Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Peter Kirby · 12-10-2006, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Christian

I'm a Christian whose recently become very interested in the historicity of Jesus. I'm feeling very overwhelmed by all the information I have to sort through to come to reasonable conclusions. To give you and idea of how over my head I am, I had never even heard of the Christ-myth until earlier this week. I've been reading a lot of the articles on your site christianorigins.com, but I feel terribly ill-equipped to discern biases that they might contain, as I'm far from being a New Testament scholar. I desperately want figure out the truth, but the road ahead looks awfully long. Can you recommend any short cuts to coming to objective conclusions without reading through a thousand articles which I feel somewhat intimidated by? I know that's a funny question and I may just being lazy about it. I just get the feeling that I don't have time for this search for historical truth without completely rearranging my life. I greatly appreciate your site for presenting balanced information from both sides of the debate. After reading the book by SJ Case I felt assured in by belief that Jesus existed, but I still feel a need to take seriously arguments to the contrary, since my knowledge of the subject is so rudimentary. I guess I'm just looking for some affirmation... for you to tell me that it's gonna be okay and that I'll figure it all out without having to go to Oxford and getting a degree in biblical exegesis. Thanks for your time, and for what you are doing. Out of curiosity, are you a Christian?

Is there a good and fair way to present the subject of the historicity of Jesus to your average intelligent individual, so they can come to a rational decision on their own?

kind regards,
Peter Kirby

Peter Kirby · 12-10-2006, 03:15 AM

Also, is there any book by a "Jesus agnostic" exploring the possible existence of Jesus? I don't think Robert Price counts here.

kind regards,
Peter Kirby

Clivedurdle · 12-10-2006, 03:16 AM

We have had some brilliant summaries here - not sure how to find them and collate them!

WCH · 12-10-2006, 03:18 AM

I'd just summarize the evidence in favour and point out that it's kind of shoddy but not so shoddy as to be conclusive one way or the other. In short...

Mark: probably written around 68-70 AD.
Luke: probably written around 85
Matthew: could be anywhere from 80-100
John: 90-100, probably

Then point out that not a single Bible author even claims to have met Jesus. Matthew, Mark and John do not self identify and were most certainly not the Matthew, Mark and John in the story. Luke does self identify, but he freely admits that everything he knows is from hearsay and he didn't meet Jesus personally. Paul claims to have met Jesus in a dream only, never while living. The only extrabiblical reference that isn't commonly accepted to be faked is Josephus, and that's also a good deal after the actual events and also by a man who didn't meet Jesus personally.

So there you have it -- everything we know about Jesus was written several decades after his death by people who didn't meet him. Not very convincing.

Peter Kirby · 12-10-2006, 03:21 AM

I think most people tend to assume he existed, and so are not troubled until they start seeing some evidence against. Besides, claims to have exhausted a search for a category of evidence are always suspect.

kind regards,
Peter Kirby

Malachi151 · 12-10-2006, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

Is there a good and fair way to present the subject of the historicity of Jesus to your average intelligent individual, so they can come to a rational decision on their own?

kind regards,
Peter Kirby

Yeah, I do so in my presentation:

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...ristianity.htm

I'm working on a written article now along the same lines. Should be done in about 3 weeks.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-10-2006, 03:15 AM	#2
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	Also, is there any book by a "Jesus agnostic" exploring the possible existence of Jesus? I don't think Robert Price counts here. kind regards, Peter Kirby

12-10-2006, 03:16 AM	#3
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	We have had some brilliant summaries here - not sure how to find them and collate them!

12-10-2006, 03:18 AM	#4
WCH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Toronto Posts: 6,290	I'd just summarize the evidence in favour and point out that it's kind of shoddy but not so shoddy as to be conclusive one way or the other. In short... Mark: probably written around 68-70 AD. Luke: probably written around 85 Matthew: could be anywhere from 80-100 John: 90-100, probably Then point out that not a single Bible author even claims to have met Jesus. Matthew, Mark and John do not self identify and were most certainly not the Matthew, Mark and John in the story. Luke does self identify, but he freely admits that everything he knows is from hearsay and he didn't meet Jesus personally. Paul claims to have met Jesus in a dream only, never while living. The only extrabiblical reference that isn't commonly accepted to be faked is Josephus, and that's also a good deal after the actual events and also by a man who didn't meet Jesus personally. So there you have it -- everything we know about Jesus was written several decades after his death by people who didn't meet him. Not very convincing.

12-10-2006, 03:21 AM	#5
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	I think most people tend to assume he existed, and so are not troubled until they start seeing some evidence against. Besides, claims to have exhausted a search for a category of evidence are always suspect. kind regards, Peter Kirby

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.