If Jesus Never Existed, Religion May Be Fiction
Posted: 09/25/2014 5:29 pm EDT Updated: 1 hour ago
Share
43
Tweet
0

Email
37
Comment
28

As someone raised in a Christian country, I learned that there was a historical Jesus. Now historical analysis finds no clear evidence that Jesus existed. If not, Christianity was fabricated, just like Mormonism and other religions. Why do people choose to believe religious fictions?

Given the depth of religious tradition in Christian countries, where the "Christian era" calendar is based upon the presumed life of Jesus, it would be astonishing if there was no evidence of a historical Jesus. After all, in an era when there were scores of messianic prophets, why go to the trouble of making one up?

In History, Jesus Was a No Show
Various historical scholars attempted to authenticate Jesus in the historical record, particularly in the work of Jesus-era writers. Michael Paulkovich revived this project as summarized in the current issue of Free Inquiry.

Paulkovich found an astonishing absence of evidence for the existence of Jesus in history. "Historian Flavius Josephus published his Jewish Wars circa 95 CE. He had lived in Japhia, one mile from Nazareth - yet Josephus seems unaware of both Nazareth and Jesus." He is at pains to discredit interpolations in this work that "made him appear to write of Jesus when he did not." Most religious historians take a more nuanced view agreeing that Christian scholars added their own pieces much later but maintaining that the historical reference to Jesus was present in the original. Yet, a fudged text is not compelling evidence for anything.

Paulkovich consulted no fewer than 126 historians (including Josephus) who lived in the period and ought to have been aware of Jesus if he had existed and performed the miracles that supposedly drew a great deal of popular attention. Of the 126 writers who should have written about Jesus, not a single one did so (if one accepts Paulkovich's view that the Jesus references in Josephus are interpolated).

Paulkovich concludes:

When I consider those 126 writers, all of whom should have heard of Jesus but did not - and Paul and Marcion and Athenagoras and Matthew with a tetralogy of opposing Christs, the silence from Qumram and Nazareth and Bethlehem, conflicting Bible stories, and so many other mysteries and omissions - I must conclude that Christ is a mythical character.
He also considers striking similarities of Jesus to other God-sons such as Mithra, Sandan, Attis, and Horus. Christianity has its own imitator. Mormonism was heavily influenced by the Bible from which founder Joseph Smith borrowed liberally.

Mormonism fabricated in plain sight
We may not know for sure what happened two millennia ago but Mormonism was fabricated in plain sight by a convicted conman. According to Christopher Hitchens:

In March, 1826, a court in Bainbridge, New York, convicted a twenty-one-year-old man of being a "disorderly person and an impostor." That ought to have been all we ever heard of Joseph Smith, who at trial admitted to defrauding citizens by organizing mad gold-digging expeditions and also to claiming to possess dark or "necromantic" powers.
Hitchens writes: "Quite recent scholarship has exposed every single other Mormon "document" as at best a scrawny compromise and at worst a pitiful fake" ...

Smith's legacy was cleaned up via subsequent "divine revelations" that rejected first polygamy and then racism at convenient historical turning points. So the historical development from fakery to respectable religion is well documented.

There is no reason to believe that the genesis of any major religion was substantially different. This raises the question of why so many intelligent people choose to believe religious fictions.

The most plausible explanation is that they cannot easily distinguish between organized religion and confidence rackets.

Starting a fake religion

Religious people may find that hard to swallow, so it is interesting to see what happens when someone sets out to found a fake religion. Would this work, or would members see through the deception and promptly leave?

American Indian film director Vikram Gandhi studied yogis and their followers in India. He concluded that these holy men were confidence tricksters, scores of whom plied their trade throughout India in the manner of the Jesus story.

The filmmaker wondered whether he could pass himself off as a guru here in the U.S. He cultivated a fake Indian accent, grew out his hair and beard and reinvented himself as Sri Kumare, a mystic hailing from a fictitious Indian village.

In the film, Kumare (2011) the director founds his cult in Arizona where he unloads his bogus mysticism upon the unsuspecting public and soon draws a group of devoted followers who seek his counsel on their life problems and become frighteningly dependent upon his new-age advice.

The underlying psychology may be fairly simple. Common confidence tricksters work their magic by telling victims what they want to hear. The same is true of successful prophets who offer pie in the sky bye and bye as I explain in my book Why Atheism Will Replace Religion. The only reason that Jesus does not fit in this category is that he probably never existed.

Jesus is real
i meet him at taco bell the other day
him and his wife and 4 kids
oh wait
never mind you mean the other one

To me, it's never really much mattered if Jesus was the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary,

a real being, who really did all the things ascribed to him,

or a fictitious character, used to convey thoughts of how humans, at their highest and best, should seek to attain.


Personally, regardless of any other factor, I've always found The Bible to be - at worst - a beautiful story, beautifully told, filled with *lessons*...kind of like an adult Aesop's Fables. It's OK that I know pigs can't build houses and wolves can't talk...the *moral* of the story is the important part.

As much as Mike Myers' The Love Guru turned it into a(nother) snappy joke, there's something to be said that It just may be

Basic
Instructions
Before
Leaving
Earth.


I never needed It to be a history book or a newspaper-of-its-day to *get* Its message.

excuse me?

There are three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources, which have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus. These are two mentions in the works of 1st-century Roman historian Josephus and one mention in the works of the 2nd-century Roman historian Tacitus

Secondly, "Evidence" only goes as far as your nose so to speak. Evidence for one person may not be evidence for another person and so forth. But as for actual "historical" evidence, there is two right there.

Source was wikipedia.

Ummmm...The Bible is not the ONLY written work that should have each of Its words read:

"...three passages in non-Christian works have been used to support the historicity of Jesus...Although the authenticity of all three passages has been disputed to varying degrees, most biblical scholars believe that all three are at least partially authentic...

"The historical analysis techniques used by Biblical scholars have been questioned....

"However the majority viewpoint among those scholars of various disciplines who have commented on the subject is that Jesus existed, although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels...

"...The theory that Jesus never existed at all has very little scholarly support..."


Apparently, nobody wants to touch the veracity, present the proof, or even attempt to establish the historical fact that He was, indeed, born of a Virgin Mary, who was artificially inseminated by God.

Perhaps this is (ONE reason) why it's called "faith".

As stated early the references in Josephus are considered later additions to the text and Tacitus' reference to Pilate as a Procurator (a title not used in Judea until 44CE) when he was actually a Prelate calls into question his sources

it he is not true. It is quite a sham that almost all religions (ie most of the world) claim him in one way or another. then their is Jerusalem. what city is Holier than Jerusalem in the world? What city has been fought over for dominance ever? those reasons alone give or tell a story that has been passed down through the ages of something very special about Israel, Jerusalem and Yahshua

The map is not the territory

There are several Holy Lands throughout the planet, depending on who's telling the story. Out of the 12 main religions on the planet, only Baha'i (Holy Place: Bahji, near Acre, Israel), Christianity (Jerusalem), and Confucianism (no ONE holy place - it is your home's altar and wherever your family's burial tomb is located), recognize Jesus as the Son of God.

ONLY 32% of the world's population is "Christian"; that means 68% of the world does NOT believe Jesus is the Son of God, born of a Virgin Mary, and sent here to wipe away our sins...and is the ONLY path TO God. Yes, that means each Sunday when you gather at church with others who believe just as you do so therefore 'you know you're right, dammit!!!' because 100% of those around you agree with you,

the majority of the world *knows* you're wrong.


Buddhists (whose Holiest places are in the Gangetic plains of Northern India and Southern Nepal), Hindus (Rishikesh, India), Muslims (ALL of Israel, not JUST Jerusalem), Jainism (Mount Shatrunjaya, India), Judaism (Israel), Shinto (Japan), Sikhism (Punjab, India), Taoism (Northeast China), and Zoroastrianism (Balkh, Northern Afghanistan) do NOT recognize Jesus as the Son of God (though they MAY recognize him as a holy man).


People fight over what their culture and their heritage tells them is important; if enough people believe the Magic 8 ball really DOES predict the future and there was only one left on earth, there'd be "Holy Wars" over Its possession, too.




For anyone interested in more information, you might find (the beginning part of) the film 'Zeitgeist' interesting viewing. Extremely provocative and conclusive evidence to the question: "Did God make Man or did Man make God?" can be found in it...especially when presenting how the 5 main world religions all appeared at the same time, telling the same story (but using different names), on the (original) 5 separate continents.

Of course, it COULD be that the whole world saw the same thing at the same time and the reason for the same story but with different players is the difference in languages, so there really IS a God...


...or it COULD be that, in the eons-long human brain's natural development, it becomes *necessary* for us to have a back-story of our creation and of a God.

Referring to Yahshua who the world calls JC their is no more recognizable name in the world. Period!!

Muslims say he is a profit so does the Jews.

So does many Buddists claim JC as one of their own. This all points back to Jerusalem.. This points to the beginning of religion in the Middle east. Zorastrism being the oldest writings in the world with their priests being called Magi. The same one the scriptures claim reconized a sign in the Heavens that brought them to Israel.

So much proof just in the pudding

If the proof was actually factual, that would be a correct conclusion to draw.

32% of the world's population is NOT "the world".

Recognizing "JC" as "a profit" (Freudian?) does NOT the Son of God make. Once a religion demotes "JC" to "a profit", He is no longer the central figure of their faith.

I already listed the Holy Places of the 12 major religions that 68% of the world's population recognize; Israel is the Holiest of places to many...Jerusalem (which is within Israel) is even fewer.


Factually-speaking, of course. There is no accounting for what others' faith dictates is true.

no 32% is not the world. where did you get 32% from? U really can show that only 32% of the world population see's Israel as a Holy land? thus the Prophets basic tenets of the religion as true?

all the Middle east does.

all the America's does.

Basically all of Europe does.

Asian Countries? how many of them see Jerusalem/ Israel/ Yahshua as important to their belief?

Can you tell me one person in History just one more famous than who the world calls ..JC? Please do. Confusion? is that his name?

Proof? who's pudding

I guess we are all missing the point. The questions to ask, why is this man so important and talked about (may be called, JC, Yeshua, Yehoshua or Yahweh) throughout history for centuries? Now, it is true the stories of him are written by men and translated numerous times (so without saying lost in translation). But his life was significant enough to write down for future generations to read about. The question is, who is this man, is he the son of god, why is he important, why did he offend so many, why is he worthy to recollect his life? These are the questions to ask and not get hung up on defacto, but what is it about this man that so many thought was relevant. My opinion, he knew something that those in power and authority wanted to suppress, end of story. As it is today, whenever knowledge can be spread to awaken, those who lust power, greed and authority always want to silence. Guess what that means you know what they know and they no longer have the power over you.. Unfortunately, we know what they want us to know, ppl dont get it so they rely on what is force fed to them instead of inquiring or critically thinking for themselves. Oh, how dumb down our society has become, we need a spoon to be fed.

I never said "only 32% of the world population see's Israel as a Holy land", so it's not mine to prove.

I DID say "only 32% of the world's population is Christian".

http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/number-of-christians-rises-but-their-share-of-world-population-stays-stable/


In an earlier post, I indicated which of the world's 12 major religions do NOT see Jerusalem/Israel as their Holy Land. Since you do not believe me, feel free to Google "Holy Land of ____" filling in the name of the religion and see for yourself. You will find that what I posted was accurate.



You're welcome; I have provided the proof that you asked for, for me to prove MY stance is valid.


Could you now provide proof of YOUR assessment that all of the Middle East, all of Europe and "all of the America's does" hold Jerusalem as sacred and holy, per the Prophet?

Nah if you can't even make whole Europe believe in God anymore then certainly none of the secular europeans would think of Jerusalem as holy place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Europe#Eurobarometer_poll_2010

I will have to research more when time permits but this would indicate

most of the world even though their is more than 6 billion people in the world now.


It depends upon whether or not you mean how many are practising Christians, and recognise Jesus Christ as Lord and saviour, or whether you mean the number who believe that Jesus was a real person but not God incarnate.

As for practising Christians, out of a population of the world of around 6 billion (6,000,000,000) 2.1 billion (2,100,000,000) are practising Christians accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour and as God incarnate.

However, if you mean the number who accept Jesus Christ as a prophet, or as a god-like human, then you have to include all moslems (as Islam considers Jesus a prophet), Jews (as they also consider Jesus a prophet), and several other minor religions (like the Jehovah's Witnesses and Spiritualists who regard Jesus as a God-like human, and the Baha'i faith which also considers Jesus a prophet).

If this is so, then there are 14 million Jews, 15 million Spiritualists, 7 million of the Baha'i faith and 1.5 billion moslems.

This makes a total of around 3.6 billion people.

However, there are many others including Hindus (1 billion), Buddhists (376 million) and a host opf other faiths and none who still believe in Jesus existing as a great teacher or prophet, but ascribe no other supernatural significance to him.

almost 5 billion out of 6 billion so I would say most believe he is someone very special.

even at 5billion out of 7 billion people that would indicate that no one else in history has had more influence on the world than The Messiah from Israel hence Jerusalem being a very Holy city.

THERE IS ACTUALLY some evidence that indicates, from the historical record, not the bible, that a man named jesus lived at the right time and place. im not going to hold your hands, do your own research instead of reading someone elses articles and picking the ones that fit your beliefs.

Jesus has nothing to do with religion. ALL religion's are man made, according to various belief's. Every religion believes that they are the right religion. But, there are no RIGHT religion's since Jesus didn't represent ANY religion.

His purpose: For God to come to earth in the flesh. To sacrifice that flesh for the salvation of ALL who believe in him.(period)

This was to battle Satan, and his evil forces. Some of which I can see right here in this discussion. Trying to change the minds of humans with their primitive, sinful, arrogant thoughts and logic was not part of his mission. We have "free will" to do that if we choose. If not, then the "consequences" are the true concern.

The Lord will not try to "sell himself" to anyone. Satan does a good enough job of that. The Lord wants us to believe and trust in him. Not want PROOF! That will never be found. One way or the other. They have been trying since his return to prove or dis-prove his existence, without ANY proof either way to date. What makes any of us think that we have the brains to do it now? That's the human arrogance and vanity showing itself.

By denying Jesus, you are also denying God the father. They are one in the same. Since centuries of non-believers have been wanting Christian's to prove the existence of Jesus with HARD EVIDENCE, with no results to date that would convince the skeptic's, let's have the non-believer's PROVE that he didn't exist for a few centuries. Not just prove it by belief's. They say that the Christian's can't do that. So they can't either. We (Christian's) want HARD EVIDENCE of his non-existence from the non-believer's. After all, that's what they wanted from US!

I think it was the History Channel that did a show regarding the historical facts of Jesus and found tombs where his family was apparently buried as well as various other evidence that he lived.

From Wiki:

"However, virtually all scholars of various disciplines who have commented on the subject consider Jesus to have existed, although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the parts of his life that have been recorded in the Gospels."