Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

ImaFungi
This was my intuitive best guess at how history most likely played out. 'Witty' rulers of wealth and power creating a story to keep the population they were ruling over in check and in line and obedient. Also a great tool in conquering and converting other populations.

Yes, I totally agree with you!

reply to post by Logarock

At least 3 of the accounts are 1st person eyewitness accounts.

No, it can not be proven that they are eyewitness accounts, and much of the Gospels talk about events the authors could not POSSIBLY have known about. BESIDES, THE AUTHORS THEMSELVES NEVER CLAIM TO BE EYEWITNESSES! So - there is at least a healthy reason to DOUBT that they are 'eyewitness' accounts.
Gospel Truth: Do we have eyewitness testimony?

Let’s first consider whether the gospels contain purely eyewitness testimony. This is surprisingly common, even though the claim can basically be dismissed immediately. Let’s think about what takes place in these gospels.

Two of them start before Jesus was born. Were the writers there? Do they know what Joseph dreamed? Were the authors in the Garden of Gethsemane when Jesus went off alone to pray? Were all four writers present throughout the whole life and ministry of Jesus? It’s pretty clear though that none of them could possibly have seen all of this. So, one should at least grant that they cannot contain only eyewitness accounts.

But could the authors be eyewitnesses to the major events, just not those mentioned above? Again, this does not seem likely.

It is pretty clear that Luke and Matthew used Mark as a source, as well as the “Q” source. They contain many of the same stories, which scholars believe were from copying written work. The reason it seems to be from written work, rather than multiple eyewitnesses recounting the same stories, is due to the many instances of verbatim similarity. This kind of congruence (wording, sentence structure, etc.) does not come from independent eyewitness testimony or oral interviews. So, we can dismiss Matthew and Luke from serious consideration as eyewitness accounts. You then have just Mark and John. Since John differs so much from Mark, it doesn’t seem to be copied. Yet, because of that stark difference, both cannot be correct.

John is often called the Maverick Gospel because of how different it is from the synoptic gospels. These differences are so interesting and numerous, I will provide a separate post just to deal with this gospel, and why I conclude it is the least reliable.

What about Mark, though? It has a lot of things going for it – it was the earliest, it was obviously popular and widely circulated, and it is the least embellished in many ways. A common apologist claim is that Mark travelled with Paul and used Peter as a primary source for accounts of Jesus. We have no real reason to believe this; it is simply later church tradition and it still wouldn’t make Mark an eyewitness. This also relies on Mark being the person mentioned in Acts and 1 Peter. First, Acts and 1 Peter are anything but reliable. Second, the name Mark was just a later addition to the gospel, which again is anonymous. We simply have no reason to think this name is actually the name of the author. The arguments for these claims go nowhere and rely on circular logic.

Sorry.

/shrug

Conclusion

Since the authors do not claim in any way to be eyewitnesses, then that should not be our starting point. The real starting point is admitting we do not know, and then we go on to examine the evidence. The evidence, in this case, does not favor assigning eyewitness status to the authors. The vast majority of scholars agree with this view.

As for a thread on reincarnation and Jesus, we've done it. Numerous times. Read those threads and then start your own. See ya there, then.

reply to post by ltheghost


Ignoring the story you posted about some guy trying to sell books, I think the idea that religion was created by the government back in the day for control of its subjects should be a common conclusion that people of intellect would come too. I mean the bible was written after jesus's life by a bunch of other people who put it together. And its been edited countless times since its inception. Not to mention just like easy stupid things like, wheres the dinosaurs? I mean hell, in 2,000 years from now people will be debating whether or not Scientology was just made up or the divine word. Religion is simply the answer to a question. The question being, " how can we make people behave and accept the fact that we, the leaders, have all the wealth and they have nothing". Then the solution came as," oh well we shall make them believe that after they die they will get milk and honey and live forever with their dead family and friends, but only if they put up with the #ty life we give them here and they stay in line".

Think about this. If you suddenly went back in time, to the era when the bible took place, you could get away with anything. There's no cell phones, GPS, security cameras, DNA, fingerprints, or any way to find you besides eye witnesses. You could make up a story in one area, and go portray it like its fact in another, and if your convincing enough, everyone would believe you. Anything that came out of that time, unless it came bearing physical evidence, should be considered as ridiculous as jack and the bean stalk. People only believed in religion because they A. had a short, crappy life B. Where scared as hell of death and C. wanted to feel as if they knew how things worked, because knowledge of the workings of something makes you feel in control.

It's important to remember also that the Gospels were written as Apocrypha which means to both reveal and to hide and they reveal as much or more by what they hide as what they reveal outwardly.

reply to post by Logarock

you still have the herculean task of proving that Elijah died, back in time, in the first place.

Wow.

Just....again, Log. WOW.

EVERY HUMAN BEING DIES. To a one. Inescapable. You honestly believe this "throne in the clouds" stuff, I guess.
*shakes head*

I have to go join the "facepalm" crowd. I believe they're (handily enough) in the smoking section. Outside. Taking their "nonconformist" attitudes out of your face.

Nice folks, too, that lot! (Off Topic hint: Want to make actual "friends" at work? Hang out with the smokers. THAT is where authentic, genuine people are, and generally the parrots and drones are not.)

Do you actually believe Methuselah lived for nearly a century? REALLY?

How about Muhammed - do you believe he flew to heaven on a horse?

reply to post by wildtimes


No need to apologize. Save for the fact that you simply assume anyone you converse with on any number of subjects is ignorant and hasn't seen any of this before.....and that it is not debatable. You engage in dogmatic statements like "all" and "hearsay". I happen to be familiar with the disagreements of scholars and others on this issue.


Most good scholars hold that Matthew wrote "Q". But at any rate you were the one that made the freshman blanket statement that it was "all" hearsay.

The fact is however you want to dice it and slice it, it is impossible for it to be "all" hearsay. And I am giving you wide breath there, plenty of wiggle room.

You still have John which is not "all". As far as Mathew it may be true that some of the material covered in the beginning of his work naturally had to be taken down from Jesus Mother, others ect, the vast amount of his work is certainly first hand "I was there".

reply to post by BloodForFreedom


WELCOME TO ATS! Glad you've arrived.

Look forward to hearing more of your lucid, reasonable thinking.
~wild

reply to post by Logarock

I happen to be familiar with the disagreements of scholars and others on this issue.

Fabulous! Please link us to those "scholars" and their "disagreements." Or at the very least NAME THEM.
(Lee Strobel does NOT COUNT as a 'scholar'.)

BO XIAN
reply to post by Mouse89

 

JESUS WAS MOST HOSTILE AGAINST RELIGION

Watch this video through to the end . . .

there's some chance you might learn something.

www.youtube.com...

. . . though intensely held biases

married to a huge lack of fair-mindedness

can even prevent learning when faced with tons of evidence.

Jesus WAS most hostile against "Religion", but it was because of the HIPPOCRASY of the "religious" he always called into question. And he made a point of that at every opportunity! Pure religion and undefiled before God, the Bible says, is to visit the widows and the orphans in their affliction.

Religion saves NO ONE. Only a personal "relationship" with the Lord Jesus Christ. Then he, by the power of his Holy Spirit, can change you from the inside out. "Religions of Men" can only change the outside! No matter how you dress up the outside of a trash can, wax it, polish it, put robes on it, place it on an alter, lift the lid, and it is STILL a trash can.

Come to Christ Jesus, and let HIM take out the trash!

Grace and peace.

reply to post by wildtimes

EVERY HUMAN BEING DIES. To a one. Inescapable. You honestly believe this "throne in the clouds" stuff, I guess.

Even if one believes that Elijah WAS taken up in a "chariot of fire" by GOD, one still can reasonably assume that the earthly body that Elijah's soul embodied was consumed by the fire. There's no need for an earthly body where Elijah (and Enoch) were taken.

Earthly bodies are for earthly things....

wildtimes
reply to post by Fromabove

 

To say that we are all of the divine would be incorrect. We are not. Only some of us are from God. The rest are the seed of Satan, the fallen angels, and Nephilim. The Bible is clear on this.

YOU JUST QUOTED HIM SAYING WE ARE!!!

What
Ev
Er.

Unbelievable. UnFREAKINGbelievable. :shk: The Bible does NOT PROVE THE BIBLE IS CORRECT.

Satan is ALSO a construct. You don't get out to the liberry much, eh?

There are now two separate human species on the earth. One has been reborn and has a spiritual nature. They are born of God. The other is fleshly and come from the earth through Adam. And there are some hybrids that are not fully human and are more demonic and so forth. Only those who are of God will be of God and live on. The rest who cannot even conceive a thought of a Creator God will be judged because they reject God and then destroyed when this universe is brought to an end.

We are not all of the divine. And Satan is not a construct (except in your mind), he is an entity, a fallen angel. He is the one who speaks when you say there is no God. He is the one that influences you when you ridicule and mock Christians. If you were of God you would love Christians, but because you are of the world you despise them.

Ever notice how when you think of which religion or god to attack each day that it is only Christianity that sparks the energy you need to start typing. Even the mere mention of Jesus just sends the people of this world into a tizzy. It's just the way it is.

reply to post by Logarock

Save for the fact that you simply assume anyone you converse with on any number of subjects is ignorant and hasn't seen any of this before.....and that it is not debatable.

Oh,...no. Nonono, Logarock. I'm not assuming anything except that you are (as you have made 'abundantly clear') a superstitious, closed-minded, gullible apologist who has bought in, hook/line/sinker - to the Evangelical/Fundamental/Literalist view and are familiar with "apologetics" techniques.

Time to move along into the 21st century. Don't you think? Don't you agree? ESPECIALLY if you are into 'scholarly works', you should long since have declared that YOU DON'T KNOW. Even the scholars admit "WE DON'T KNOW" - that's why they have jobs. Teaching. Real, important jobs. (Unlike mega-church lying pastors such as Lee Strobel).

reply to post by texastig


and you my friend is what i call a strong believer. I respect your opinions, but until the day comes when god is in front of me.... that is the day i will believe. I will not waste my time reading the bible that has been touched and written by different hands. I will not waste my time and believe someone who has NEVER seen god himself. The human race was built on lies and deception. "WE" (you and I) are controlled and we are not being told what we want to hear. It's all lies and deception. In this society today, i do not believe ANYTHING we are being told or taught. NONE of us know the truth for sure, and we will never know until "GOD" steps foot onto earth and shows himself, that he is real and it is he who created everything. The bible says "the end will come soon." WHY? to put fear in us so that we can TURN to HIM and BELIEVE in HIM and WORSHIP him. (CONTROL) in all hopes that you will be saved.

Religion has been around FOREVER and it is used so that people can turn to something for answers. We all want to know how? and why?. But does it really mean it's the truth?

I don't know maybe i am trying to find myself and i'm going through a battle, but i will only believe what i see with my own 2 eyes.

wildtimes
reply to post by Logarock

 

you still have the herculean task of proving that Elijah died, back in time, in the first place.

Wow.

Just....again, Log. WOW.

EVERY HUMAN BEING DIES. To a one. Inescapable. You honestly believe this "throne in the clouds" stuff, I guess.
*shakes head*

I have to go join the "facepalm" crowd. I believe they're (handily enough) in the smoking section. Outside. Taking their "nonconformist" attitudes out of your face.

Your style is a bit different but still the in the end the same sort of condescension. Really in a discussion like this whether one believes or doesn't believe should be off the table as it is obvious which side any given person is on. Its a given. that's why I don't say things like "I have to join the face palm crowd". It should be assumed that we are both in the face palm position. But I like to keep it to the issues or question at hand even if I am tempted to say "man your a *^^%&@@".

But yea that's right everyone dies at some point when did I say otherwise?

reply to post by Fromabove


Well done

But you could also say there are two types of human, One type believes whatever someone else has told them about the big questions and have no original thought or are just too lazy to think for themselves and the other type who use their God given mind to question what other people say to find their own spirituality, the last type of human will one day reach for the stars and take the human race forward, the first type wants to destroy the world just to prove their own club is right.

Mouse89
reply to post by texastig

 

and you my friend is what i call a strong believer. I respect your opinions, but until the day comes when god is in front of me.... that is the day i will believe. I will not waste my time reading the bible that has been touched and written by different hands. I will not waste my time and believe someone who has NEVER seen god himself.

But do be honest with yourself and understand that you wouldn't believe someone if they told you that they in fact had seen God. Even if God resurrected one of your deceased loved ones to tell you, you may not believe it or that they had really ever been dead.

reply to post by Logarock

But yea that's right everyone dies at some point when did I say otherwise?

Look at your 'posts in thread'. You said Elijah never died. Twice, IIRC.

ETA:

John has already died, Elijah never died and thus couldn't have been born as John. Elijah's death is reserved for the final chapter of human rule on the earth during the days of the anti-Christ and false prophet.

Even if I take your point about Jon being Elijah reincarnated you still have the herculean task of proving that Elijah died, back in time, in the first place.

No, YOU have the herculean task of proving he DIDN'T DIE, since it is YOU who has claimed that. From scripture. Which is circular and not reliable.

And since you just admitted that everyone dies, well, I'm still waiting for your "scholars" and links to their works - or their names, at least.

reply to post by Fromabove

Ever notice how when you think of which religion or god to attack each day that it is only Christianity that sparks the energy you need to start typing.

Mmm...nope!

I attack Islam pretty regularly. There just aren't as many Muslims on here as there are zealous Evangelical Christians. What I attack is IGNORANCE and the placing of FEAR OF HELL into the hearts of people.

You're free to read my many, many threads in this forum. You'll find ALL religions scrutinized.

wildtimes
reply to post by Logarock

 

Save for the fact that you simply assume anyone you converse with on any number of subjects is ignorant and hasn't seen any of this before.....and that it is not debatable.

Oh,...no. Nonono, Logarock. I'm not assuming anything except that you are (as you have made 'abundantly clear') a superstitious, closed-minded, gullible apologist who has bought in, hook/line/sinker - to the Evangelical/Fundamental/Literalist view and are familiar with "apologetics" techniques.

Well, I am getting a chuckle here. But, alas, some of us in this world have no choice, cannot deny. While we may appear.....all those things you say above....we are indeed forced beyond the conundrum by evidences. It is impossible for us to deny that there is another world. And if I may say so, forced way beyond the techniques of "apologetics". In short I am not simply a believer.

reply to post by Fromabove

We are not all of the divine. And Satan is not a construct (except in your mind), he is an entity, a fallen angel. He is the one who speaks when you say there is no God.

Dear Fromabove,

We ARE all of the divine. And I have NEVER said "there is no God." I'm not an atheist.

I'm a Deist, and an Agnostic. Which means, I believe in a Supreme Divine, but I don't know for sure. It's the only really honest, intelligent pov, in my opinion.
But, if you've been convinced otherwise, well, that's your lot in life. I denounce "hell". I do NOT denounce God. And if Jesus lived he was a man, just like other men walking around. I, however, am a woman.

So, according to your thesis, I'm part of the downfall of mankind, and a demonic influence anyway. Right?