"Jesus Certainly Existed" Three Reasons To Be Skeptical

Dalek Supreme

Well-Known Member
Three reasons why one (not relying on faith) should be agnostic about the claim "Jesus certainly existed".

1) The Gospels/Acts are overflowing with signs of literary fabrication.

"Those who want to find a historical record in Mark face an even greater obstacle than the ambiguous evidence for Mark's literary borrowing of non-Jesus material to create Jesus stories. This obstacle is the fact that if Jesus' earthly ministry actually happened as Mark portrays it, the history of Paul's Gentile mission and the opposition it encountered would be incomprehensible. How could it be that neither Paul nor anyone who worked with him, nor his opponents, knew about Jesus' determined endorsement of a mixed community sharing table fellowship together? How is it that everyone somehow forgot that Jesus explicitly "declared all foods clean (7:19)"? In the pitched battles Paul waged against his Judaizing opponents in his epistles, any one of the many stories about Jesus' conflicts over Law observance would have been devastating evidence of the rightness of Paul's side, yet none are ever mentioned."

Tom Dykstra, Mark, Canonizer of Paul, pp. 229-230

"A raft of scholars, including Randel Helms, Thomas L. Brodie, John Dominic Crossan and others, have shown again and again how this and that Gospel passage likely originated as a Christian rewrite of this or that Old Testament passage."

Thomas L Thompson, Is This Not the Carpenter, pp. 113-114

"Yet, regardless of the difficulty, comparing Luke-Acts and Mark with this verifiable literary antecedent is worthwhile. A key reason is simple: in looking for a literary precedent to the Gospels there is no verifiable pre-Christian text which comes as close to any gospel as the Elijah-Elisha narrative does to Luke-Acts and Mark."

Thomas Brodie, The Crucial Bridge, pp. 97

"While issues with the gospels are certainly not enough to rule out the possibility that there was a historical Jesus behind the gospel story, it also cannot be said with certainty that there must have been one. The lack of primary sources and the problems with the Gospel stories alone, would seemingly justify having some doubt."

Raphael Lataster, Jesus Did Not Exist, Sources: We All Know They're Rubbish - pp. 35/73

"The use of cycles, parallels, repetitions, melodramatic characterization, stereotyped scene construction, inventing or presenting stories that replicate biblical narrative, unbalanced narrative with evident symbolic import, and a balanced structure-all these raise insurmountable objections. History cannot be quite so symmetrical. In addition there are any number of historical problems."

Richard Pervo, The Mystery of Acts, pp. 151

Note: Nowhere in Acts do the authorities show concern that Jesus escaped justice.

"Despite scholarly efforts to detect an underlying Aramaic original for Mark or Matthew, it is probable that all the evangelists wrote in the common (koinē) Greek of their day. Further, the vast majority of Hebrew Bible citations in the New Testament are taken from the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint)."

"Large sections of Matthew, Mark, and Luke repeat stories about and sayings of Jesus in nearly identical words. Hence these three Gospels are referred to as the “Synoptic” Gospels. On a linguistic level, both Luke and Matthew improve on Mark’s style, smoothing out inelegant expressions and repetitions. Luke eliminates Mark’s characteristic use of parataxis (one short phrase following another without indicating how they are related) by employing balancing particles and subordinate clauses. Matthew follows Mark’s outline, though the insertion of considerable sections of discourse material may obscure that relationship for the casual reader. Luke knows most of Mark but has no parallels to Mk 6:45–8:26; whether Luke chose to omit this section or had a different version of Mark remains unclear. Detailed analysis of the traditions shared by Matthew, Mark, and Luke provides strong support for the view that Mark provided the template that Matthew and Luke revised, both correcting and smoothing out its language and expanding the Jesus material it contained."

"While the Synoptic Gospels have a close literary relationship, the Fourth Gospel, the Gospel of John, presents a much greater puzzle. Its chronology of Jesus’s ministry differs from that of the Synoptics. In John, Jesus spends three years preaching, during which he journeys between Galilee and Jerusalem; in the Synoptic Gospels, he visits Jerusalem only once, at the end of a ministry that apparently lasted less than a year."

The New Oxford Annotated Bible NRSV, pp. 1380-1381

2) The earliest Xtian writings (Pauline Epistles) are odd when looked at closely. Paul is adamant that his Gospel is not from humans, but from scripture, and visions/dreams (Gal. 1:11-18, Rom. 15:4, 1 Cor. 15:3-8). A secret hidden through the ages now revealed (Rom. 16:25-26, 1 Cor. 2:6-7). Also Paul says his apostleship is by the same means as the founding Pillars (Gal. 2:6-8). Paul's preexisting being was killed for looking like a human (Phili. 2:7), and his killers would not have killed him if they knew it was God's secret plan for mankind's salvation (1 Cor. 2:6-8). This makes more sense when looking at the Joshua/Jesus in the OT who tricks Satan and is exalted by God. Note that these verses have what can be perceived as symbolisms for flesh (dirty clothes= sinful flesh & Five Kings= Five Senses that enslaves one to sin). So Zech. 3:1-9, 6:11-13, & Jos. 10:22-27 together symbolically has a Jesus in a flesh disguise getting hung in a tree, shoved into a tomb, and exalted by God to remove guilt of the land.

Zechariah 3:1-9

"1 Then he showed me the high priest Joshua (Savior) standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan (Adversary) standing at his right hand to accuse him. 2 And the LORD said to Satan, "The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this man a brand plucked from the fire?" 3 Now Joshua was dressed with filthy clothes as he stood before the angel. 4 The angel said to those who were standing before him, "Take off his filthy clothes." And to him he said, "See, I have taken your guilt away from you, and I will clothe you with festal apparel." 5 And I said, "Let them put a clean turban on his head." So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with the apparel; and the angel of the LORD was standing by.

6 Then the angel of the LORD assured Joshua, saying 7 "Thus says the LORD of hosts: If you will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here. 8 Now listen, Joshua, high priest, you and your colleagues who sit before you! For they are an omen of things to come: I am going to bring my servant the Branch. 9 For on the stone that I have set before Joshua, on a single stone with seven facets, I will engrave its inscription, says the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the guilt of this land in a single day."

Zechariah 6:11-13

11 Take the silver and gold and make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest Joshua son of Jehozadak (Savior Son of the Righteous God); 12 say to him: Thus says the LORD of hosts: Here is a man whose name is Branch: for he shall branch out in his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD. 13 It is he that shall build the temple of the LORD; he shall bear royal honor, and shall sit upon his throne and rule. There shall be a priest by his throne, with peaceful understanding between the two of them."

Joshua 10:22-27

"22 Then Joshua (Savior) said, "Open the mouth of the cave, and bring those five kings out to me from the cave." 23 They did so, and brought the five kings out to him from the cave, the king of Jerusalem, the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king of Lachish, and the king of Eglon. 24 When they brought the kings out to Joshua, Joshua summoned all the Israelites, and said to the chiefs of the warriors who had gone with him, "Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings." Then they came near and put their feet on their necks. (see Psa. 110:1/Heb. 10:13) 25 And Joshua said to them, "Do not be afraid or dismayed; be strong and courageous; for thus the LORD will do to all the enemies against whom you fight." 26 Afterward Joshua struck them down and put them to death, and he hung them on five trees. And they hung on the trees until evening. 27 At sunset Joshua commanded, and they took them down from the trees and threw them into the cave where they had hidden themselves; they set large stones against the mouth of the cave, which remain to this very day. (see also Deut. 21:22-23/Gal. 3:13)"

3) Verses held up as undeniable evidences for an historical Jesus have plausible alternative explanations. The verse Gal. 4:4b "God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law," looks to have Jesus born of a woman, and is Jewish. But what Paul could mean is that "woman/law" is Divine Wisdom (Greek Sophia personified feminine wisdom/see Prov. 3:13-20, 8:1-36, Baruch 3:37, 4:1) in that Jesus was made all knowing unlike Adam. The verse Gal. 1:19 "but I did not see any other apostle except James the LORD's brother." is seen as a slam dunk for historicity. But Paul's theology is of spiritual kinship (Gal. 4:5-7) and everyone in Christ are brothers/sisters. Paul makes no distinction that this James is blood related to Jesus, and maybe "Lord's brother" is a cultic title? The verse Rom. 1:3b "who was descended from David according to the flesh" (2 Sam. 7:12) is good evidence for historicity. But 2 Sam. 7:12c "who shall come forth from your body," can mean God made a flesh body from David's semen for Jesus (it was a belief that the male seed contained the whole body). This is a convenient way to fulfill messianic prophecy for a celestial event instead of on Earth.
 

Dalek Supreme

Well-Known Member
Additional information for the Gospels/Acts:

The anonymous author of Mark hints to the reader that it's entirely a parable in which the meaning is an inside secret (Mar 4:10-12) while referencing Isa. 6:9-10. This echoes Romans 11:7-12 (Deut. 29:4 & Psa. 69:22-23), :25-27 (Isa. 59:20, 27:9a).

Some examples of the Gospels/Acts literary fabrication:

Mark 1:16-17= Jer. 16:16a, Eze. 47:10a, :10c, 1 Kings 19:19-21

Mark 1:40-42= Exodus 4:6-7

Mark 2:3-5, :11= 2 Kings 1:2-4

Mark 4:37-41= Jon. 1:6, :11-17, Psa. 107:23-29

Mark 5:1-20= Isa. 65:1, :4a, Psa. 107:4-7 :10-14, 1 Kings 17:18, Psa. 78:49, Exo 14:28a

Philo: In Flaccum

"VI There was a certain madman named Carabbas,... this man spent all this days and nights naked in the roads, minding neither cold nor heat,..."

"Mark's imitation also retains some of the distinctive traits of Odyssey, insofar as both stories place monsters in caves, grazing animals on the mountains, and neighbors at the scene. ...Finally, just as Odysseus told Polyphemus to tell others who it was who blinded him, Jesus tells the Gerasene to tell others who it was who healed him."

Dennis R MacDonald, The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, pp. 73

Mark 6:48= Gen. 1:2c, Exo. 33:22, Job 9:8

Mark 7:28-29= 2 Kings 8:13-14

Mark 10:13-14= 2 Kings 4:26-27

Mark 11:12c-21= Hos. 9:1-17, 10:1-2, :8-10, Psa. 37:35-36a, Job 5:3, Zec. 11:2, Prov. 12:12, Eze. 19:11-14, Sira. 6:2-3, Zec. 14:21c, Isa. 56:6-8, Jere. 7:11, 8:13, 26:4-6, :8-9

"In other words, the beginning and end of the fig tree story is wrapped around (and contains within its center) the clearing of the temple. We saw Mark do this before, when he took the tale of the raising of Jairus's twelve-year-old daughter and wrapped that around a symbolically related story of the woman who had bled for twelve years. The purpose of this structure (called intercalation) is to communicate that the one story illuminates the meaning of the other. Mark uses this device repeatedly. In this case, 'the tree is a symbol of the sacrificial system whose time is now passed, hence 'it was not the season for figs' any more; therefore 'may no one eat fruit of you again'. Which finally, and perfectly, explains this strange story."

Richard Carrier, OHJ, pp. 434

Mark 15:14-15 (Yom Kippur Scapegoat)= Lev. 16:7-10 (16:8=1 Cor. 5:5/Gal. 4:3, :9)

Some examples of Mark being influenced by the Pauline epistles:

Mark 14:51-52, 16:5= 1 Corinthians 15:47 Note: Historicists point to Mark 14:51 as an historical detail, but it's symbolism of mortal/immortal flesh.

2 Cor. 8:9= Mark 10:17-22; 1 Cor. 13:2= Mark 11:23; 1 Cor. 3:10-11= Mark 12:10-11; Rom. 13:7= Mark 12:17; Rom. 6:12-14= Mark 9:42-47; 2 Cor. 9:6-15= Mark 12:41-44; 2 Cor. 11:13-15= Mark 13:21-23; Gal. 5:13-15= Mark 12:28-34; 1 Thes. 5:4-11= Mark 13:32-37; Phil. 3:21= Mark 12:25; 1 Thes. 4:16= Mark 14:62; Gal. 2:11= Mark 8:33; Gal. 4:6= Mark 14:36; 1 Cor. 5:6-8= Mark 8:15.

"They are the literary invention of the evangelists drawing on scripture and popular myth and literature."

Earl Doherty, Neither God Nor Man, pp. 428

Mark has Jesus riding on a single colt/foal (young donkey). Matthew using the Septuagint (LXX) takes the prophecy in Zechariah as translated literally in that Jesus rides both a donkey and it's foal at the same time.

Mark 11:7 "7 Then they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks on it; and he sat on it."

Matthew 21:7 "7 they brought the donkey and the colt, and put their cloaks on them, and he sat on them."

Zechariah 9:9

"9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter Jerusalem! Lo, your king comes to you; triumphant and victorious is he, humble and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey."

Zechariah LXX

"Rejoice exceedingly, O daughter of Sion! Make proclamation, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold thy king is coming for thee. He is righteous and a saviour. He is meek and mounted on an ass, even a young colt."

Jesus reads from the Septuagint instead of the Hebrew/Aramaic in Luke.

Luke 4:18-19

"18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, 19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”"

Isaiah 61:1-2

"The spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me; he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners; 2 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn;"

Isaiah 61:1-2 (LXX)

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me; he has sent me to preach glad tidings to the poor, to heal the broken in heart, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind; 2 to declare the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of recompence; to comfort all that mourn;"

John takes a parable in Luke and reverses the Lazarus theme from "neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead" in Luke to "Many... had seen what Jesus did, believed in him" in John. Also in Luke there's no mention of the sisters having a brother named Lazarus, nor does Mark, or Matthew mention him. Compare Luke 10:38-39, 16:19-23, :27-3 to John 11:1-4. :17, :38-45.

The conversion of Saul of Tarsus is very fishy.

Acts 9:3-8, :17-19= 2 Mac. 3:23-28, Tob. 11:7-8, :11-15a, 2 Mac. 3:34-36

Search: "Robert M Price New Testament Narrative as Old Testament Midrash"

Plato: Theaetetus

"SOCRATES: In the name of the Graces, what an almighty wise man Protagoras must have been! He spoke these things in a parable to the common herd, like you and me, but told the truth, "his Truth" (a book by Protagoras) in secret to his own disciples."

Philo: On the Confusion of Tongues

"XXXVIII ...but to proceed onward to look at the passage in a figurative way, considering that the mere words of the scriptures are, as it were, but shadows of bodies, and that the meanings which are apparent to investigation beneath them, are the real things to be pondered upon."

Plutarch: Isis & Osiris

"11 Therefore, Clea, whenever you hear the traditional tales which the Egyptians tell about the gods, their wanderings, dismemberments, and many experiences of this sort, you must remember what has been already said, and you must not think that any of these tales actually happened in the manner in which they are related."

"...Socrates says that the myth “would save us, if we were persuaded by it”. Myth represents a sort of back-up: if one fails to be persuaded by arguments to change one’s life, one may still be persuaded by a good myth. Myth, as it is claimed in the Laws, may be needed to “charm” one “into agreement” when philosophy fails to do so."

plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-myths/

"In Paul's letters essential Christian doctrines are routinely called mysteries. The NT evinces other common vocabulary of mystery cults used with the same peculiar connotations, not just mysterion (divine secret), but teleios (mature [as higher ranking initiates]), nepios (immature [as lower ranking initiates]), skene (body [as discardable and unneeded for salvation]), epoptes (witness [to the mysteries]), etc."

Richard Carrier, OHJ, pp. 97
 

GanjaJack

Well-Known Member
There is literally no hard evidence that Jesus existed, NONE, 0, Zilch..

The Vatican refuses to provide the evidence that they say they have.

Given the Vatican's penchant for lies, molestation and greed, along with lots of other atrocities committed by the church, they have lost any of their credibility as Gods spokesmen on earth.
 

Dalek Supreme

Well-Known Member
There is literally no hard evidence that Jesus existed, NONE, 0, Zilch..

The Vatican refuses to provide the evidence that they say they have.

Given the Vatican's penchant for lies, molestation and greed, along with lots of other atrocities committed by the church, they have lost any of their credibility as Gods spokesmen on earth.
We are all prone to the Holy Dopamine Gost via Placebo Faith. The evolution that increased our cognition still has remnants of the things that preexisted it. The ancient Theists/Philosophers thought that the *FEELS* was contact with a divine presence/knowledge. Just study the neurology of addiction, as well as how both drug and thought addictions are related (on a neurochemical level). The Armor of God is the Dopamine Reward System that fights off Demonic Reason.
 

mudballs

Well-Known Member
We walk by faith not by sight.
2 Cor 5:7

I dont believe in the divinity of jesus. There was a dude named jesus, he was a kind, wise and passionate man that was wronged by his fellow man. You believe what you want and spread it long and loud for all i care, but you know little of the concept of "faith" and the people who carry it.
 

Antidote Man

Well-Known Member
He existed. And he was someone of importance, obviously, as 2000 years later people are still going to war over his beliefs. I would never worship a human, which, he was, and could care less how many people walk that path. I say much of his wisdom is full of shit, and yes, very likely doctored by the church.. as a form of control, praying on the fear of others and 'managing' the minds of the lower class. But he was a real human being. I think there's enough evidence out there to support it.
 

Kerowacked

Well-Known Member
Put the pipe down and back away. Of course He existed, as did Pilate, Herod, Caiphus etc. Gnostics and early Christians persecutions are well documented right up to the time Nero burned Rome. Even Muslims acknowledge the Man, geeesh!
 

Dalek Supreme

Well-Known Member
Put the pipe down and back away. Of course He existed, as did Pilate, Herod, Caiphus etc. Gnostics and early Christians persecutions are well documented right up to the time Nero burned Rome. Even Muslims acknowledge the Man, geeesh!
Then can you answer two simple multiple choice questions in context of Paul the Apostle that logically follows?

1) Who would most likely kill Jesus just for looking like, and believed to be just a human (Phili. 2:7 "but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form,")?

A) Romans B) Jews C) Satan

2) Who would most likely not kill Jesus if they knew that killing him would fulfill God's secret plan for mankinds salvation as per God's will (1 Cor. 2:6-8 "Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. But we speak God's wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.")?

A) Romans B) Jews C) Satan
 

Dalek Supreme

Well-Known Member
Meme removed
So you can't answer two simple questions.

Can anyone else answer two simple multiple choice questions in context of Paul the Apostle that logically follows?

1) Who would most likely kill Jesus just for looking like, and believed to be just a human (Phili. 2:7 "but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form,")?

A) Romans B) Jews C) Satan

2) Who would most likely not kill Jesus if they knew that killing him would fulfill God's secret plan for mankinds salvation as per God's will (1 Cor. 2:6-8 "Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. But we speak God's wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.")?

A) Romans B) Jews C) Satan
 

Dalek Supreme

Well-Known Member
We walk by faith not by sight.
2 Cor 5:7

I dont believe in the divinity of jesus. There was a dude named jesus, he was a kind, wise and passionate man that was wronged by his fellow man. You believe what you want and spread it long and loud for all i care, but you know little of the concept of "faith" and the people who carry it.
How about you. Can you answer two simple multiple choice questions in context of Paul the Apostle that logically follows?

1) Who would most likely kill Jesus just for looking like, and believed to be just a human (Phili. 2:7 "but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form,")?

A) Romans B) Jews C) Satan

2) Who would most likely not kill Jesus if they knew that killing him would fulfill God's secret plan for mankinds salvation as per God's will (1 Cor. 2:6-8 "Yet among the mature we do speak wisdom, though it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to perish. But we speak God's wisdom, secret and hidden, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.")?

A) Romans B) Jews C) Satan
 

VincenzioVonHook

Well-Known Member
so, the usual. Someone comes in with a well worded and cited post for a debate about the existence of jesus. The usual replies of "put the pipe down, your wrong" or "of course he did how dare you" followed with zero debate or clarification, and when all else fails, throw a pop culture meme in. Good too see nothing has changed here when debating the existence of Jesus. All one dude had to do is ask why Jesus had a Mexican name and anger followed.

We are all prone to the Holy Dopamine Gost via Placebo Faith. The evolution that increased our cognition still has remnants of the things that preexisted it. The ancient Theists/Philosophers thought that the *FEELS* was contact with a divine presence/knowledge. Just study the neurology of addiction, as well as how both drug and thought addictions are related (on a neurochemical level). The Armor of God is the Dopamine Reward System that fights off Demonic Reason.
That was an interesting take. Good input.

I have no doubt the man existed, and was a prophet of healing, well being and governance which went on to shape the western world, but he obviously didn't come from a magic man in the sky. I have no issues with the teachings or followings of Jesus christ, just the blind allegiance. The main issue i see is that some people legitimately want to have a debate that doesn't end with "your wrong" with zero citing or organised argument.

Its always "it was documented and proved all throughout history", but when you ask for a supporting statement or argument there's crickets, memes and angry faces.
 
Top