandering for 40 years in sinai, how david and solomon's kingdoms were tiny and weak, and so on.

Actually the old testment amounts to the History of the Jewish people. The way its told is differant than anyother peoples. The Jews constantly putting themselves in a bad light. As far as history goes I trust the Jews more than anyother group.

Here is Ammo for non-believers.

What sin did Moses Commit in the dessert. Now read the Revelations of Paul.

Either God Changed or Paul is not whom you believe him to be its that simple. THE sin of Moses . What was it. How many times did Paul commit this sin . Many many times he did. Read the Revelation of Paul open your eyes. Read Peters Revelation . Than ask why they picked and choose who made the Big book.

WOW!

The old testament is nothing more than a collection of popular nursery rhymes which had already been in existence for a very long time. Some of these were obviously re-written to include some popular figures of the then recent past.

Considering how little evidence there is for Jesus, it pales to how little there is for Bable, the flood, Jericho, Abraham, David, Moses, Sampson, Lot, etc.

I'm lolling over double here!

You hit it right on . The thing in Germany never happened with the jews its just made up lies it couldn't have happened . According to you the Jews never existed . If their history is made up fair tales so are its people.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: fishjie
no the bible is highly inaccurate as a historical tool. it contains tons of anachronisms, the archaeological evidence does NOT back it up, and there are tons of miracles in there. read the bible unearthed to see how archaeology shows that there was no exodus, no wandering for 40 years in sinai, how david and solomon's kingdoms were tiny and weak, and so on.

Actually the old testment amounts to the History of the Jewish people. The way its told is differant than anyother peoples. The Jews constantly putting themselves in a bad light. As far as history goes I trust the Jews more than anyother group.

Here is Ammo for non-believers.

What sin did Moses Commit in the dessert. Now read the Revelations of Paul.

Either God Changed or Paul is not whom you believe him to be its that simple. THE sin of Moses . What was it. How many times did Paul commit this sin . Many many times he did. Read the Revelation of Paul open your eyes. Read Peters Revelation . Than ask why they picked and choose who made the Big book.

WOW!

The old testament is nothing more than a collection of popular nursery rhymes which had already been in existence for a very long time. Some of these were obviously re-written to include some popular figures of the then recent past.

Considering how little evidence there is for Jesus, it pales to how little there is for Bable, the flood, Jericho, Abraham, David, Moses, Sampson, Lot, etc.

I'm lolling over double here!

You hit it right on . The thing in Germany never happened with the jews its just made up lies it couldn't have happened . According to you the Jews never existed . If their history is made up fair tales so are its people.

What...the...f*ck...

How did you make this leap of twenty four carat logic?

 

[FeuerFrei]

Originally posted by: fishjie
no the bible is highly inaccurate as a historical tool. it contains tons of anachronisms, the archaeological evidence does NOT back it up, and there are tons of miracles in there. read the bible unearthed to see how archaeology shows that there was no exodus, no wandering for 40 years in sinai, how david and solomon's kingdoms were tiny and weak, and so on.

That's funny. I, on the other hand, have seen a multitude of archaeological evidence corroborating the Biblical accounts. Mostly from photos and lectures from a guy who made many trips to the Holy Land to study archaeology. Maybe this book you read willfully misinterpreted evidence and left some out. Try reading something that isn't aimed at concealing truth. Remember, secular sources fear the truth about Jesus and are close-minded. You're more likely to get openness on biblical evidence from Christian sources.

In reality there's all kinds of Egyptian records and paintings of the plagues; each plague was designed by God to illustrate the powerlessness/non-existence of a specific Egyptian god or goddess.

In regard to the exodus it appears the fleeing Israelites crossed the present day Persian Gulf rather than the Red Sea. Solomon (?) erected stone pillars marking the crossing point on either shore which stood till recent years when the local government removed them to a museum for safe-keeping. Plus, searches of the sea floor between those two points turned up human bones, horse bones, and gold chariot wheels. So the 40 years of desert wandering probably took place in Saudi Arabia rather than the Sinai Peninsula and the famous Mt. Sinai may be in Saudi Arabia. Seriously, the Sinai Peninsula is a little small to be lost for 40 years no?