How Historians Know Jesus Did Not Exist

[jerry mcmasters]

Thanks!  My question is:  "Rythmics said the first people to suggest J is a total myth were jesus' supposed contemporaries in the ancient world, so he's probably full of shit, right?"

Justin Martyr came up with idea of diabolical mimicry for this very reason.

Well should be easy to come up with a quote of his where he says HJ never existed.  Not BJ, but HJ.  Everyone knows there has always been skepticism about walking on water, plucking coins from fish mouths, raising from the dead, and being the son of God.  Don't bait and switch here, the 300 or so pages on this forum have been about the existence of HJ, not BJ.

[Minimalist]

There is a major difference between arguing over facts and arguing over fairy tales.

[jerry mcmasters]

There is a major difference between arguing over facts and arguing over fairy tales.

Genius level post, Min.

[Rhythmcs]

Within forty years of the creation of the gospel of john we've got a saint telling us that pagans are comparing the christ story to mythology in criticism. Now, normally, if a saint told me the sun had risen in the east this morning I'd go check for myself...but the idiocy of his apology in this particular has me convinced that he was exactly as dumb as it sounds. He believed he'd solved a problem.

[Rhythmcs]

Justin Martyr came up with idea of diabolical mimicry for this very reason.

Well should be easy to come up with a quote of his where he says HJ never existed.  Not BJ, but HJ.  Everyone knows there has always been skepticism about walking on water, plucking coins from fish mouths, raising from the dead, and being the son of God.  Don't bait and switch here, the 300 or so pages on this forum have been about the existence of HJ, not BJ.

But those who hand down the myths which the poets have made, adduce no proof to the youths who learn them; and we proceed to demonstrate that they have been uttered by the influence of the wicked demons, to deceive and lead astray the human race. For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, they put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter, under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere marvellous tales, like the things which were said by the poets. And these things were said both among the Greeks and among all nations where they [the demons] heard the prophets foretelling that Christ would specially be believed in; but that in hearing what was said by the prophets they did not accurately understand it, but imitated what was said of our Christ, like men who are in error, we will make plain. The prophet Moses, then, Was, as we have already said, older than all writers; and by him, as we have also said before, it was thus predicted: "There shall not fail a prince from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until He come for whom it is reserved; and He shall be the desire of the Gentiles, binding His foal to the vine, washing His robe in the blood of the grape." The devils, accordingly, when they heard these prophetic words, said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and gave out that he was the discoverer of the vine, and they number wine [or, the ass] among his mysteries; and they taught that, having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven. And because in the prophecy of Moses it had not been expressly intimated whether He who was to come was the Son of God, and whether He would, riding on the foal, remain on earth or ascend into heaven, and because the name of "foal" could mean either the foal of an ass or the foal of a horse, they, not knowing whether He who was foretold would bring the foal of an ass or of a horse as the sign of His coming, nor whether He was the Son of God, as we said above, or of man, gave out that Bellerophon, a man born of man, himself ascended to heaven on his horse Pegasus. And when they heard it said by the other prophet Isaiah, that He should be born of a virgin, and by His own means ascend into heaven, they pretended that Perseus was spoken of. And when they knew what was said, as has been cited above, in the prophecies written aforetime, "Strong as a giant to run his course," they said that Hercules was strong, and had journeyed over the whole earth. And when, again, they learned that it had been foretold that He should heal every sickness, and raise the dead, they produced Aesculapius.

https://earlychristianwritings.com/text/...ology.html

You pick the silliest shit to die on sometime Jerry. It's not exactly strange to find a saint telling us the pagans thought his christ was a tall tale. They didn't believe in his god. What -is- strange is his explanation for how that happened, above.

Justin Martyr is not the only early christian apologist who informs us of the arguments that pagans had made, either. Would you like to know more?

(your lunatic framing on that q was precious though, like it would be justin fucking martyr who said the hj didn't exist....? No, dipshit, it was the pagans who suggested that.)

[jerry mcmasters]

Within forty years of the creation of the gospel of john we've got a saint telling us that pagans are comparing the christ story to mythology in criticism.  Now, normally, if a saint told me the sun had risen in the east this morning I'd go check for myself...but the idiocy of his apology in this particular has me convinced that he was exactly as dumb as it sounds.  He believed he'd solved a problem.

By "christ story" what do you mean?

[jerry mcmasters]

Well should be easy to come up with a quote of his where he says HJ never existed.  Not BJ, but HJ.  Everyone knows there has always been skepticism about walking on water, plucking coins from fish mouths, raising from the dead, and being the son of God.  Don't bait and switch here, the 300 or so pages on this forum have been about the existence of HJ, not BJ.

But those who hand down the myths which the poets have made, adduce no proof to the youths who learn them; and we proceed to demonstrate that they have been uttered by the influence of the wicked demons, to deceive and lead astray the human race. For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, they put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter, under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere marvellous tales, like the things which were said by the poets. And these things were said both among the Greeks and among all nations where they [the demons] heard the prophets foretelling that Christ would specially be believed in; but that in hearing what was said by the prophets they did not accurately understand it, but imitated what was said of our Christ, like men who are in error, we will make plain. The prophet Moses, then, Was, as we have already said, older than all writers; and by him, as we have also said before, it was thus predicted: "There shall not fail a prince from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until He come for whom it is reserved; and He shall be the desire of the Gentiles, binding His foal to the vine, washing His robe in the blood of the grape." The devils, accordingly, when they heard these prophetic words, said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and gave out that he was the discoverer of the vine, and they number wine [or, the ass] among his mysteries; and they taught that, having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven. And because in the prophecy of Moses it had not been expressly intimated whether He who was to come was the Son of God, and whether He would, riding on the foal, remain on earth or ascend into heaven, and because the name of "foal" could mean either the foal of an ass or the foal of a horse, they, not knowing whether He who was foretold would bring the foal of an ass or of a horse as the sign of His coming, nor whether He was the Son of God, as we said above, or of man, gave out that Bellerophon, a man born of man, himself ascended to heaven on his horse Pegasus. And when they heard it said by the other prophet Isaiah, that He should be born of a virgin, and by His own means ascend into heaven, they pretended that Perseus was spoken of. And when they knew what was said, as has been cited above, in the prophecies written aforetime, "Strong as a giant to run his course," they said that Hercules was strong, and had journeyed over the whole earth. And when, again, they learned that it had been foretold that He should heal every sickness, and raise the dead, they produced Aesculapius.

https://earlychristianwritings.com/text/...ology.html

You pick the silliest shit to die on sometime Jerry.  It's not exactly strange to find a saint telling us the pagans thought his christ was a tall tale.  They didn't believe in his god.  What -is- strange is his explanation for how that happened, above.

Justin Martyr is not the only early christian apologist who informs us of the arguments that pagans had made, either.  Would you like to know more?

We all think it's a tall tale.  The question is was there a man behind it somewhere.  You already said there was, so you're on the hill with me, dummy.

[Rhythmcs]

You don't possess the grace to acknowledge that you got exactly what you asked for after insisting that I was full of shit. Did pagans say jesus was a myth from the start? Justin Martry says they did, and explains how he thinks that happened.

[Minimalist]

Justin Martyr came up with idea of diabolical mimicry for this very reason.

Well should be easy to come up with a quote of his where he says HJ never existed.  Not BJ, but HJ.  Everyone knows there has always been skepticism about walking on water, plucking coins from fish mouths, raising from the dead, and being the son of God.  Don't bait and switch here, the 300 or so pages on this forum have been about the existence of HJ, not BJ.

There was no HJ or BJ in antiquity....Okay, there were bjs but they cost extra.  Justin and his fellow propagandists would  have looked at you as if you had rocks in your head for suggesting that there was any jesus aside from the one they worshiped AS A GOD.  After Theodosius  you stood an excellent chance of being murdered by these  loving xtians for disputing any part of the official doctrine.

[jerry mcmasters]

You don't possess the grace to acknowledge that you got exactly what you asked for after insisting that I was full of shit.  Did pagans say jesus was a myth from the start?  Justin Martry says they did, and explains how he thinks that happened.

Well I am nothing if not graceful.  Thank you for conceding that HJ is actually a thing.

Now do you get that some pagans saying J was a myth from the start has ZERO bearing on whether there is an actual historical human as the basis for some of the writings in the NT about Jesus?  Surely you don't think that when they meant "myth" they meant what Min means, like literally no Jesus.  They would not even have understood the question as it involves modern critical thinking, historical method, and, well, the NT as currently composed.

[jerry mcmasters]

Well should be easy to come up with a quote of his where he says HJ never existed.  Not BJ, but HJ.  Everyone knows there has always been skepticism about walking on water, plucking coins from fish mouths, raising from the dead, and being the son of God.  Don't bait and switch here, the 300 or so pages on this forum have been about the existence of HJ, not BJ.

There was no HJ or BJ in antiquity....Okay, there were bjs but they cost extra.  Justin and his fellow propagandists would  have looked at you as if you had rocks in your head for suggesting that there was any jesus aside from the one they worshiped AS A GOD.  After Theodosius  you stood an excellent chance of being murdered by these  loving xtians for disputing any part of the official doctrine.

It's a modern question, one that can only be asked in a modern context.  The "Quest for the Historical Jesus" is, what, a couple hundred years old, coming out of Germany I think?

[Rhythmcs]

The first people to suggest it were jesus supposed contemporaries in the ancient world.

That there was no Jesus at all?  Not even a faker that was just a human?  Source?

[/quote]

You don't possess the grace to acknowledge that you got exactly what you asked for after insisting that I was full of shit.  Did pagans say jesus was a myth from the start?  Justin Martry says they did, and explains how he thinks that happened.

Well I am nothing if not graceful.  Thank you for conceding that HJ is actually a thing.

Now do you get that some pagans saying J was a myth from the start has ZERO bearing on whether there is an actual historical human as the basis for some of the writings in the NT about Jesus?  Surely you don't think that when they meant "myth" they meant what Min means, like literally no Jesus.  They would not even have understood the question as it involves modern critical thinking, historical method, and, well, the NT as currently composed.

 Exactly...what...you...requested. They absolutely did, because they'd already gone through a period a skepticism, euhemerism, and cultural relativism...and they didn't believe in the abrahamic god in the first place.

That is what the very first christian apologist felt he needed some answer for. It hadn't properly caught on. The first people who heard it saw it for the mythology that it was. Justins best explanation was that demons had tricked everyone by preempting christ. You'll love this part. He writes his little screeds to the emperor and the senate...like they were taking his mail. That's how he ends up dead. So..it seems like he might have failed to convince his audience.

[Minimalist]

There was no HJ or BJ in antiquity....Okay, there were bjs but they cost extra.  Justin and his fellow propagandists would  have looked at you as if you had rocks in your head for suggesting that there was any jesus aside from the one they worshiped AS A GOD.  After Theodosius  you stood an excellent chance of being murdered by these  loving xtians for disputing any part of the official doctrine.

It's a modern question, one that can only be asked in a modern context.  The "Quest for the Historical Jesus" is, what, a couple hundred years old, coming out of Germany I think?

Close enough for government work....unless you are Elon Musk.

But that is what makes Diabolical Mimicry such a howler.  They thought they had to explain why their god was so much like all the others.

[jerry mcmasters]

That there was no Jesus at all?  Not even a faker that was just a human?  Source?

Well I am nothing if not graceful.  Thank you for conceding that HJ is actually a thing.

Now do you get that some pagans saying J was a myth from the start has ZERO bearing on whether there is an actual historical human as the basis for some of the writings in the NT about Jesus?  Surely you don't think that when they meant "myth" they meant what Min means, like literally no Jesus.  They would not even have understood the question as it involves modern critical thinking, historical method, and, well, the NT as currently composed.

 Exactly...what...you...requested.  They absolutely did, because they'd already gone through a period a skepticism, euhemirsm, and cultural relativism...and they didn't believe in the abrahamic god in the first place.

That is what the very first christian apologist felt he needed some answer for.
[/quote]

Put up or shut up.  Skepticism, euhemirsm, cultural relativism blah blah blah.  Give me the quote that they didn't believe in HJ the way Min doesn't believe in HJ.

[jerry mcmasters]

The ancients were doing Theology. We're doing history.

[Rhythmcs]

I'm not going to teach you the entirety of greco-roman history and philosophy Jerry. You suggested I was full of shit. It's clear I'm not, though it hardly matters since the subject is itself full of shit. Justin Martyr says that pagan detractors called his christ story a myth. If you think he was full of shit, fine...but in that case...the very first christian apologist, then, suggests the christ myth theory, and his explanation is demons.

[jerry mcmasters]

I'm not going to teach you the entirety of greco-roman history and philosophy Jerry.  You suggested I was full of shit.  It's clear I'm not, though it hardly matters since the subject is itself full of shit.  Justin Martyr says that pagan detractors called his christ story a myth.  If you think he was full of shit, fine...but in that case...the very first christian apologist, then, suggests the christ myth theory, and his explanation is demons.

Is your serious belief that when pagan detractors called the christ story a myth, they meant there was no Jesus at all in the way we have been discussing it here for 300 pages?  You don't think tthey were referring just to the son of god, walk on water, raise from the dead stuff?

[Rhythmcs]

You're aware of christians calling other people's religious stories myths, yes? That christians don't think there was ever any Historical Ganesh? Pagans are capable of the same. The proto and early christians allege that the pagan intelligentsia were extremely skeptical of their claims. That they accused the christians of just stealing their stories. This would continue openly, with emperors of rome chiming in, until about 340/350ad. It was pretty much over, and rome fully captured by christianity, by 363. From then until just before 1800...you would be killed...for suggesting as much.

[Minimalist]

You don't possess the grace to acknowledge that you got exactly what you asked for after insisting that I was full of shit.  Did pagans say jesus was a myth from the start?  Justin Martry says they did, and explains how he thinks that happened.

Well I am nothing if not graceful.  Thank you for conceding that HJ is actually a thing.

Now do you get that some pagans saying J was a myth from the start has ZERO bearing on whether there is an actual historical human as the basis for some of the writings in the NT about Jesus?  Surely you don't think that when they meant "myth" they meant what Min means, like literally no Jesus.  They would not even have understood the question as it involves modern critical thinking, historical method, and, well, the NT as currently composed.

Agreed about the not understanding part because they considered the seven heavens to be a real thing...sort of like xhristards think of heaven and hell.  Oh there would have been a few intellectuals who thought the whole thing was silly but in a pre-literate society not enough to matter.  They would have thought that the gods adventures would have taken place in a whole different realm...unless some horny god was coming to fuck a human woman....hell, even Yahweh gets his rocks off with Mary!  Oddly, though, this is exactly the kind of jesus  that "Paul" imagined.  A god who existed in outer space as Carrier puts it.  "Paul" knows nothing about any of the gospel stories which show up in them.  None of the people either.  No Joseph.  No Mary.  No Caiaphas.  No Pilate.  Nobody.  In fact scholars have detected a list of over 60 later xtian interpolations into Paul in some sort of meshuganah effort to harmonize them.  While we may have that modern critical thinking you mention it is equally difficult for us to put ourselves in the position of primitive men who were used to having a god be in charge of virtually everything.  Remember.  The Romans had a goddess for the Roman sewer system.  How much more holy can you get than that?

[Rhythmcs]

The rabble believe crazy shit to this very day. The big pagan/christian changeover did nothing for that. Comes standard.

[jerry mcmasters]

You're aware of christians calling other people's religious stories myths, yes?  That christians don't think there was ever any Historical Ganesh?  Pagans are capable of the same.  The proto and early christians allege that the pagan intelligentsia were extremely skeptical of their claims.  That they accused the christians of just stealing their stories.  This would continue openly, with emperors of rome chiming in, until about 340/350ad.  It was pretty much over, and rome fully captured by christianity, by 363.  From then until just before 1800...you would be killed...for suggesting as much.

I didn't ask you if pagans were capable of it, they're capable of it by virtue of being sentient human beings.  Is there any evidence that they did not believe in HJ in the way we have been discussing for 300 pages.  You are taking their theological disbelief- their skepticism of the supernatural, biblical Jesus,- and trying to sell that off as evidence of historical disbelief that there was a HJ, a wandering apocalyptic prophet around Galilee who got himself whacked, the same HJ you already said you believe existed...but they don't believe existed...?  Again, it's unlikely something they would have even considered, and you didn't really answer whether you yourself belief it of them.

[jerry mcmasters]

Well I am nothing if not graceful.  Thank you for conceding that HJ is actually a thing.

Now do you get that some pagans saying J was a myth from the start has ZERO bearing on whether there is an actual historical human as the basis for some of the writings in the NT about Jesus?  Surely you don't think that when they meant "myth" they meant what Min means, like literally no Jesus.  They would not even have understood the question as it involves modern critical thinking, historical method, and, well, the NT as currently composed.

Agreed about the not understanding part because they considered the seven heavens to be a real thing...sort of like xhristards think of heaven and hell.  Oh there would have been a few intellectuals who thought the whole thing was silly but in a pre-literate society not enough to matter.  They would have thought that the gods adventures would have taken place in a whole different realm...unless some horny god was coming to fuck a human woman....hell, even Yahweh gets his rocks off with Mary!  Oddly, though, this is exactly the kind of jesus  that "Paul" imagined.  A god who existed in outer space as Carrier puts it.  "Paul" knows nothing about any of the gospel stories which show up in them.  None of the people either.  No Joseph.  No Mary.  No Caiaphas.  No Pilate.  Nobody.  In fact scholars have detected a list of over 60 later xtian interpolations into Paul in some sort of meshuganah effort to harmonize them.  While we may have that modern critical thinking you mention it is equally difficult for us to put ourselves in the position of primitive men who were used to having a god be in charge of virtually everything.  Remember.  The Romans had a goddess for the Roman sewer system.  How much more holy can you get than that?

Hopefully Rythmics reads that.  He thinks they were weighing in on the HJ debate.

[Rhythmcs]

Yes....there is evidence. Justin Martyr says they called his christ story a myth. He explains that by way of demons. They would continue to do as much for centuries as christianity developed and captured the roman state...according to the christians....

You misunderstand me, I don't believe there is a historical jesus. I point out that the historical jesus of the scholarly consensus is a literal anyman..and no man in particular. A man who was baptized and crucified applies to tens of thousands of people. The problem with the hj isn't the supernatural shit..it's that the natural shit™ is also disputed by the consensus. Mundane details like any physical description are simply not present and any mundane detail that comes to your mind when you think "historical jesus" is disputed because we understand the theological importance of it's inclusion or exclusion. In the other thread I mentioned mary's perpetual virginity. Why would this be important to the hj? Because we know the authors (or editors) weren't trying to tell us that jesus had brothers in the blood sense because -they- believed (strongly, as in slap a bitch with some heresy charges strong) in it..so those authors would not have been telling us about jesus blood siblings.

Stop being a piece of shit Jerry. You asked a question, I took the time to answer it accurately and apparently brought you a whole bunch of info you were unaware of. You're fucking welcome.

this...?

a wandering apocalyptic prophet around Galilee who got himself whacked

-Not the consensus of scholars. The wandering apocalyptic prophet is disputed. Galilee? Disputed.

[jerry mcmasters]

Yes....there is evidence.  Justin Martyr says they called his christ story a myth.  He explains that by way of demons.  They would continue to do as much for centuries as christianity developed and captured the roman state.

You misunderstand me, I don't believe there is a historical jesus.  I point out that the historical jesus of the scholarly consensus is a literal anyman..and no man in particular.  A man who was baptized and crucied applies to tens of thousands of people.  The problem with the hj isn't the supernatural shit..it's that the natural shit™ is also disputed by the consensus.  Mundane details like any physical description are simply not present and any mundane detail that comes to your mind when you think "historical jesus" is disputed because we understand the theological importance of it's inclusion or exclusion.  In the other thread I mentioned mary's perpetual virginity.  Why would this be important to the hj?  Because we know the authors weren't trying to tell us that jesus had brothers in the blood sense because -they- believed (strongly, as in slap a bitch with some heresy charges strong) in it..so those authors would not have been telling us about jesus blood siblings.

Stop being a piece of shit Jerry.  You asked a question, I took the time to answer it accurately and apparently brought you a whole bunch of info you were unaware of.  You're fucking welcome.

The limits of my grace have indeed runneth over.  Goodnight.

[Minimalist]

The earliest xtian artwork of the supposed jesus portrays him as a philosopher; a beardless young man wearing a toga.  I don't know who pulled that idea out of their asshole but it has  certainly undergone radical change over the centuries.