
The Myth of Jesus
Exploring the Bible and early Christian beliefs....
* Archived Articles -1
* Archived Articles -2
* 'A long day's journey into light'
"Researchers concluded: 'Religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable and, so, don’t appeal to intelligent people.'"'
('Atheists are smarter,' Express, 17/8/13)
"Religious belief drops when analytical thinking rises...Analytic thinking reduced religious belief regardless of how religious people were to begin with."
(''How critical thinkers lose their faith in God.' Scientific American, 1/5/12)
[The]...scientists were members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Our survey found near universal rejection of the transcendent by NAS natural scientists. Disbelief in God and immortality among NAS biological scientists was 65.2% and 69.0%, respectively, and among NAS physical scientists it was 79.0% and 76.3%. Most of the rest were agnostics on both issues, with few believers."
('Leading scientists still reject God', Nature, Vol. 394, No. 6691, 1998. p. 313)
Richard Jeni
"You're basically killing each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend."
Thomas Jefferson
"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."
George Carlin
"Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man - living in the sky - who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of things he does not want you to do.. And if you do any of these things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time! But He loves you and he needs money!"
Epicurus
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Anon.
"There once was a time when everyone believed in God and the church ruled. It's not a coincidence this time is known as 'the Dark Ages'."
Voltaire
"Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities."
"Every two years the National Science Foundation produces a report, Science and Engineering Indicators, designed to probe the public’s understanding of science concepts. And every two years we relearn the sad fact that U.S. adults are less willing to accept evolution and the big bang as factual than adults in other industrial countries... When presented with the statement “human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals,' just 45 percent of respondents indicated “true.” Compare this figure with the affirmative percentages in Japan (78), Europe (70), China (69) and South Korea (64). Only 33 percent of Americans agreed that “the universe began with a big explosion.' Consider the results of a 2009 Pew Survey: 31 percent of U.S. adults believe 'humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.' (So much for dogs, horses or H1N1 flu.) The survey’s most enlightening aspect was its categorization of responses by levels of religious activity, which suggests that the most devout are on average least willing to accept the evidence of reality. White evangelical Protestants have the highest denial rate (55 percent), closely followed by the group across all religions who attend services on average at least once a week (49 percent). I don’t know which is more dangerous, that religious beliefs force some people to choose between knowledge and myth or that pointing out how religion can purvey ignorance is taboo." Source: Scientific American |
The subject of Jesus is of course absolutely central to Christian belief and its theology and yet credible, contemporary evidence for the historical existence of Jesus, as he is described in the New Testament, is non-existent. Astonishingly, very few Christians appear to be aware or bothered by this. Apart from the absence of any convincing evidence for such a person ever living, as the New Testament describes, there is of course the considerable problem of the many images of Jesus presented by the different writings in the New Testament. For example, the Jesus of the Synoptics bears little resemblance to the Jesus of the Fourth Gospel, and neither of these have similarity to the Christ portrayed by the apostle Paul. The blood-thirsty, avenging warrior Jesus of Revelation cannot be found anywhere else in the New Testament. There is the further difficulty that if such a person ever lived why the Gospel writers find it impossible to agree on something as basic as dating. For example, the two Gospels that record his birth, namely Matthew and Luke, not only describe the birth of Jesus happening in different circumstances but it occurs at different times: moreover, each one supplies details that make the other Gospel account to be impossible. In the case of Jesus' last days, the author of the Fourth Gospel sets out his account to be one day earlier than the Synoptics: apparently the reason for this is a theological one, i.e., to have Jesus dying at the same time as the paschal lambs. Therefore, if it can be shown that the Gospel writers had no interest in accuracy but only sought to write a story that satisfied a theological motive, it is surely reasonable to assume that their entire writings fall into this category. Indeed, even if there were a historical Jesus (and I do not believe there was), he would be buried under the theology of the early church and his life no longer accessible. Other examples are when the writers manipulated the text to fulfil what they considered to be a messianic prophesy, e.g., Matthew 21:2-5 and also in John 19:23-24 (in both cases the writers misunderstood the Hebrew parallelism and mistakenly wrote of two acts when the Old Testament text refers to only one.) A further example of why one is justified in believing that the Jesus of the Synoptics, John or Paul, or any Christian writing of the period, had no existence other than in the imagination of the New Testament writers are the number of 1st century sects that claimed to be following the teachings of Jesus. If a physical Jesus lived and preached, ca. 30 CE, then it is extraordinary that so soon after this, there were so many sects, but not only this, they were so very different, e.g., the Ebionites and the Gnostics. As discussed elsewhere on this site, according to the New Testament, Jesus' life was associated with the following events: A special star appears to signal his birth (Matt 2:2); there is a massacre of infants in an attempt to kill him (Matt 2:16); he went about 'healing every disease and every infirmity' (Matt 4:23); fame spreads throughout all Syria so 'all the sick' are brought to him - who are then healed by him (Matt 4:24); he is followed by 'crowds' (Matt 5:1); 'great crowds' follow him (Matt 8:1); he heals a leper (Matt 8:3), a paralysed servant (Matt 8:13); and Peter's mother-in-law (Matt 8:15); 'many' who are afflicted are brought to him and he heals 'all who were sick' (Matt 8:16); great crowds follow him (Matt 8:18); he heals demoniacs (Matt 8:32), and a paralytic (Matt 9:7); crowds witness his healing ability (Matt 9:8); a ruler comes to him for help with his daughter (Matt 9:18); he heals a woman with a hemorrhage (Matt 9:22), and a ruler's daughter (Matt 9:25); a 'report of this goes through all that district' (Matt 9:26); he heals two blind men (Matt 9:30) who then 'spread his fame through all that district' (Matt 9:31); he heals a dumb demoniac and crowds marvel at what he does (Matt 9:33); he travels about cities and villages and heals 'every disease and every infirmity' (Matt 9:35); crowds follow him (Matt 9:36); he preaches in cities (Matt 11:1), speaks to crowds (Matt 11:7), and heals a man with withered hand (Matt 12:13); many follow him and 'he heals them all' (Matt 12:15); he heals a blind and dumb demoniac (Matt 12:22); 'great crowds gather' around him (Matt 13:2); he speaks to the crowds (Matt 13:34); Herod hears about his fame (Matt 14:1); crowds follow him as he heals the sick, and feeds 5000+ people (Matt 14:13); on entering Gennesaret, he is recognized and all the sick are brought to him and all of those who touch him are healed (Matt 14:36); great crowds come to him with the sick who are healed (Matt 15:30); the crowd see 'the dumb speaking, the maimed whole, the lame walking and the blind seeing' (Matt 15:31); he feeds 4000+. people (Matt 15:38); he meets a crowd and heals an epileptic (Matt 17:14,18); large crowds follow him in Judea and he heals them (Matt 19:2); a great crowd follows him on leaving Jericho (Matt 20:29); he heals two blind men (Matt 20:34); he ejects the Temple traders (Matt 21:12); he heals the blind and lame (Matt 21:14); people call for his execution (Matt 27:23); all the people admit responsibility (Matt 27:25); when he dies there is darkness 'over all the land' (Matt 27:45);. the Temple curtain is torn and there is an earthquake (Matt 27:51); the saints came out of their tombs and appear in Jerusalem (Matt 27:52-53), and he is resurrected from dead as he foretold (Matt 28:1ff). And yet all of this - recorded in just Matthew alone (John records even more spectacular events) - was ignored by each and every writer at the time when Jesus supposedly lived. Not even one of these events was recorded or was referred to by any writer active in the 30 - 90 CE period (the Gospels were written after this time - see 'Dating the Gospels'.) Attempts to refute the mythicist view have been unsuccessful. Advocates of the mythicist view are able to refer enquirers to the extraordinary silence of not only Paul, but other New Testament writers (e.g., the author of 1 Peter) regarding the earthly life of Jesus: they are able to also draw attention to other factors that support their stance, e.g., the failure of any (non-Christian) writers, active in the first century CE, to mention Jesus. There is the further point that Jesus is not provided with an earthly existence in any specific time and geographical location until the canonical Gospels, and there are wholly valid reasons for not dating their composition before the final years of the first century CE at the very earliest.
|
Frequently Asked Questions
1. As so many people believe in Jesus, surely he must have existed?
History records numerous occasions when many people have "believed" in something unreal. At one time, many people believed the Suin revolved around the earth which was stationery because the Bible said the earth did not move (e.g., Psalm 104:5). Now, we know differently. The same ignor\nce is demonstrated when the Bible speaks of the earth having "four corners" (Rev 7:1).
2. But the Bible records Jesus' life and how his followers taught about him.
In addition to there being no contemporary evidence for Jesus' existence, there is none for those followers mentioned in the Bible. If we take Acts as an example, Richard Heard, M.A., M.B.E., M.C., (Fellow of Peterhouse, Cambridge and University lecturer in Divinity at Cambridge), said in his An Introduction to the New Testament: Acts of the Apostles that "in his narrative in the early part of Acts [the author] seems to be stringing together, as best he may, a number of different stories and narratives, some of which appear, by the time they reached him, to have been seriously distorted in the telling." In sum, the New Testament writings that give details about Jesus' life and his followers are late and dependent on (inaccurate) story-telling.
3. Apart from the New Testament, surely there is evidence for Jesus in contemporary secular writings?
In addition to the earliest Christian writings, e.g., Paul and Peter being silent about Jesus' earthly life, not one secular writer active during the period when Jesus is supposed to have lived makes any reference to him. In view of what the Gospels claim he did, this is incomprehensible.
4. But I have definitely seen Christians referring to "pagan evidence for Jesus' existence."
If you examine what is claimed, you will find (a)there is no contemporary pagan evidence for Jesus, and (b)what is offered as "evidence" arises long after the time when Jesus is supposed to have lived, it is fragmentary and questionable, e.g., Josephus who is dealt with here, or it simply repeats what Christians were saying, e.g., Pliny. Christians seem unaware of the astonishing lack of decisive evidence, and when challenged they cannot offer anything. In one case a Christian cited Tertullian, and yet he lived in the third century!
5. So do the canonical Gospels supply any accurate information about Jesus?
Mark (on which Matthew and Luke are dependent) shows the earliest account of Jesus' life were no more than numerous different and disconnected stories which the author linked together. The fact that the Gospel writers cannot even agree on when Jesus was born (or the circumstances) or when he died (the Synoptics have the crucifixion on the Passover day whereas John has it on the Preparation), or details of the resurrection and the events following this, is surely testimony to the mythical basis of Jesus' alleged life.