- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Evidence For a Would-Be Messiah is Shaky
By Frank R. Zindler
For most of my life, I had taken it for granted that Jesus, although certainly not a god, was nevertheless an historical personage - perhaps a magician skilled in hypnosis. To be sure, I knew that some of the world's greatest scholars had denied his existence. Nevertheless, I had always more or less supposed that it was improbable that so many stories could have sprung up about someone who had never existed. Even in the case of other deities, such as Zeus, Thor, Isis, and Osiris, I had always taken it for granted that they were merely deified human heroes: men and women who lived in the later stages of prehistory - persons whose reputations got better and better the longer the time elapsed after their deaths. Gods, like fine wines, I supposed, improved with age.
About a decade ago, however, I began to reexamine the evidence for the historicity of Jesus. I was astounded at what I didn't find. In this article, I would like to show how shaky the evidence is regarding the alleged existence of a would-be messiah named Jesus. I now feel it is more reasonable to suppose he never existed. It is easier to account for the facts of early Christian history if Jesus were a fiction than if he once were real.
Comments
Flying in a commercial plain these days is shakey
But faith in God and His only son Jesus Christ is such a personal decision that I hesitate to try to convince anyone. I just know that when I look out these windows that life is too beautiful, too organized, to mysterious to just give breath to us humans for a few years and then we die, nothing more. I think not. We have eternal spirits and I think that is more of the burden of proof than whether God or His son Jesus is real because once you realize you have an eternal soul and a spiritual persona, a spirit which is more you than your physcial self, then you have to admit there is eternal life and then you have to ask yourself if I have an eternal soul/spirit then what happens at death.
Funerals happening all around us and is that it? Is that all life is, a birth, hard work, and a head stone? I dont think so. I think life is the tip of the iceberg, there is a life so much fuller and richer than we could ever imagine. But here I go preaching again. Its your decision. I choose to believe in God and in His only son Jesus and I hope to see you in heaven, but if I dont, Ill be the one jumping up and down saying...WE WON...WE WON!
Jumping up and down WE WON WE WON
It would be hard for me to be happy over any one going to hell.That statement is way out there!JESUS saves.
curious
"Ill be the one jumping up and down saying...WE WON...WE WON!"
Gloating over someones eternal torment doesn't seem very Christian.
God forbid
If someone chooses that route who can stop them? I would rather we all be there but I think that is too naive. I just see things differently is all. I did sound arrogant didnt I?That was wrong of me. I dont mean too.
AA is off the mark
There is substantially more evidence for Jesus than any other Jewish man during that time period. That's good enough for me.
Concerning an Untruth
Mr Zindler, you begin your list of arguments with an untruth. Not really the greatest first impression to give. You say, “To be sure, I knew that some of the world’s greatest scholars had denied his existence.” Sir, unless you have no idea who are and who are not leading experts in NT and ancient historical studies, that is simply a lie. Among current scholars of the NT and ancient history, these online discussion of the so-called “Christ myth” are considered to be the equivalent of discussing the Holocaust hoax among historians of WWII. Both are in fact, quite similar. Both speak primarily to a certain group (Neo Nazis/ Bible skeptics). Both are immensely popular in these two groups online communities. Both distort evidence, use outdated scholarship, ridiculous arguments, and askew the whole method used to do historical work. G.A. Wells in not an expert. Hence, quoting any of his words relating to historical Jesus issues is like asking Tom Cruise to professionally diagnose a psychological disorder. I’m not saying either are non-intelligent men, but neither have the education or training in the right fields. As such, their views amount to little more than layman commentary. Furthermore, Earl Doherty is not an expert in NT studies or ancient history. Nor is Acharya S, Timothy Freke, Peter Gandy, Arthur Drews, Dan Barker, Rook Hawkins etc etc. Thus, I really couldn’t care less what any of these people have to say about Jesus, Paul, Peter, Josephus, Tacitus, or the Gospels anymore than I would take seriously a skinhead who hands me a pamphlet on how the Jews conspired to give Hitler a bad name. Or a psycho evangelical who tells me he saw a vision of Jesus who showed him the apocalyptic future of the USA. Conversley, here is a list of modern scholars of NT and ancient history, both Christian and non, who endorse Jesus of Nazareth as a historical personage: NT Wright, Richard Bauckham, D. MacDonald, Edwin Yamauchi, Robert Van Voorst, John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg, Gerd Ludemann, John Meier, Craig Blomberg, Bart Erhman, James Tabor and so on. I have to wonder why you reject the one thing that all of these fellows, and it is hard to find two NT scholars who agree on anything, agree on and choose to side with non-scholarly, internet community. If you want to say that these atheist internet denizens and quiz-masters have convinced you that Jesus didn’t exist, then say so. But do not try to give the impression that you have simply decided b/w two scholarly discussed options. Modern NT scholars have declared the historicity of Jesus to be so certain, that questioning it is more the result of an inability to deal with reality than anything else.