razlyubleno

By this logic we can prove the virgin birth, since messiah was supposed to have Davidic lineage. David is on Joseph's side, not Mary's, and Joseph was not Jesus' biological father. Pretty embarrassing, huh? Or maybe Matthew was just unaware of how his story would be interpreted almost 2 millennia later? Perhaps he was writing for people who didn't share our conception of embarrassing? Perhaps he was writing for a contemporary audience whom we're not familiar with?

razly

aa5874

The embarrassment criterion is absolute non-sense. It proves absolutely nothing. You must assume Jesus did exist first and then assume the Nazareth story is true and then claim that it was embarrassing so the story was true.

The criterion of embarrassment produces false results.

In the Gospels, Peter attempted to walk on water towards Jesus the water-walker during a sea-storm and nearly drowned or began to sink, Jesus the water-walker had to save Peter.

The story is embarrassing, Peter nearly drowned, so based on your theory, it must be true that Jesus did exist, it must be true that Peter saw Jesus walking on water, and it must be true that Peter did attempt to walk to Jesus.

However, the entire event, the water-walking affair, is fiction, the embarrassing story is bogus.

The criterion of embarrassment is useless to determine veracity. In fact, many criminals use the embarrassment ploy to falsely justify their illegal activities.

Now, in the NT, Jesus was born in Bethlehem, not Nazareth.

Mt 2:1 - Your claim that Jesus was born in Nazareth is not found in the NT.

There are no clues in the NT that Jesus existed. The clues for Jesus's existence as human cannot be found anywhere.

And it is actually the reverse. The NT contains the clues that Jesus was fiction. Just look at Matthew 1.18, Luke 1.35, Mark 16.6, John 1, and Acts1.9.

And by the way, I really don't care about how many believe Jesus existed unless they can provide the evidence for their belief.

I deal with evidence not with concensus.

It is not unusual for millions of people to be wrong. It is not unusual for millions to believe the wrong God exist.

At one time the God Serapis was worshipped by many and this God made a man see and another lame man walk after the Emperor Vespasian spat in the eyes of one and touched the other.

Now, hardly anyone worships Serapis.


And, finally, it makes no sense for the followers of Jesus to claim he was the son of the God of the Jews with the power to forgive sin when they know it was a lie, and then to be executed themselves for their known lies.


Jesus was just a fantastic story written long after the supposed time of events and likely well away from Judea and believed to be true by those who were decieved into believing the lie was true.

spamandham

Such figures are meaningless if they are not based on directly addressing the question "did Jesus exist" from an analytical perspective. That is not a question many scholars have addressed head on. The vast majority (probably in the 85% range), start by assuming Jesus of Nazareth was historical.

spamandham

...or was the birth narrative a response to anti-Jewish slander that had the messiah be a poor wandering no-good bastard son of an unknown carpenter from nowhere'sville, who was crucified as a common criminal?

Without a detailed knowledge of what was going on at the time and the intents of the writers, we have no idea whether the 'embarrasment principle' applies.

...or was his crucifixion actually a symbolic story for what was happening to the Jewish people, and that's why it draws so heavily on the Jewish scriptures?

gentleexit

Angry god leaves. Someone sacrifices himself/herself (mother and her Macc's) - in "suicide", not ritual murder. Angry god smiles again. The someone is celebrated evermore for their godliness. Jewish, not Greek and AFAIK not characteristic of other cultures either.

The mother of the maccabees was the proto-martyr (not Stephen) and Jesus, what's he? In a line of Jewish thought about the relationship of God and man.

storytime

More likely that the story was intent to show that non Jews were equal inheritors of the promised land. (Deceiving Jews out of their own property?) Of which claims the Jews denied. What was so special about Jerusalem in those days that would have caused non Jews to lay claim to it?

aa5874

If Jesus of the NT did exist he could only have been human.

If Jesus was only human, then the conception, birth, healing methods, transfiguration, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus as described are all fictitious or embellished.

So, in order to accept Jesus as human, the Jesus story as presented in the NT will have to be rejected or partially discarded.

But, therein lies the problem.

What must be discarded or should the entire story be rejected as fiction?

The author of gMatthew claimed Jesus was born of a virgin called Mary through the Holy Ghost, this conception is an obvious fictitious event, but Mary may also be fiction, so also could be Joseph, her so-called husband. There is no non-apologetic evidence or information external of the NT that can corroborate any character called Jesus, Mary, Joseph during the time of Tiberius.

If Jesus did exist he could only have been human.

But, Paul the letter writer claimed Jesus was resurrected and seen by over 500 people including himself. The author of Acts claimed Saul/Paul talked to Jesus from heaven and was blinded by a bright light.

If Jesus was human, such reports are obvious fiction, but Paul may also be fiction. There are no non-apologetic sources to confirm or corroborate any characters called Jesus or Paul as found in the NT.

If Jesus did exist he could only have been human.

According to the NT, Jesus, Peter and Paul preached about the kingdom of God and salvation if people believed in Jesus. But Jesus himself preached for a very short time compared to Peter or Paul.

Based on church writings, all three were executed, Jesus sometime at 33 CE, Peter and Paul at around 66 CE.

Why was not Paul or Peter worshipped as Gods seeing that they suffered more than Jesus, they were imprisoned, beaten and stoned and eventually executed after working for God for almost 40 years.

If Jesus just a man why was he worshipped as a God, why not Peter or Paul? Jesus only preached for about 3-4 years, never imprisoned, beaten or stoned. Peter and Paul suffered for almost 40 years.

Jesus as human could have been called a Saint like Peter and Paul, but instead he was called the son of the God of the Jews.

Now, calling Jesus, a human being, the son of the God of the Jews with the power to forgive sin is regarded as blasphemy in Jewish tradition, yet Paul and Peter, after Jesus was executed for blasphemy, continued to tell people for over 30 years that Jesus, a known human, was really a God that could forgive sins.

The human only Jesus is untenable.


Jesus was worshipped as a God, it would appear, for one reason. Jesus was introduced as a God, that is, from the very start, the first stories of Jesus presented him as the son of the God of the Jews, not as just a man, at a time long after the supposed events, possibly after the writings of Josephus or after Antiquities of the Jews in particular.

dog-on

There is no birth story in Mark, now is there...

dog-on

Like the flaming monks, or the willing sacrifices to the volcano god....

So, you know of no stories of the ancient Greeks, where the hero sacrifices himself for the good of his people?

Romans?

Chinese....?????

angelo

There's no resurrection story there either. Mark's gospel ends thus; 'He was crucified and buried according to the scriptures'. That's the end of the gospel of Mark which every scholar worth his salt agrees was the first to be written.
All the bullshit come later when these people were trying to interpret what had occurred to a historical man who told them the kingdom of god was at hand. Like starving people, they listened to this guy who promised them this would happen in their lifetimes. It's why he made such an impression. He went further than John The Baptist who preached that the kingdom was to come. Jesus claimed HE was the kingdom and all who followed him would have eternal life.
Most if not all religious movements had a founder. Jesus was the christian founder with a lot of help from Paul of Tarsus.