aa5874

But why are the Jesus stories assumed to be ancient biographies? We have the "Lives of the Twelve Caesars" by Suetonius and it can CLEARLY be seen that the Jesus stories are NOT biographies, all FOUR, but resemble Myth fables like Plutarch's "Romulus".

In the NT, it was the Jesus of FAITH, the resurrected and ascended Jesus that SENT the Holy Ghost to the apostles on the day of Pentecost to start Christianity.

Without the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost the Jesus story would have utterly failed. See Acts 1 and 2

Please, carefully examine the NT. This is extremely significant.

The historical Jesus played ZERO role in the development of Christianity.

Please remember that in the Synoptics Jesus was NOT known as Christ by the Jews.

Please try and remember that Jesus demanded that his disciples tell NO man he was Christ in the Synoptics

Do not forget that in the Synoptics Jesus deliberately spoke in parables so that the Jews would NOT be converted and be WITHOUT Salvation.

And, importantly do remember that Jesus did NOT come to start a New Religion, Nor destroy the Law, but he was sent to fulfill the Law.

Do not forget that the disciples abandoned Jesus and that Peter denied ever knowing or was associated with him after he was arrested.

And finally, and most significant, in the Synoptics Jesus was described as the Child of a Ghost who was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day.

It is just not reasonable at all to consider the Jesus stories as biographies since even in the very NT, Jesus played NO role in the development of Christianity and was NOT even described as human.

It was the Holy Ghost at Baptism that caused Jesus to develop the biography of a SPIRIT since he soon started to walk on water.

The Jesus stories are not biographies just myth fables like the myth fables of the Greeks and Romans as confirmed by Justin Martyr.

"First Apology" XXI The genre of the Gospels was known to be myth since 1800 years.

The Jesus stories PROPOUND NOTHING but Myth fables.

andrewcriddle

Plutarch's Romulus probably should be regarded as an ancient biography.

I do not believe that there was a historical Romulus but Plutarch apparently thought that Romulus was a real figure.

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller

For what it's worth, I don't think the gospel began as a biography. I think it is a retelling of the Book of Joshua.

aa5874

Your classification of Plutarch's "Romulus" as ancient biography does not alter the fact that Romulus and Remus were ONLY believed to have existed even though they were described as HUMAN BEINGS and BORN of the SAME WOMAN.

The authors of the Jesus crossed the line when they claimed Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost and never identified or claimed Jesus had a human father.

And further, Christian writers who mentioned Jesus claimed he was truly of the seed of God.

This is Tertullian in "On the Flesh of Christ".18 Jesus was unadulterated myth.

radius

I don't know for sure - they may have a few things in common with ancient novels, but they seem to be an 'evangelical' genre of their own.

I've seen the phrase 'pious fiction' used by Christians to describe apocryphal gospels...does this count as a 'genre'?

I am not sure either of the value or significance of categorisation on the basis of stylistic and structural features...certainly in terms of (a)historicity (a 'pious fiction' and an 'ancient novel' can both be partly historical just as a bios could be entirely fictional).