'Jesus NEVER existed': Writer finds no mention of Christ in 126 historical texts and says he was a

a reply to: Harvin

I still recall a thread here where i asked the question about people who were thought to be real people and actually were made up. I DO NOT recall any intelligent answers someone even gave Paul Bunyan as a response.

Serapis

Shakespeare

Adam and Eve

Noah

a reply to: Spider879

Personally, Jesus is just all right with me... the ideas put forth about how to treat others, anyway... the rest? Just divisive dogma of uncertain provenance (providence?).

But really, to each their own... and if folks kept to that philosophy, there would be a whole lot less misery and stupid in the world.

But a figure devised and evolved (sorry) to control folks and get them to forget their terrible lot in life and focus on a gauzy future paradise? Sounds like a tyrant's wet dream- which is Satan's tears, btw...

originally posted by: blood0fheroes
a reply to: Spider879
One thing I haven't seen brought up yet, in reference to Josephus; is how he can be considered a contemporary historian when he wasn't even born until after Jesus had allegedly died...

It's mind boggling how people can think that someone who wasn't even alive when Jesus (or anyone else) allegedly lived could have witnessed that person living or that rumor is first-hand evidence.

originally posted by: UKLionheart
Hi all,

I am not religious at all, but I have a great difficulty with this argument. It is very difficult (scientifically impractical?) to prove a negative on lack of evidence. I looked at 100 historical documents and none of them mentioned Queen Victoria. Does that mean Victoria didn't exist, or that I am looking in the wrong place?

The argument is that there is no evidence that Jesus lived. As you point out, that is not evidence that he did not live. However, there is a strong argument to be made that if he had lived there would be some first-hand evidence. The complete lack of contemporaneous documentation of his existence makes it highly likely, although not impossible, that he never lived. For two thousand years people have searched for contemporaneous documentation proving that Jesus lived. None has been found.

originally posted by: MarkJS
Original referenced post- nested quote:

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

Tuesday is named for the Norse god Tyr, Wednesday for Woden (Odin), Thursday for Thor, and Friday for Frey. Is that proof that those gods existed? Using your illogic, it must be.

Sure, but to make it clearer, I'm referring to the year zero in the Gregorian calendar, which was started by the Romans. They must have known something that you don't.

It was a political decision. Are you going to argue that the people who named the days of the week knew something you don't know?

a reply to: kelbtalfenek
"kelb tal-fenek"
Hey I recognize that horrible language!

Are you Maltese?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Akragon

This is where I loose all respect for Bart Ehrman. He's welcome to believe what he wants, of course, but he has set an agenda to go out and attack those who don't believe in a historical Jesus, even though his research and his books belie the historical Biblical Jesus existence.

I believe that's where Ehrman becomes a paid shill for the Christian Universities that hire him.

It's obvious to me that the Bible has distorted, beyond recognition, any truth about who the real Jesus was, if he was. Certainly, the biblical character of Jesus Christ did not ever exist. Bart Ehrman is intellectually dishonest in his criticism of those who reject the biblical model of Jesus Christ and his existence.

IEhrman bases his argument on reverse-engineered machinations not evidence. Ultimately, he concludes, without evidence, that the Biblical accounts of Jesus are based on oral tradition and argues (again, without evidence) that this justifies his belief that Jesus lived. Hogwash. There were oral traditions about Isis and Odin, too. I'll bet Ehrman wouldn't use his silly argument to justify a belief that they lived. Ehrman is intellectually dishonest. I'm in basic agreement with your post except that it's impossible to prove with certainty that someone did not exist.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Harvin

I still recall a thread here where i asked the question about people who were thought to be real people and actually were made up. I DO NOT recall any intelligent answers someone even gave Paul Bunyan as a response.

Serapis

Shakespeare

Adam and Eve

Noah

Too little is known about Serapis. You only can find some theories regarding Serapis and we cannot conclude if Serapis was considered an actual person on earth, was an actual living person or was a completely fictitious character. Another consideration in exaples like this that people actually did write fiction for entertainment purposes, they put on plays...plays have to have characters.

Shakespeare could have been a few writers, that i am not sure about and it was only recently that i read about that myself. Shakespeare is different since pen names are commonly used. Just depends on if anyone knew him in person and had stated so in writing. For that example people would easily accept the name may be a pen name.

Adam and Eve and Noah have too little known about them. The problem there is you cannot say, as a matter of fact, they did not exist. Adam and Eve...maybe there was a few sets of them dispersed througout a specific region and within walking distance.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Spider879

Its not terribly curious that a British tabloid like the Daily Mail would publish this story. The story, the headline alone, is an attention getter and the Daily Mail is ever fighting for more views, more subscribers, etc. Anyone in Great Britain who wants to impress their peer group with superior education, intelligence and modernity does so by regularly and in the right company, proclaiming themselves to be atheist. Now, with the rise of militant Islamists, and particularly in Great Britain, it has become fashionable to not only tout atheistic views, but anti-religious leanings as well. What I find particularly telling is that this appeared in the "Science" section of the Daily Mail. In the so-called advanced, Progressive, Western nations like Britain, Science is the new and only acceptable religion. As a result, anti-religious works posing as, or presented as, settled "Science" simply reinforces accepted thought and as such, has near become a business model.

There's a total absence in your post of evidence that Jesus actually existed. You can start by naming one person who lived when Jesus allegedly lived who wrote that s/he witnessed Jesus living.

This doesn't prove that Jesus never existed, but only how obscure he was in his own lifetime. From reading the Gospel, you should understand that the people he preached to numbered only a few thousands. It was left to the disciples to spread the message after his death. Christianity spread slowly by word of mouth over the next few centuries.

originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
a reply to: Spider879

I could find 500 books from today that involve science and don't mention Stephen Hawking...Does that mean he doesn't exist?

Don't limit yourself to 500 books. Using all the documents in the world, cite one written by someone who lived when Jesus allegedly lived who claims that s/he witnessed Jesus living.

a reply to: Harvin

BS#!

We know for a fact that Serapis was invention of Ptolemy.

Serapis was devised during the 3rd century BC on the orders of Ptolemy I of Egypt[1] as a means to unify the Greeks and Egyptians in his realm.
en.wikipedia.org...

We know for a FACT that Shakespeare was a person who was believed to exist that didn't.

Science has proven that the myth of Adam and Eve is genetically impossible, as is the Noah myth also scientifically impossible.

a reply to: infolurker

Unless you can build a time machine, and go back to that time period, there is no way to know the absolute truth. Maybe its far fetched and mythical. But when I hear the argument that a supreme being is farfetched. I remember we are living on a semi molten rock ball with oceans of water, surrounded by a thin air envelope, that is circling a ball of fire a million miles across, held in place by "gravity" a force that no one can really see or weigh or show you a picture of, and that ball of fire is in a spiral of 100 billion other balls of fire, that are circling a black hole, with billions of other spirals of fire balls, in a universe so vast the edges of it are not definitively known. And that whole universe came into being in a millionth of a second from a point smaller than an atom by a mechanism that also cannot be photographed or definitively quantified. And we ourselves, are made of atoms that were formed in the hearts of stars and spontaneously came alive and then sentient after billions of years. Whats far fetched? Science is part of the answer, but not the absolute answer to why we are here. There is a saying in Buddhism that creation is a finger pointing at God. I have always liked this line of thought.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Harvin

BS#!

We know for a fact that Serapis was invention of Ptolemy.

Serapis was devised during the 3rd century BC on the orders of Ptolemy I of Egypt[1] as a means to unify the Greeks and Egyptians in his realm.
en.wikipedia.org...

It is not known and even in the link it states:

"there is evidence which implies Serapis existed before the Ptolemies came to power in Alexandria"

In addition, too little is known so this cannot be on the list.

originally posted by: windword
We know for a FACT that Shakespeare was a person who was believed to exist that didn't.

Not the same circumstances. Anyone can pick up a book written under a pen name and assume the person was an actual living person and the authors can cultivate that persona, very easy to do. If i pick up a book written under some obscure name how would i know it was not a pen name?

This goes into the - does not meet the same criteria column.

originally posted by: windword
Science has proven that the myth of Adam and Eve is genetically impossible, as is the Noah myth also scientifically impossible.

Adam and Eve or Noah gets too much into the belief system itself and people were always willing to accept that this may not be true.

Maybe debatable here, but i would omit this due to too hard to know.

it's easy to find jesus in the historical record, he was the son of cleopatra and the last pharaoh of egypt. of course he's likened to horus, all pharaohs were.

a reply to: Harvin

Okay Harvin, you've taken this point as far as you can. Now what do you intend to do with it and what does it have to do with this thread? Are you saying that it's impossible for the biblical Jesus Christ to be a fictional character? I say anything else is impossible.

Either you believe in magical god men, or you don't. It's a matter of faith, not fact.

a reply to: windword

Are you saying that it's impossible for the biblical Jesus Christ to be a fictional character? I say anything else is impossible.

Either you believe in magical god men, or you don't. It's a matter of faith, not fact.

"It's" a fact

Fiction is the form of any work that deals, in part or in whole, with information or events that are not real, but rather, imaginary and theoretical—that is, invented by the author.

Hebrews 12 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts4

Zechariah 3 For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes

Revelation 5 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Harvin

Okay Harvin, you've taken this point as far as you can. Now what do you intend to do with it and what does it have to do with this thread? Are you saying that it's impossible for the biblical Jesus Christ to be a fictional character? I say anything else is impossible.

Either you believe in magical god men, or you don't. It's a matter of faith, not fact.

depends on what "magic" actually is, doesn't it?

Original referenced post- nested quote:

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: MarkJS
Original referenced post- nested quote:

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: MarkJS
Two points:
-The whole calendar system revolves One Person - Jesus. So every day that you live is in reference to Jesus' existence. You can't get more proof of a Jesus than that.

Tuesday is named for the Norse god Tyr, Wednesday for Woden (Odin), Thursday for Thor, and Friday for Frey. Is that proof that those gods existed? Using your illogic, it must be.

Sure, but to make it clearer, I'm referring to the year zero in the Gregorian calendar, which was started by the Romans. They must have known something that you don't.

It was a political decision. Are you going to argue that the people who named the days of the week knew something you don't know?

They changed the year zero from being the time of the foundation of the Roman Empire to being the year of Jesus' Birth. And you think that was political? Hardly.

Just admit it. No matter how much truth is shown you, you rather believe in lies. It's ok (well not really). Maybe it's the first honest emotion you shown in a long while.

originally posted by: Harvin

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
a reply to: Spider879

I could find 500 books from today that involve science and don't mention Stephen Hawking...Does that mean he doesn't exist?

He would probably say. "In some dimension yes"

How did you make out with the list of people that were thought to have existed and were later found NOT to exist?

I recall you in that discussion as well and do not recall any remotely credible examples.

SO, here is the chance for anyone to give an example.

Sorry I don't understand your question/statement. I don't know what discussion you are referring to either. Are you sure you are not mixing me up with some other fella? Your entire response to me seems just odd. Maybe you didn't quite understand what you were replying too so let us review.

Chrisfishenstein said:
"I could find 500 books from today that involve science and don't mention Stephen Hawking...Does that mean he doesn't exist?"

To which I replied:
He would probably say. "In some dimension yes"

Of course when I said "He" I was referring to Stephen Hawking. You know the guy who postulates about infinite dimensions and possibilities.

I know, I know it is science humor and not everyone gets it but just in case you did then I am trying to figure out your reply to me.