Toto

Stephen Carr is a poster here, and is a noted atheist from the UK.

Stephen C. Carlson also posts here, under his name. He blogs at http://www.hypotyposeis.org/weblog/ and is formerly a software engineer and lawyer, and currently a graduate student at Duke, I think. I don't know his theological bent.

aa5874

There are those who suppose or believe that there was an historical Jesus, a mere human preacher, that was walking around Galilee asking Jews to believe in him to forgive their sins and to believe that he would come back in the clouds.

But when a human only Jesus is placed in the 1st century during the reign of Tiberius, we get what Julian called "a monstrous lie".

If Jesus was human only, it becomes clear that gMatthew's and gLuke's conception story is just not true, just fiction.

If Jesus was human, and was registered in the census, his father would have been believed to be Joseph or whoever was registered as the father.

So, from the very start, the historical Jesus is based on fiction.

Now, if we continue the supposition that Jesus existed only as human, then all the disciples must have known Jesus could not rise from the dead after three days. They knew it was lie or just could not be true.

Anyhow, according to the story, Jesus claimed he was the son of God during interrogation by the chief priest and was executed as a blasphemer,he did die and Peter visited the tomb, the body is missing, the burial garments are still in the tomb.

Now, if Jesus was only human, the resurrection and post resurrection events are fiction, monstrous lies.

Now, Peter knows Jesus was human, that Jesus' body is not in the tomb, he has a decision to make, either acknowlegde that Jesus was just a fraud, not a God or continue to knowingly make false claims about the man called Jesus.

According to the stories, Peter did continue to falsely claim Jesus was a God and Peter would also be crucified knowning that Jesus was only human and that his body was never recovered. Peter died for a monstrous lie.

And, according to another self proclaimed apostle, he met Peter, and the Lord's brother, who must have known that Jesus was just a man, not a God at all. This apostle claim that Jesus did resurrect, was in heaven and that over 500 people saw Jesus alive after he was resurrected, a monstrous lie.

Now, Saul/Paul would also be crucified knowning that Jesus was human, and that all of his claims about this human Jesus resurrection and ascension was false.

Peter, Paul and Jesus died stupidly, all crucified for lying to themselves, knowning that their claims were monstrous lies as stated by Julian.

But, those fables could not be true. They are just tales written but believed to be true.

The historical Jesus is just a "monstrous lie".

Analyst

Or there was a historical Jesus who told his followers he would rise from the dead and when he didn't they assumed he did somehow, thus starting the cult.

The gospels however are pious fiction loosely based on his sayings but describing incidents which were imagined, sometimes to fulfill OT prophecies and the "rising from the dead" theme.

mountainman

Dear aa5874,

The fact remains that if this is so then the monstrous lie must have been politically thrust upon ancient history at some point between the year dot and the present day. When and how did this happen? What was the reaction of the common people and the academics of the empire to the raising of the monstrous lie to the status of supreme state religious holy writ, or canon? My suggestion is diagramatically depicted below:



Best wishes,


Pete

Ken Carman

Thanks. That helps. As a "noted atheist" that's all I need to know. Whenever someone publishes a book or article debunking anything it's nice to know where they are coming from, not that one can't be somewhat more objective than "where one is coming from." That in itself; while never 100% due to human nature, is a noble goal, IMO.

Meanwhile, back to the topic...

Steven Carr

I'm not that noted although my web site http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/deb.htm was definitely the 'leading', indeed , practically the only :-), atheist web page in the UK at the time.

It was a small field to be leading in :-)

I also spell my name with a V.

aa5874

And, once the man Jesus told his followers that he would rise from the dead, then that would have been a monstrous lie, absolute stupidity or lunacy.

Look at Mark 14.61-62 Jesus, if we suppose him to be only human, died stupidly as a notorius liar, deceiving himself, or was killed for his insanity.

If it is supposed that Jesus was just human, then there was no gospel, no good news from Jesus but false claims, Jesus would have been a fraud.

Look at John 3.16, one of the monstrous lies of Jesus, if he is supposed to be just human.

Monstrous lies from a supposed man. A monster of a deceiver.

When the supposed man died, and his body had vanished from the tomb, the author of Matthew claimed that the soldiers falsely claimed that the disciples stole his body, but it was the disciples who knew Jesus could not resurrect, they knew he just a man.

If it is supposed Jesus was just a man, the resurrection as described, is a monstrous lie, it is therefore likely to be true that a disciple or disciples know how the supposed man body vanished.

It is true.

The historical Jesus is a "monstrous lie" as stated by Julian.

A reasonable solution is that the Jesus stories were manufactured by unknown person, with the monstous lie that Jesus was a God, long after the supposed events and were eventually believed to be true.

Analyst

Without any evidence, just assume he died. He could have been executed, but maybe he had appendicitis, or an infected tooth, or toenail. Anything would kill you in those days. All of that "body vanishing from the tomb" was invented decades later, not from malice, just to "fill in the blanks".

aa5874

I am using the stories, the written statements, presented by the authors and church writers to show that there were monstrous lies.

The monstrous fables have been canonised into the records.

The church writers claim as the truth that Jesus did exist as a God with flesh as a result of a virgin birth.

There is no need to assume he had appendicitis, the canonised books and the church writers claimed he was crucified after a trial with Pilate.

Now, if we supposed Jesus was a man, the claims that he was born of a virgin and conceived of the Holy Ghost was a monstrous lie, and the local authorities would have done background checks on Jesus and would have known Jesus was lying and leading people astray. Jesus was just a man, a fraud, perhaps insane or ridiculously stupid.

The local authorities even had an informant, an "undercover agent", Judas, with the proverbial "hidden camera and audio tape", recording all the lies and blasphemy.

The supposed Jesus was killed for his stupidity, insanity, constantly lying and leading people astray.

According to the canonised NT, the supposed Jesus had a hunch that the local authorities wanted him dead but he just could not ever stop telling those monstrous lies. See the canonised NT and church writings.

It is not tenable to me that such a fraud could have been worshipped as a God when it would have been known and confirmed that he was a monstrous liar.

The historical Jesus is not tenable, just a monstrous lie.

Analyst

Monstrous is too extreme. He was a charismatic person who made a great impression on those who heard him, but like most he was of the moment, he had no interest in a continuing movement, which is why he didn't even dictate his thoughts to a scribe. Think Elmer Gantry.