pinkvoy

If the HJ is correct, then obviously Jesus is a child, offspring to Mary, grows up, and starts his ministry close in time to John the Baptist, is crucified, and a movement grows around his brother James, and a new convert Paul. Around 50-AD Paul starts writing letters, and 10 years around that, the gospels are written. Rome destroys the Jerusalem church around 70AD.
Tacitus, Pliny, and Josepheus wrote of Jesus or Christians, and you talk to them, and they clearly had Jesus in mind, whom they regard as historical figures.


What if the MJ is correct?

If MJ's could time travel to ancient Palestine 1-90AD what would you observe and discover? As part of this time travel thought experiment, you may speak with those who you believe existed, like Josepheus, Tacitus, Pliny, the authors of the Gospels, Paul, James, etc. What would they say? What would their followers say?

Can you give us a decade by decade account of the rise and growth of MJ, followed by a belief in HJ?

i.e 1AD Jesus was born to Mary and Joseph,

25-30AD learns from John the Baptist
30AD Jesus does his own preaching,
33AD was executed by Pontius Pilate,

35AD reports of Jesus alive, movement centers in Jerusalem by James, brother of Jesus
40AD Paul joins movement, starts preaching far and wide
50AD writes epistles, meets and knows author of Luke and Acts
60AD as Tacitus and Pliny wrote of Christians being expelled from Rome, writes of persecution under Nero
70AD Gospel of Mark, first edition of John, gospel of THomas, and Q are written by this time, Jewish-Roman war destroys many
of the original eyewitnesses and scatters them.
90AD Josephus writes of Jesus and early Christians

ApostateAbe

That is a much-needed challenge. MJ advocates tend to believe that the gospels were written later, and they push the dates forward as far as they can, which I think is the early second century, but I think an MJ narrative of any sort is essential.

Steven Carr

Do Tacitus and Pliny have a time machine as well?

When were Christians expelled from Rome? I thought Jews were expelled from Rome?

Perhaps people had no idea that the Christians were no longer Jews.

Steven Carr

Produce this Q document, or name a Christian who had ever heard of it.

show_no_mercy

I'm not exactly a Jesus Mythicist, but I'll put down my own reconstruction of Christianity

25-37 CE John the Baptist preaching, and then executed by Herod (Antiquities). His followers scatter.

40 CE Paul has a vision about a resurrected Jesus, a secret hidden "for generations" (Rom 16:25; Eph 3:4-5) now revealed to him and starts preaching to include Gentiles in the promise of Abraham via faith in Jesus, writes epistles to various Gentiles interested in Judaism in the Diaspora.

50 CE A certain "Chrestus" causes the Jews to be expelled from Rome.

60 CE A certain "Jesus" (Ananias) preaches doom and gloom for Jerusalem for multiple years

66 CE Nero is Emperor when the Jews go to war with the Romans. Nero, disliked by Jews, is called the "beast" by a maniac on Patmos named John, possibly the John spoken of by Paul as one of the Pillars who also had a vision of the resurrected Jesus.

70 CE Jesus Ananias is killed during the first Jewish-Roman war. His followers disperse, angered that he was brought to the procurator by Jewish leadership. The 2nd temple is destroyed and a crisis in Judaism has many Jews looking for answers for why god abandoned them... and what to do about absolving sin now that sacrifices can no longer be done.

Paul's Gentile churches mix with the "Jesus movement" (possibly multiple Jesuses) and hybridize into a dying and rising savior god. The sacrifice of this Jesus was a sin offering of some sort.

90 CE the gospel of Mark is written, retrojecting Jesus to one generation before the fall of the temple.

110 CE Papias says that a collection of sayings "of the Lord" was circulating - a Hebrew and Greek version of Q that he calls Matthew and Mark, respectively.

130 CE Markion, a shipbuilder from Pontus, notes that there are two gospels floating around in his travels around the Roman empire. One is a neutral gospel, the other is a highly Judaized version of it - Mark and Matthew, respectively:

Marcion by his Antitheses accuses [a gospel text] of having been interpolated by the protectors of Judaism with a view to its being so combined in one body with the law and the prophets

- Tertullian, "Against Marcion" 4.4.4

Markion sets out to correct this Judaized gospel with one of his own. He also collects all of Paul's letters in his travels around the Roman Empire and puts together the first New Testament in record.

144 CE Markion is kicked out of the church in Rome; the Roman church writes a corrected version of Markion's "anti-Matthew" gospel (Luke).

150 CE Justin Martyr cites "Memoirs of the Apostles"

160 - 180 CE The Roman church attempts to "Catholicize", claiming that all of the "heretics" were really using their gospels and epistles and mutilated them. Acts of the Apostles is written, along with the Pastoral Epistles. The four gospels then get their names, and Markion's Pauline epistles are edited to reflect Roman orthodoxy.

The rest is Catholic history!

Toto

You would observe a traditional Jewish society under Roman rule, with no sign of Jesus. The Temple was in existence for most of this period.

Try this as a start:

6 CE Census of Quirinius; Judas the Galilean led a tax revolt that was crushed by the Romans

The Romans have extended their Pax Romana and built roads and made public improvements, and trade and commerce florish.

46 CE: Judas' sons are crucified by Tiberias; also Theudas was beheaded for his opposition to Roman rule

62 CE James the brother of someone named Jesus was stoned to death

66-70 CE The (First) Jewish War, destruction of the Temple

At the end of first century: The story begins to evolve of the crucifixion and resurrection of a "Jesus" who is symbolic of the Jewish nation.

90-95: John of Patmos writes his Apocalypse. His Jesus is not identifiably human.

93 CE: Josephus writes the Antiquities of the Jews, a source book for gospel writers

112: Pliny the Younger writes to Emperor Trajan - first historical witness to Christians (but not Jesus)
Christianity exists at this time as a cult that sings hymns to the rising sun.

116: Tacticus writes his Annals. The relevant volume from the decade when a gospel-type Jesus would have lived has not survived (which is highly suspicious in itself - if it had mentioned Jesus it would have been saved somewhere.) A later volume that makes reference to Christians martyred under Nero has, although it is suspected of being a forgery.

115-117 Revolt against Trajan, total destruction of Jerusalem.

120 CE (approx) Lucian the satirist mocks Christians in his Peregrinus, providing the most reliable evidence of the existence of Christianity (he does not mention Jesus, just a crucified lawgiver.)

131-35 Bar Kochba Revolt

142-3 CE Marcion of Sinope travels to Rome, puts together the letter of Paul and an early version of a gospel.
144 CE Marcion excommunicated by the proto-orthodox church of Rome

Mid 2nd century: The works of Justin Martyr are dated to 150. By this time, the gospel story is in existence and has been situated 40 years before the destruction of the Temple. But the gospels themselves have not been canonized and are not in their final form.

gurugeorge

0-35 CE - no human-being Jesus, nary a jot nor a tittle. No Christian religion.

circa 35 - 40 CE - perhaps sparked off by the Caligula events, a sect of proto-Gnostic Jews search the Bible for clues (previously their school had been apocalyptic, but they had been disappointed so many times, now they're more mystical and spiritual). They get the idea that the Messiah had already been, come in obscurity, and that a great spiritual victory had somehow secretly been won by a Messiah-like figure in the recent-ish past. They "see" this in Scripture. The world was already changed, it just didn't know it yet. It's a great secret, and the time has come to reveal it. Some of them have mystical experiences and visions. They preach some, but it's a localised, and very Jewish affair

40 CE - 70 CE - someone either vaguely connected with them, or having heard of them, or having a similar idea independently of them - let's call him "Shorty" - universalises this idea, makes it not just a Jewish saviour but a world-saviour. He has particularly strong visionary experiences of the entity in question that inspire him to spread the good news. He travels far and wide and inspires "cells" of gentiles who follow his teaching. His congregations are basically like little circles of folks who are the contemporary equivalent of "New Agers", probably most of them well-to-do. (He could be conceived of as a con artist, but it's more likely he sincerely believed his visions and felt he had something of value to teach, and a tiny number of people believed him, maybe a few hundred in total, but scattered around various places.) The tenor of the meetings is mystical, visionary - people get into trance states and get "teachings" from Christ too, speak in tongues, etc. Whacky but harmless stuff. There's a bit of infighting between some of the original oddball Messianists and Shorty, as they want him to pay dues, and they part initially in a friendly way, but there's some acrimoniousness too. Towards the end of this period, after Shorty's death, the scattered Christian cells start to fancifully elaborate on Shorty's teachings - some seek to return to the original Jewish version of the sect, others strike out in their own directions (remember, part of the teaching involves people coming up with their own, inspired gospels, often straight from "Jesus"' mouth, in trance-inspired "prophecy"). Some cells tend more towards the philosophical, others develop the original Jewish and Pauline proto-gnosticism, others become more eclectic and syncretise the Christ figure with other pagan deities.

70-90 CE - Disaster! Huge calamity befalls the original sect - they themselves get scattered, some end up in Rome. They encounter the Roman cells started by Paul. One of their number, or perhaps merely a diasapora Jew in Rome who encounters the religion, writes a grumpy satire based on his take on what the original, hypothesized Jesus Christ figure might have been like. He introduces the idea that some of the original Jewish apostles had known the Christ figure personally.

90-150 CE - At some point, either the Roman Christians, recognising a good thing when they see one, or some among the number of diaspora Jews themselves, start to diverge in their interpretation of the Christ idea somewhat. Not all that much, really, it's just that as the idea that some of the original apostles knew Jesus personally takes root, it becomes clear that it would be advantageous if the Roman Christians could tout their freshly minted diaspora Jews as lineally connected with the original figure. There's a bit of to and fro between them and some of the original proto-Gnostic types, but eventually the Jewish-centric ones win out, re-write "GMark" from a pro-Apostle, pro-Jewish standpoint, emphasising that they have the lineal connection. There are a few variant ideas within this school too - the proto-Gnostic strand is less favoured, but still part of the movement, and there are other variations, some even more human-centric (de-deifying the figure altogether). Towards the end of this period, in response to Marcionism (which is a descendant of one of the original Pauline forms that happens to be more successful than most), a new gospel (Luke) is written, and a "true history" (Acts) that's meant to more firmly establish the Apostolic Succession idea, are written.

By the middle of the second century, this newfangled "orthodoxy" starts to flex its muscles and tries and spread its message and bring some unity to the scattered and variegated movement. Everywhere it goes, it encounters what's left of the older strain of Christian thought - a varied jumble of ideas and responses to the original Pauline message, having developed more or less on their own all along. Some of them more successful and flourishing than others, but none of them holding to any particular "party line" about the central cult figure, or even any particular doctrine. Time to change that!

By the end of the scond century it starts to consolidate its power, and starts to gain some numbers (partly because it's rich and can afford to "bribe" poor and disenfranchised people with good works - not being totally sarcastic here, I'm sure they did do a lot of good things for poor people, as Christians have often done). At this point, the whole religion is still very small beer - maybe a few thousands at most.

After this period, the older forms of Christianity are more and more of a burden. The continuous introduction of new gospels from the old method of inspiration is more and more a liability in terms of the desire to unify, ensure smooth flow of monies back to the Church, and a comfortable life for bishops, and is therefore discouraged, and eventually outlawed.

The extant older forms are definitely ruled out as "heresies", and the idea is touted that they are deviations from the orthodox position (whose "history" of course has the whole thing back-asswards).

mountainman

The Romans take out Judaea at Masada. Apollonius of Tyana is stalking around the empire cautioning the emperors to behave themselves, in person and in letters and books.

None of them would have ever heard of Jesus of Nazareth, or his followers or his poorly written gospels or the acts of any disciples. Big blank screen for anything at all resembling the New Testament Canon Christians.

Nothing on the scanners of sensors.
Cannot find the new testament in bookshops.
Cannot find the bible in any bookshops in the 1st century.




The midwife of the birth may have been the literary genius Eusebius of the Caesars.
Jesus may have been cooked up in imperial scriptoria between 312 and 324 CE.
The Emperor may have decided to sponsor a great and wonderously wretched new technology project.
A New and STrange Codex was required to shepherd the gentiles through the christian gate.
The question which begs to be asked is of course was any of the NT authentic at all?
What was this monstrous fable refered to by Emperor Julian as the "fabrication of the Christians"?

Pagan and Christian Historiography
in the Fourth Century A.D.
--- ARNALDO MOMIGLIANO (1959/60)

On 28 October 312 the Christians
suddenly and unexpectedly
found themselves victorious.
The victory was a miracle -
though opinions differed
as to the nature of the sign
vouchsafed to Constantine.

The winners became conscious of their victory
in a mood of resentment and vengeance.
A voice shrill with implacable hatred
announced to the world
the victory of the Milvian Bridge:
Lactatius' De mortibus persecutorum.

In this horrible pamphlet by the author of De ira dei
there is something of the violence of the
prophets without the redeeming sense of tragedy
that inspired Nahum's song for the the fall of
Nineveh.

The Politics of Imperial Christianity in the 4th century
was Conversion by the Sword

aa5874

As soon as you imply that Tacitus, Pliny and Josephus wrote about Jesus then you are not presenting the facts.

1. Pliny did NOT mention any one called Jesus or Jesus Christ.

2. Tacitus did NOT mention any one named Jesus or Jesus Christ.

3. The "TF" Antiquities of the Jew 18.3.3 and 20.9.1 are regarded as forgeries.

4. In antiquity, Christians do not inherently mean only those who believe in Jesus. There were probably thousands of Christians in Samaria who believed in a magician called Simon Magus, the Holy One, before the Canonical Jesus stories were written.

5. No Church writer used Tacitus "Christus" to prove Jesus did exist as just a man even up to the 4th century.

6. No Church writer used the Pliny letters up to the 4th century to prove that Jesus was just a man.

7. No Church writer used Josephus to prove Jesus was just a man up to the 4th century. Josephus was used in the 4th century to show that it was not certain that Jesus was a man and that he was raised from the dead.

Now, once Paul knew Jesus was just a man born to Mary through normal reproductive means then Paul was either a lunatic or an idiotic hypocrite and liar who would die stupidly for the very lies he propagated about Jesus..

Once Paul, being a Jew, knew Jesus was just a man and that he was crucified for blasphemy, it makes no sense for Paul to knowingly lie to Jews who knew Jesus for about 30 thirty years as a manin Galilee telling them to worship the very same man as a God and then simultaneously tell the very Jews and Gentiles not to worship men as Gods.

A Pauline writer claimed he was beaten with almost 200 lashes, stoned and jailed while teaching that Jesus was the son of a God, that without his resurrection there would be no salvation from sin for mankind, and that the Laws of God including circumcision were abolished by Jesus.

These are the teachings of a madman, a most hypocritical liar or a phenomenal idiot once Paul knew Jesus was just a man.

It is far more likely then that the external historical sources Pliny, Tacitus and Josephus did paint the most probable scenario by not mentioning a character called Jesus or Jesus Christ.

The Jesus "son of a God, Messiah/Christ" character appears to or may have been invented sometime at the end of the 1st century, perhaps after the writings of Josephus well outside Judea.

Once it is proposed that Jesus was just a man, then it is implied inherently that the Jesus stories were either embellished or a pack of lies. Once the Jesus stories were embellished or a pack of lies then the information in the Gospels cannot be used to reconstruct an HJ.

The Gospel say Jesus was the offspring of the Holy Ghost, HJers say "No, at all. It is not the truth".

HJers will invent the truth about Jesus from their imagination.

MJers can only show you what the Gospels, NT and Church writings claimed was true. They truly did describe Jesus as the offspring of the Holy Ghost, who walked on water, transfigured, resurrected, ascended and is coming back to earth sitting or standing on the right hand of POWER.

Is not this the description of a supernatural entity?

We don't have to invent the information about Jesus from our imagination.

Jesus was truly described as a MYTH.

Now, this is my timeline as of right now. I am not obligated to maintain this timeline, it is subject to change with or without notice.

AD 1-90----ZERO about Jesus Christ, however there was the LOGOS the philosophical son of God, and many other diverse beliefs like Simon Magus and Menander who were called Christians since before the Jesus Christ stories were written.

AD 90.... Perhaps just the beginning of the Jesus story. A story about a God/man character used by an apocalyptic writer or was sold to or given to some apocalyptic character under the guise that the story is authentic who then believes the Jesus story, that the Jews were to be blamed for the Fall of the Temple and that there would be a conflagration of the earth as supposedly predicted by the son of God Messiah/Christ.


The Jesus story of the Synoptics appears plausible, just "believe Jesus the son of God was the Christ and you will be saved" from the impending conflagration, and people begin to believe and are waiting for the kingdom of God. More and more people believe but nothing happens. Jesus is taking a long time to come back.

Then some time later, the Jesus story begin to evolve, it is no longer "believe in the son of God Christ and be saved from the conflagration" BUT that God so loved the world that he sent Christ to die for all the sins of mankind and came to abolish the Laws of God including circumcision.

It must be understood that the Synoptic Jesus did not require that the Laws of God be abolished including circumcision just for people believe the story that Jesus the Son of God was the Christ/Messiah.

The MJ only requires that one person, perhaps living hundreds of miles away from Judea, who initially believes that Jesus was a son of a God and the Messiah decades after he was supposedly on earth and begins to propagate his apocalyptic message that Jesus is coming back and whosoever believe in him will be saved from the conflagration.

It would seem to me as of now that the entire Canonical NT WAS INVENTED after 90 AD.

It would also appear that the "Logos" the philosophical son of God, predated the God/man Jesus, (the Synoptic Jesus), then later the Logos was amalgamated with the God/man as found in John.

The Pauline Jesus seems to be just a post ascension Jesus invented by the Pauline writers some time after the writings of Justin Martyr, and is based on events in the Synoptics and Acts of the Apostles.

The MJ only requires belief that Jesus was God many decades after the supposed events.

The HJ requires that people actually knew for decades that Jesus was a man and still worshiped him as God while preaching simultaneously for hundreds of years that no man must be worshiped as a God when it was known for decades that Jesus was crucified for blasphemy.

And if Jesus did nothing as found in the NT, if he did not do anything supernatural or spectacular but only spoke in parables or incoherent riddles how was he elevated to be equal with God with the power to forgive sins?

HJ requires that people knew that they lied about their Lord and Saviour, son of God, the truth and the life.

mountainman

This implicates a MJ (Mythical Jesus) or a FJ (Fictitious Jesus). Do we have any evidence whatsoever from the field of ancient history in which the new testament canonical writings are referred to as "Fabrication of the Christians"? Do we have any evidence of any major controversies when the Jesus Books were widely published in the Roman Empire in Greek?

Jesus Mythicists need to find themselves in the unchartered waters of the fourth century, where Constantine's rule is openly called "NERONIAN". Nero imagined himself on stage, and rigged the Olympic Games so that he won every event --- the emperor was clearly out-of-control. Constantine's stage was high technology literature. He is responsible for the widespread publication of christian propaganda --- in the form reasonably similar to how we find the core of the bible today.

Nobody has ever questioned the foundational authenticity of the literature published in the epoch of Constantine.
EUSEBIUS - "history researcher of "The Tribe of Christians",
EUSEBIUS - "First EDITOR-IN-CHIEF of the first New Testament Bibles"
EUSEBIUS - "Author of the Gruesome Tales of Legendary Heroic and Very Very Pious Christian Martyrs".
EUSEBIUS - "The forger of the Testimonium Flavianum" in the historical evidence itself!!!!!!
EUSEBIUS - "Well renumerated by Constantine for his skills in the field".
EUSEBIUS - "Would you buy a used car off Eusebius?
EUSEBIUS - "Everyone buys the HJ off Eusebius.


THE HJ EXISTS IN .... EUSEBIUS ... WE TRUST.