Why the Jesus Myth is illogical.

[fallingblood]

Recently, we have had a few threads sprout up about whether or not Jesus existed. A few members on this forum have argued that Jesus is nothing more than a myth. The basis of that idea though, as we will see, is completely illogical.

There is a little background that is needed. First, Jesus was a Jew. The earliest writer we have that mentions him, Paul, was a Jew. The Gospel writers, with the exception of Luke, were Jews. Throughout the Gospels, we see Jesus within Judaism. More so, he is in Israel, the Jewish homeland. Jesus is firmly in Judaism. That is important.

Now, if we are to believe that Jesus was simply created, we have to ask why. Is there a logical reason for any Jew to create Jesus? I would have to say there isn't.

The reason is quite simple. When we look at Jesus, a couple of things pop out. Jesus was being portrayed as the Messiah and Jesus died on the cross. Here is the problem. As soon as Jesus died, according to Judaism, Jesus was a failed Messiah. Not a very logical story for a group trying to prove a Messiah.

At the same time though, there was no lack of supposed Messiahs, or failed Messiahs. There was no reason to create another figure who was a failed Messiah and was not anything wholly unique. His message was the same message others were preaching. He was just one more faith healer. And he was just one more supposed Messiah who was crucified.

There are a couple of other illogical reasons to assume it is made up. First, the story is flawed. Early Christians were trying to claim that Jesus was sinless, perfect. Yet, at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus, we see Jesus being baptized by John. There would be no reason for this if Jesus was perfect. It's an embarrassing story, which would have been better left out.

Another is that Jesus was from Nazareth. Some Jesus mythers claim that Nazareth didn't even exist during that time so the idea is that the creators of Jesus also created a city to fit him. The problem is that we know Nazareth existed in the first century. We have archeological records from that time showing that Nazareth was a village in the first century. However, it was a village that was of little importance. It was of such little importance it wasn't mentioned in literature until well after Jesus died. It had no religious significance, no political significance, really no significance at all. Instead though, we see Matthew and Luke going through work just to show that this Jesus of Nazareth actually was born in Bethlehem. If Jesus was created, one would assume they would just have had him from Bethlehem instead of putting him in an obscure village and then creating a story how he had to go to Bethlehem to be born.

The most embarrassing aspect of the life of Jesus though is that he died. When he died, he was proven to be a failed messiah. There is no logical reason that the Jews would have created a story about a failed messiah who died such a humiliating death.


One final thing though. Many of the Jesus mythers claim that Jesus was copied from other god men. But lets look at Augustus quickly. He was considered to be the son of a god. He was considered to be a god, at least in Egypt. He was considered the savior, redeemer of the world. I mention that because he has the same similarities with Jesus as other claim that these god men do, yet no one doubts that Augustus lived.

The idea that Jesus was simply a myth is illogical.

 

[logician]

Your post is illogical. The Jesus story is an obvious myth becaues we know nothing about the supposed man.

1. When he was born.
2. When he died.
3. Nobody can point to a SPECIFIC man in history and say, yep, that was Jesus.
4. The little "evidence" claimed to support the existence is either hearsay, or forged.
5. No historian contemporary to the time of the supposed Jesus ever heard of such a man.
6. There are no writings or books written by the supposed Jesus.

Sorry, nobody can claim with "certainty" that anybody in ancient history existed based upon such flimsy evidence. If they do, they have some other axe to grind.

 

[fallingblood]

Your post is illogical. The Jesus story is an obvious myth becaues we know nothing about the supposed man.

1. When he was born.

We may not know the exact date, but then again, there are many ancient characters we don't know the exact date of when they were born. If you want to keep this position, then we can start eliminating many ancient characters. Actually, it wasn't even until recently that we finally found out when Harry Houdini was born, and he lived just a hundred years ago.

2. When he died.

Again, there are many question marks about when people died. If you want to keep that position, then again, we can start eliminating many ancient characters.

The fact is, knowing the exact time of birth and death does not mean anything. We don't need those to know that a person lived. If that was true, we could erase many people off our history books.

3. Nobody can point to a SPECIFIC man in history and say, yep, that was Jesus.

Accept they point to the specific man in the Gospels, the writings of Paul, and Josephus and all say, yep, that was Jesus. This is simply a dumb argument.

4. The little "evidence" claimed to support the existence is either hearsay, or forged.

Hearsay, again, does not mean it is bad. Much of what we know about the emperor Tiberius is hearsay. Much of what we know about history in general is hearsay. Saying it is hearsay is illogical.

As for forgeries, I'm assuming you are talking about Josephus, which wasn't a forgery.

5. No historian contemporary to the time of the supposed Jesus ever heard of such a man.

How many historians were keeping record of individuals peasant Jews during that time period? We know very little about Judaism in the 1st century because few people cared. Your argument here only shows that Jesus was considered to be not important.

6. There are no writings or books written by the supposed Jesus.

That is ridiculous to use as an argument. How many ancient characters never wrote anything? There is no logic in that argument.

Sorry, nobody can claim with "certainty" that anybody in ancient history existed based upon such flimsy evidence. If they do, they have some other axe to grind.

We can say with relative certainty that Jesus existed. We can say that he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. And the topic isn't even that. It is about how positions such as yours, that Jesus was a myth that was created it illogical. Maybe you want to actually address what I said instead of spreading the same misinformation you have become known for.

 

[Willamena]

One final thing though. Many of the Jesus mythers claim that Jesus was copied from other god men.

They're not "Jesus mythers"; "Jesus plagiarizers" might be a better term.

Some wouldn't know a myth if it jumped up and bit them on the nose.

 

[MW0082]

Recently, we have had a few threads sprout up about whether or not Jesus existed. A few members on this forum have argued that Jesus is nothing more than a myth. The basis of that idea though, as we will see, is completely illogical.

There is a little background that is needed. First, Jesus was a Jew. The earliest writer we have that mentions him, Paul, was a Jew. The Gospel writers, with the exception of Luke, were Jews. Throughout the Gospels, we see Jesus within Judaism. More so, he is in Israel, the Jewish homeland. Jesus is firmly in Judaism. That is important.

Now, if we are to believe that Jesus was simply created, we have to ask why. Is there a logical reason for any Jew to create Jesus? I would have to say there isn't.

The reason is quite simple. When we look at Jesus, a couple of things pop out. Jesus was being portrayed as the Messiah and Jesus died on the cross. Here is the problem. As soon as Jesus died, according to Judaism, Jesus was a failed Messiah. Not a very logical story for a group trying to prove a Messiah.

At the same time though, there was no lack of supposed Messiahs, or failed Messiahs. There was no reason to create another figure who was a failed Messiah and was not anything wholly unique. His message was the same message others were preaching. He was just one more faith healer. And he was just one more supposed Messiah who was crucified.

There are a couple of other illogical reasons to assume it is made up. First, the story is flawed. Early Christians were trying to claim that Jesus was sinless, perfect. Yet, at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus, we see Jesus being baptized by John. There would be no reason for this if Jesus was perfect. It's an embarrassing story, which would have been better left out.

Another is that Jesus was from Nazareth. Some Jesus mythers claim that Nazareth didn't even exist during that time so the idea is that the creators of Jesus also created a city to fit him. The problem is that we know Nazareth existed in the first century. We have archeological records from that time showing that Nazareth was a village in the first century. However, it was a village that was of little importance. It was of such little importance it wasn't mentioned in literature until well after Jesus died. It had no religious significance, no political significance, really no significance at all. Instead though, we see Matthew and Luke going through work just to show that this Jesus of Nazareth actually was born in Bethlehem. If Jesus was created, one would assume they would just have had him from Bethlehem instead of putting him in an obscure village and then creating a story how he had to go to Bethlehem to be born.

The most embarrassing aspect of the life of Jesus though is that he died. When he died, he was proven to be a failed messiah. There is no logical reason that the Jews would have created a story about a failed messiah who died such a humiliating death.


One final thing though. Many of the Jesus mythers claim that Jesus was copied from other god men. But lets look at Augustus quickly. He was considered to be the son of a god. He was considered to be a god, at least in Egypt. He was considered the savior, redeemer of the world. I mention that because he has the same similarities with Jesus as other claim that these god men do, yet no one doubts that Augustus lived.

The idea that Jesus was simply a myth is illogical.

this is your own logic that you concluded this. THERE IS NO PROOF IN YOUR POST!!!! Bring some proof then we can truly debate.....

 

[fallingblood]

this is your own logic that you concluded this. THERE IS NO PROOF IN YOUR POST!!!! Bring some proof then we can truly debate.....

So you simply dismiss it because you can't actually debate it. Learn the meaning of the word debate. I've posed my argument, now it's your turn to offer a rebuttal. As in the style of a debate.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I don't know if I would waste my time other than the OP, fallingblood.

There is no hope of an intelligent conversation on this topic.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The fact of the matter is that we will never know one way or another whether an actual person existed whom we now know as Jesus. It's rather irrelevant, as the mythos surrounding Jesus, long ago, became more meaningful and powerful than any person it may or may not have been based on anyway. If there was a real guy named Jesus who was the seed of the religious character/symbol, no doubt he would fall far short of living up to the idea and myth of Jesus that has grown over the centuries.

 

[MW0082]

So you simply dismiss it because you can't actually debate it. Learn the meaning of the word debate. I've posed my argument, now it's your turn to offer a rebuttal. As in the style of a debate.

I dismiss it because it is not proof, it is opinoin. You need to learn the difference between those two words.

In your opinoin Jesus must have been real due to his own flaws and that Nazareth may be a real city, adn that a Jew said it is true so it must be. You can't use your gospel to prove your gospel.

Again I ask why did the Pagans celebrate December 25th?

Why does Bethlaham literally translate into house of bread? As in the virgin holding the leaf of wheat.....

How can someomne acend to heaven for all to see never make into the histopry books?


Once you have PROOF (learn the word please) i'll and other will gladly debate it.

 

[fallingblood]

I don't know if I would waste my time other than the OP, fallingblood.

There is no hope of an intelligent conversation on this topic.

I think I have to agree with you here. After seeing MW0082's posts, I'm actually happy to have dogsgod around. At least he provides some logical posts.

 

[fallingblood]

I dismiss it because it is not proof, it is opinoin. You need to learn the difference between those two words.

I'm not addressing what you've stated in your post. There is no reason for me to offer a rebuttal to something that you didn't even provide evidence for, and that is not actually on this subject. I presented an argument. That argument is that the idea that Jesus was just a myth is illogical. I've presented my support and evidence backing my position.

If you disagree, please, offer a rebuttal, and start a debate. Don't sidestep the issue and try to dismiss outright. If it truly is so wrong, as you are implying, it should be no problem for you to provide a logical argument as to why my position, that the idea that Jesus is a myth is illogical, as detailed in the OP, is incorrect. It is as easy as that.

 

[MW0082]

Sorry I am at work for the majority of the day and not privy to elaborate more than I could. Plus seeing how I have a life to live properly rebutting your shawty "proof".

Lets begin, seeing how most people don't know the truth about any of their so called messiahs.

Buddha;
Both went to their temples at the age of twelve, where they are said to have astonished all with their wisdom. Both supposedly fasted in solitude for a long time: Buddha for forty–seven days and Jesus for forty. Both wandered to a fig tree at the conclusion of their fasts. Both were about the same age when they began their public ministry:
“When he [Buddha] went again to the garden he saw a monk who was calm, tranquil, self–possessed, serene, and dignified. The prince, determined to become such a monk, was led to make the great renunciation. At the time he was twenty–nine years of age… “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age.” (Luke 3:23). Both were tempted by the “devil” at the beginning of their ministry: To Buddha, he said: “Go not forth to adopt a religious life but return to your kingdom, and in seven days you shall become emperor of the world, riding over the four continents.” To Jesus, he said: “All these [kingdoms of the world] I will give you, if you fall down and worship me” (Matthew 4:9). Buddha answered the “devil”: “Get you away from me.”
Jesus responded: “…begone, Satan!” (Matthew 4:10). Both strove to establish a kingdom of heaven on earth. According to the Somadeva (a Buddhist holy book), a Buddhist ascetic’s eye once offended him, so he plucked it out and cast it away. Jesus said: “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out, and throw it away;.” (Matthew 5:29).

 

[MW0082]

Krishna;

According to Bhagavata Purana some believe that Krishna was born without a sexual union, by “mental transmission” from the mind of Vasudeva into the womb of Devaki, his mother. Christ and Krishna were called both God and the Son of God. Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man. Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity. Krishna’s adoptive human father was also a carpenter. A spirit or ghost was their actual father. Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent. Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star. Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna’s parents stayed in Mathura. Both Christ and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted. Both were identified as “the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head.” Jesus was called “the lion of the tribe of Judah.” Krishna was called “the lion of the tribe of Saki.” Both claimed: “I am the Resurrection.” Both were “without sin.” Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine. Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured “all manner of diseases.” Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead. Both selected disciples to spread his teachings. Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners. Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies. Both were crucified and both were resurrected.

 

[MW0082]

Odysseus;

Homeric tales about Odysseus emphasize his suffering life, just as in Mark Jesus said that he, too, would suffer greatly. Odysseus is a carpenter like Jesus, and he wants to return his home just as Jesus wants to be welcomed in his native home and later to God’s home in Jerusalem. Odysseus is plagued with unfaithful and dim-witted companions who display tragic flaws. They stupidly open a magic bag of wind while Odysseus sleeps and release terrible tempests which prevent their return home. These sailors are comparable to Jesus’ disciples, who disbelieve Jesus, ask foolish questions, and show general ignorance about everything. It’s amazing that either Odysseus or Jesus ever manage to accomplish anything, given the companions they have, but this simply demonstrates the power and ability of the one true leader who has a divine mandate to lead the people out of darkness and into a brighter future.

 

[MW0082]

Romulus;

Romulus is born of a vestal virgin, which was a priestess of the hearth god Vesta sworn to celibacy. His mother claims that the divine impregnated her, yet this is not believed by the King. Romulus and his twin brother, Remus, are tossed in the river and left for dead. (A “slaughter of the innocents” tale which parallels that of Matthew 2:13-16). Romulus is hailed as the son of god. He is “snatched away to heaven” by a whirlwind (It is assumed that the gods took him), and he makes post mortem appearances. In his work Numa Pompilius, Plutarch records that there was a darkness covering the earth before his death (Just as there was during Jesus’ death according to Mark 15:33). He also states that Romulus is to be know afterwards as ‘Quirinus’; A god which belonged to the Archiac Triad (a “triple deity” similar to the concept of the Tri

 

[dogsgod]

One final thing though. Many of the Jesus mythers claim that Jesus was copied from other god men. But lets look at Augustus quickly. He was considered to be the son of a god. He was considered to be a god, at least in Egypt. He was considered the savior, redeemer of the world. I mention that because he has the same similarities with Jesus as other claim that these god men do, yet no one doubts that Augustus lived.

The idea that Jesus was simply a myth is illogical.

I may or may not get to the others eventually but let's deal with this little chestnut first.

If you see a comparison here between the information that we have on Augustus Caesar and that of Jesus Christ then you're on your own. No amount of debating on my part is going to convince you of anything if this is the extent of your research.

 

[MW0082]

Romulus;

Romulus is born of a vestal virgin, which was a priestess of the hearth god Vesta sworn to celibacy. His mother claims that the divine impregnated her, yet this is not believed by the King. Romulus and his twin brother, Remus, are tossed in the river and left for dead. (A “slaughter of the innocents” tale which parallels that of Matthew 2:13-16). Romulus is hailed as the son of god. He is “snatched away to heaven” by a whirlwind (It is assumed that the gods took him), and he makes post mortem appearances. In his work Numa Pompilius, Plutarch records that there was a darkness covering the earth before his death (Just as there was during Jesus’ death according to Mark 15:33). He also states that Romulus is to be know afterwards as ‘Quirinus’; A god which belonged to the Archiac Triad (a “triple deity” similar to the concept of the Trinity

......

 

[MW0082]

Dionysus;

Dionysus was born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger. He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles. He “rode in a triumphal procession on an ***.” He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification. Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25. He was the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine. He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.” He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.” He was identified with the Ram or Lamb. His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified.

 

[MW0082]

Hercales;

Heracles is the Son of a god (Zeus). It is recorded that Zeus is both the father and great-great- great grandfather of Heracles, just as Jesus is essentially his own grandpa, being both “The root and offspring of David” (Revelation 22:16) as he is part of the triune God which is the father of Adam and eventually of Jesus. Both are doubly related to the Supreme God.
Diodorus writes that,”For as regards the magnitude of the deeds which he accomplished it is generally agreed that Heracles has been handed down as one who surpassed all men of whom memory from the beginning of time has brought down an account; consequently it is a difficult attainment to report each one of his deeds in a worthy manner and to present a record which shall be on a level with labours so great, the magnitude of which won for him the prize of immortality.”

 

[MW0082]

Hercales cont;

Jesus is also said to have done a very large number of good works. John 21:25 says that: “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”
Hera tries to kill Heracles as an infant by sending two serpents after him, yet Heracles survives by strangling them. This parallels Herod’s slaughter of the innocents in an attempt to kill Jesus (Matthew 2:13-16).
Heracles makes a descent into Hades and returns from it with Theseus and Peirithoüs, just as Jesus descends into the “lower parts of the earth” or Hades (Ephesians 4:7-8); Though Jesus does not bring anyone up from it. Heracles’ body is not found and he is assumed to have been taken by the gods:”After this, when the companions of Iolaüs came to gather up the bones of Heracles and found not a single bone anywhere, they assumed that, in accordance with the words of the oracle, he had passed from among men into the company of the gods.”