AusGeoff wrote on Oct 14
th, 2023 at 2:03am:
Excerpted overview of main Jesus mythicist
arguments from Wikipedia:
Most "Christ mythicists" follow a threefold argument:
they question the reliability of the Pauline epistles and
the Gospels to postulate a historically existing Jesus;
they note the lack of information on Jesus
in non-Christian sources from the first and early
second century; and they argue that early Christianity
had syncretistic and mythological origins...
Paul's epistles lack detailed biographical information—
most mythicists agree that the Pauline epistles are
older than the gospels, and note that aside from a few
passages which may have been interpolations,
there is a complete absence of any detailed
biographical information such as might be
expected if Jesus had been a contemporary
of Paul...
The gospels are not historical records, but a
fictitious historical narrative—mythicists argue
that although the gospels seem to present a historical
framework, they are not historical records, but
theological writings, myth or legendary fiction
resembling the Hero archetype. They impose "a
fictitious historical narrative" on a "mythical cosmic
saviour figure", weaving together various pseudo-
historical Jesus traditions...
No independent eyewitness accounts
survive, in spite of the fact that many authors
were writing at that time. Early second-century
Roman accounts contain very little evidence,
and may depend on Christian sources...
Paul refers to Jesus as an exalted being, and is
probably writing about either a mythical
or supernatural entity, or a celestial deity
named Jesus. This deity is derived from personified
aspects of God, notably the personification of
Wisdom, or "a saviour figure patterned after similar
figures within ancient mystery religions" which were
often a dying-and-rising god...
While Paul may also contain proto-Gnostic (early theological)
ideas, some mythicists have argued that Paul may refer to a
historical person who may have lived in a dim past, long
before the beginnings of the Common Era [CE].
Mostly agree with this.
However, there is no reason to doubt that Jesus existed - beyond his close group, he was unknown or irrelevant. He was Galilean - all of whom were considered illiterate and backward by Judeans.
Literacy was uncommon throughout the region and of those literate people recording events in the region, they focussed on people and issues of importance.
An obscure figure who lived in an obscure region who had little impact in Galilee and no impact - culturally, socially, religiously or politically - on other regions would not be a figure any scribe would expend their time documenting.
A parallel to this would be Socrates. Had it not been for Plato's dialogues almost nothing would have been known of Socrates and history would have overlooked him.
Similarly with Jesus. Had Paul, (and other Paulines such as Luke), not written extensively on him, (at least in the sense of his being a divine figure), Jesus would have been completely overlooked by history - as other messiah claimants of the time have been.
Did Jesus exist? Paul's arrival on the scene so shortly after the crucifixion, his close association with the Jerusalem Community's enemies, his writings and his run-ins with James are evidence that he did - there was just no reason to invent Jesus - he was not a divine figure nor, by his death without liberating his fellow Jews from Rome, was he eligible to be the messiah to Jerusalem Community members.
Forum
Pages: 
Does “Christian Atheism” Really Exist? (Read 7195 times)
