The Jesus Puzzle

[freedom13]

THE JESUS PUZZLE
Was There No Historical Jesus? Earl Doherty

Preamble My investigations have led me to a fundamental disagreement with Professor Wells. (He is the only prominent writer on the "Jesus-as-myth" theory in the past generation; earlier proponents are difficult for the average reader to come by, so I will not address them.) Wells postulates that Paul and other Christians of his day believed that "Jesus" had lived in obscurity at some unknown point in the past, perhaps two or three centuries before their time. The problem is, there seems to be no more evidence in the epistles that Paul has such a figure in mind than there is for his knowledge of a Jesus of Nazareth who had lived and died during the reign of Herod Antipas. Rather, everything in Paul points to a belief in an entirely divine Son who "lived" and acted in the spiritual realm, in the same mythical setting in which all the other savior deities of the day were seen to operate. No Greek or Roman believed that the god Mithras had lived in an identifiable period of earthly history, or that the bull he slaughtered was "historical," and the mystery myths at the time of Christian beginnings tended to be moved to a supernatural sphere under the influence of current philosophy. With this view, Christianity can be seen to fit nicely into its surrounding milieu, a child of its time. It also enables us to read and understand Paul in all his spiritual richness—from an historical interest point of view—and to gain a thorough picture of what his faith constituted. Once early Christian belief is seen in its proper light, a whole new window is gained onto the religious spirit of the era, since Christianity was the great synthesizer and preserver of that spirit. But if we insist instead on seeing early Christian faith as some strange hybrid anomaly against the background beliefs of its day, that picture will remain forever deficient. Today we face two principal impediments to understanding Paul's belief in Christ as an entirely spiritual figure. One is the fact that it is based on views of the universe which are alien to our modern outlook. The second is our failure to grasp how the Jewish scriptures, as they were interpreted by certain circles in Paul's day, could confer features on the heavenly Christ which we perceive as "historical." I am referring to passages like Romans 1:3, that Christ was "of David's seed," or Galatians 4:4, that he was "born of woman," plus a smattering of references to things like Jesus' "flesh" or "blood." These matters I have been careful to address, and to provide an intelligible explanation for.

Did Jesus exist? Are the origins of Christianity best explained without a founder Jesus of Nazareth? Before the Gospels do we find an historical Jesus or a Jesus myth?

[freedom13]

Historical Jesus or Jesus Myth: The Jesus Puzzle

Historical Jesus or Jesus Myth: The Jesus Puzzle Did Christianity begin with an historical Jesus or a Jesus myth? Was the original Jesus a man or a mythical savior god? Solving the Jesus Puzzle through the Christian and ancient-world record, from the Pauline epistles to the Gospels to the second century Christian apologists, from Philo to Josephus to Jewish and Hellenistic philosophy. Christian faith evolved from a Jesus myth to an historical Jesus. New Testament scholarship needs to uncover that original evolution and rewrite the history of Western religion.

[freedom13]

Did Jesus exist? Are the origins of Christianity best explained without a founder Jesus of Nazareth? Before the Gospels do we find an historical Jesus or a Jesus myth?

Historical Jesus or Jesus Myth: The Jesus Puzzle
Further studies on a wide range of topics concerning the historical Jesus and the Jesus myth. Each one adopts the viewpoint that problem questions or documents are best solved when approached from the position that there was no historical Jesus. At the same time, these articles will help provide a greater insight into the origins of Christianity, the object of its worship and the source of its ideas.

[Technosoul]

Why was Paul charged with killing the Cristians before he was converted by a reported spiritual event? Was the Christian movement also a myth that Paul made up? And if such a group of people exsisted from which Paul got his background inspiration then did that Jewish sub-cult of Christains fake an exsistance of someone they claimed was biblical fullfillment as the "world teacher"? It seems odd that all that was a myth, even if perhaps parts of the New Testiment was overstating the abilites of the person they honored.

But then, anything is possible. None the less someone had to write the four gospels and write the sayings and so forth, otherwise the four gospels could not exsist. And it was those sayings, recorded in manuspcripts, which had the real power to generate a new religion. And those sayings are hardly a myth.

Also, what proof do you have that Paul exsisted as a real person, he might have been a myth also?

[Darebirth]

Quote by: freedom13 Did Jesus exist? Are the origins of Christianity best explained without a founder Jesus of Nazareth? Before the Gospels do we find an historical Jesus or a Jesus myth?

I any point in the history of a religious society, you are going to have people with Messianic complexes. In our own society, which is predominatly Christian, we see many with Messianic complexes, most popularly the leader of the Branch Dividians in Wako, Texas. It is safe to assume that people in Bible times had Messianic complexes as well. I don't see why it is so improbable that a man named Jesus could have at some point preached the Bible and that he was God in the city of Jerusalem.

This isn't any kind of proof or solid base for an arguement that Jesus is God, but I as an atheist can at least come to terms with the idea that Jesus was a person who existed.

[SoylentGreen]

Darebirth This isn't any kind of proof or solid base for an arguement that Jesus is God, but I as an atheist can at least come to terms with the idea that Jesus was a person who existed.

And yet the evidence that he could of existed is on par with the evidence that Harry Potter existed.
We have only a story that's it.

[linda_mary_13]

The Jesus puzzle only puzzels those who have no faith. If you have faith then Jesus exits therefore there is no question he existed. This provides an additional puzzle to solve which is the Faith Puzzel.

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: linda_mary_13 The Jesus puzzle only puzzels those who have no faith. If you have faith then Jesus exits therefore there is no question he existed. This provides an additional puzzle to solve which is the Faith Puzzel.

There is no faith puzzle. Faith = belief that is not based on proof:
Nothing puzzling about that.

[loser]

People would definitely like to believe that Jesus (as Messiah, Son of God) never existed and is only a myth (God even explains why this is so).

Liars and deceivers have always been with us; now, just like in the past.

Self-deception is just such a terrible waste of a life.

Why not seek truth?

In the end, you will find only freedom.

Poor Earl is bound tightly; don't let his shackles become yours.

[Aussie]

Quote by: linda_mary_13 The Jesus puzzle only puzzels those who have no faith. If you have faith then Jesus exits therefore there is no question he existed. This provides an additional puzzle to solve which is the Faith Puzzel.

I've seen a few of your posts now Linda, and I could pretty much summarise all your answers to - the Bible says so. Do you have any independant thought on any of these subjects (and please dont look to the Bible for the answer...)?

[NoonBlueApples]

Quote by: SoylentGreen And yet the evidence that he could of existed is on par with the evidence that Harry Potter existed. We have only a story that's it.

If you want to get down to it, you can only ever know that which you experience. If you have never tasted a pineapple before, I could tell you all about what a pineapple taste like, but you have never experienced the taste of a pineapple for yourself.
Therefore you have no evidence that electrons, protons, or neutrons exist. You have no evidence that your own brain exist. You know that you have thoughts so you assume the thought comes from your brain, you believe that all matter is made up of atoms though experience of the physical world and how matter interacts.
So does it even matter if Jesus is real to you? Jesus is real to those who "experience" him.
I suppose you could argue that Harry Potter lives in your imagination, maybe Harry Potter is real to you. But you must know that Harry Potter is fiction, it is through reason we come to understand this. We know his creator, J.K., and we know he is fiction, we can prove this by having conversations with J.K.
However, there is no more evidence to suggest that Jesus did not exist than there is evidence to suggest that he did exist.
Does it matter?
Is what we can learn from the story more important?
We can only ever truly know that we ourselves (our thinking mind) exist, we take it on faith that everything we experience also exists.
But where do our thoughts come from?
How do we come about our ability to reason, think and contemplate. If thought did not exist in the universe, we could not think. So where did that which makes thought possible come from?
But that is another topic.

[SoylentGreen]

NoonBlueApplesIf you want to get down to it, you can only ever know that which you experience

There are many things we can know without experiencing it.
I know that having touched fire once it will be painfull to do it again without actually experiencing it again.
What you are refering to is meta physical approach to knowledge.

So does it even matter if Jesus is real to you?

Personally no. It matters not one wit to me. But as this is a debate site I will debate the point. In real life it is a matter of live and let live to me.

However, there is no more evidence to suggest that Jesus did not exist than there is evidence to suggest that he did exist.

Sorry but the evidence of his existence is exactly on par with harry.

Does it matter? Is what we can learn from the story more important?

Only to those who want to believe . Isn't what we learn from harry potter just as important?

We can only ever truly know that we ourselves (our thinking mind) exist, we take it on faith that everything we experience also exists.

Contradiction , if you can't prove anything exists then why would your mind be any different? Are you absolutely sure your thinking or is it the one who is the author of your life.

[Dadoo]

As an icon, however, The Christ is impeccable.
The second coming is essentially, the 'first' empirical experience for most of the Christ Mind. In the 2 nd coming, one realizes that (s)he is Christ's twin as it were. How can one have faith in the majesty of the next world until one believes in the reality of this world?
It is irrelevant if Christ was a man, a God , both or a composite of many sages. In any case, the job was done, and well. I am not a Christian per se, altho' I allow sound dogmatic axioms to gently guide me- from any faith. I am a reformed Cathoholic, and in my years of Crucifix worship, I learned the true meaning of parable and analogy. It beats arguing over base manifestations!
Ha!
Dadoo

[loser]

Do you have any independant thought on any of these subjects (and please dont look to the Bible for the answer..

Didn't you know that the Bible is the Answer Book?

Besides, there's no such thing as "independent (or original) thought". You are only what you eat.

There are many things we can know without experiencing it. I know that having touched fire once it will be painfull to do it again without actually experiencing it again.

You have bound yourself in a prison of your own making. Your false assumption causes you to stop growing, your cognition has atrophied. You don't know that touching fire again will be painful...you only assume it to be so.

That's the problem with mankind; most all go through life assuming but never coming to the knowledge of anything.

Sorry but the evidence of his existence is exactly on par with harry.

You're just being facetious. You KNOW that Harry is (recent) fiction, attested to be so by his creator. And you KNOW that Jesus is attested to be real by His Creator. Evidence may be lacking but perception should help you fill in the gaps. Open eyes will make you wise.

Isn't what we learn from harry potter just as important?

What did HP teach you, anyway?

I am a reformed Cathoholic, and in my years of Crucifix worship, I learned the true meaning of parable and analogy.

I doubt if you are completely deprogrammed just yet.

[Dadoo]

I was fishing for a smile.
May I add, loser, that i see
Programs replace programs. One paradigm supplants the next. New words, old hats.
But I am not only what I eat-
I am Wholly what I choose to consume, as well.
There is magic here, logician. I quite enjoy
your POV, however, and agree that you exist.
-dadoo

[Okieslims]

I think there probably was a man name Jesus.. in a time where many preached and hoped to gain an edge on the competition, Jesus most likely rose above his competition. I think he built a following and that following built his legend.

He was a dime a dozen cult leader

[SoylentGreen]

loserThat's the problem with mankind; most all go through life assuming but never coming to the knowledge of anything.

It's called learning from your mistakes , a concept you are obviously unfamiliar with.

And you KNOW that Jesus is attested to be real by His Creator.

I KNOW no such thing. But I do know that the church that pushes the fiction of jesus are making as big a profit as Rowling.

What did HP teach you, anyway?

That religion has a lot in common with fiction.

[NoonBlueApples]

I think therefore I am. I am aware of my thoughts and I can only be sure that my thoughts exist. I know that my thoughts exist, for if they did not I would not be able to contemplate my own existence. I cannot know the thoughts of another, I have no internal proof that any other than myself exist.
I believe that the universe (this includes other people) exists because it is not possible for my mind (as I know it) to create perceptions. I cannot imagine the taste of something I have never tasted, I cannot imagine the feel of something I have never felt. If I have never been burned, if I have never felt pain, I cannot imagine what pain is, I would have no concept of it.
If you are honest with yourself, you will realize that the only thing you can possibly know is that which you have come to know first hand. You can imagine something new, but what you imagine is not experienced. You can imagine a creature that is half eagle and half lion, but you cannot experience such a beast. In fact, the only reason you can imagine such a thing is because you are able to experience an eagle and a lion, the mind can then combine the two.
If you have only seen an eagle on TV, you have only ever experienced the image of an eagle, you have not experienced an eagle.
You can never experience Harry Potter. You can imagine, but as we know, imagination and experience are very different.
One can come to know God, for God is within ones ability to know and experience. Until you have experienced, you cannot know.
Some seek the experience of God through Jesus, others Muhammad, others still the Buddha, Father Sky, Brahma, Apollo, and so forth.
The point is that all of humanity, for all of time, have sought the experience of God.
Even Atheists ask, "Who is this God you speak of?"
Never assume you have all the answers, no matter what you believe. You can never know anything until you realize that you know nothing. He who leads the unexamined life has not lived at all.
The universe is more complex than you have yet to imagine.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: linda_mary_13 The Jesus puzzle only puzzels those who have no faith. If you have faith then Jesus exits therefore there is no question he existed. This provides an additional puzzle to solve which is the Faith Puzzel.

What a dishonest thing to say?

[Theists] are apt to quote the late Stephen Jay Gould's 'NOMA' — 'non-overlapping magisteria'. Gould claimed that science and true religion never come into conflict because they exist in completely separate dimensions of discourse:

To say it for all my colleagues and for the umpteenth millionth time (from college bull sessions to learned treatises): science simply cannot (by its legitimate methods) adjudicate the issue of God's possible superintendence of nature. We neither affirm nor deny it; we simply can't comment on it as scientists.

This sounds terrific, right up until you give it a moment's thought. You then realize that the presence of a creative deity in the universe is clearly a scientific hypothesis. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more momentous hypothesis in all of science. A universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference. God could clinch the matter in his favour at any moment by staging a spectacular demonstration of his powers, one that would satisfy the exacting standards of science. Even the infamous Templeton Foundation recognized that God is a scientific hypothesis — by funding double-blind trials to test whether remote prayer would speed the recovery of heart patients. It didn't, of course, although a control group who knew they had been prayed for tended to get worse (how about a class action suit against the Templeton Foundation?) Despite such well-financed efforts, no evidence for God's existence has yet appeared.

To see the disingenuous hypocrisy of religious people who embrace NOMA, imagine that forensic archeologists, by some unlikely set of circumstances, discovered DNA evidence demonstrating that Jesus was born of a virgin mother and had no father. If NOMA enthusiasts were sincere, they should dismiss the archeologists' DNA out of hand: "Irrelevant. Scientific evidence has no bearing on theological questions. Wrong magisterium." Does anyone seriously imagine that they would say anything remotely like that? You can bet your boots that not just the fundamentalists but every professor of theology and every bishop in the land would trumpet the archeological evidence to the skies.

Either Jesus had a father or he didn't. The question is a scientific one, and scientific evidence, if any were available, would be used to settle it.

Edge: WHY THERE ALMOST CERTAINLY IS NO GOD By Richard Dawkins

It is absolutely not acceptable to have faith that Jesus existed. Just as it's not acceptable to have faith that a used car will run without researching it. In our day to day lives, we value evidence and chastise our friends who don't adequately investigate things. It's only in religion that we do a 180 and allow people to get away with saying completely impossible things. We need to stop that. It's time for religion to stop getting a free pass.

[Dadoo]

YES! Science and spirituality are disparate views of identical tangible phenomenon. We speak very little of things unexperienced. We ponder only the evidence at hand, through many lenses, and arrive at many conclusions. If we apply "M" theory technology... we could unify our perspectives and broaden the senses. Dadoo