Ancient Confession Found: "We invented Jesus Christ"
- Thread starter kudzu
- Start date
I agree with Fowl.
There are four basic facts we know about Jesus that are certain by the standards of conventional historical analysis:
A Galilean Jew named Jesus existed historically
He was an itinerate Rabbi who had a modest following in Galilee
He somehow ran afoul of the Roman authorities in Jerusalem and was crucified
Some of his followers believed they saw him after his crucifixion
A Galilean Jew named Jesus existed historically
He was an itinerate Rabbi who had a modest following in Galilee
He somehow ran afoul of the Roman authorities in Jerusalem and was crucified
Some of his followers believed they saw him after his crucifixion
And those same sources also tell us about other things happening at the time that were pretty amazing as well.
Matthew 27:52-53 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
I think it's pretty amazing that not just Jesus but a bunch of other people came back from the dead and a lot of people saw them walking around.
And then he went up into heaven before the disciples and they even give a specific location:
Luke 24:50-51 And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
The Internet brings out the cray-cray in stupid people.
2000 years of history and research yet, along comes some idiots on the Internet to "discover" that Jesus was "invented".
Stupidity and ignorance are as old as all human history.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
He had a few memorable sermons too.
You are confusing and conflating historical fact, and interpretation.
What I stated are widely accepted facts by the standards of historical scholarship.
The testimony that the disciples saw Jesus after his crucifixion is a well attested fact that goes back to the earliest days of the Church, and clears the bar for historicity.
The story in Luke is not attested by multiple sources, isn't written down until six decades later, and may be more of a legendary account based on oral tradition.
You can make whatever interpretations you want. I think the balance of probability is that some of the disciples believed they saw Jesus after his crucifixion. And that is a fact that can be cited without getting into interpretation.
Yes, there are many other little factoids that are probably historical beyond the four basic ones I wrote down.
Some of the parables have the ring of authenticity, and the Sermon on the Mount is probably quasi-historical.
Jesus was literate, probably had some elementary education in the Torah, and probably read Hebrew and maybe some Greek, in addition to being fluent in Aramaic.
NiftyNiblick
1960s Chick Magnet
Not true.
They're all superstitions to me,
but as long as you're not trying to influence the laws of the land with them,
believe what makes you happy.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
The title Rabbi didn't exist back then, The title "rabbi" was first used in the first century CE.
- Biblical verses that refer to Jesus are mistranslations.
- Jewish belief is based on national revelation.
- Jesus did not gather all the Jews to Israel.
- Jesus did not fight the forces of evil in the world.
- Jesus did not resurrect all the dead people who died before him
Last edited:
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
What title was used for a religious teacher?
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
leaders
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
They'd address them as "Leader Joseph" or "Leader Jesus"?
Can you remind me of what the "historical fact" of the disciples thinking they saw him after the crucifixion?
I'm just curious what evidence you have of the disciples seeing the empty tomb. Cuz if it's the Gospels then there's those other things I mentioned just adjacent to them.
Then you think a bunch of dead people also rose that day and walked around Jerusalem and that Jesus was seen ascending into heaven or disappearing in front of their eyes.
Based on the same sources that testify to many dead people coming back to life on the day of the Crucifixion.
So I guess we have to accept that a bunch of dead people rose from the graves on the day of the Crucifixion because it says it in the same source.
Got it. That's clear.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Jesus did not do everything that the Messiah was supposed to do. Jesus did not gather all the Jews to Israel. Jesus did not fight the forces of evil in the world and overcome them at the head of an army led by a descendent of King David.
The concept of the Messiah has its foundation in our Jewish Bible, the Tanach, which teaches that all of the following criteria must be fulfilled before any person can be acknowledged as the Messiah:
Reason #1 – The Messiah must be from the Tribe of Judah and a Descendant of King David AND King Solomon – Jesus did not qualify.
The Messiah must be a member of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10) and a direct descendant of King David & King Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12-14; 1 Chronicles 22:9-10). Genealogy in the Bible is only passed down from father to son (Numbers 1:1-18).
There is no evidence that Jesus really had this pedigree, and the Christian Bible actually claims that he did not have a “birth-father” from the tribe of Judah descending from King David and King Solomon (Matt. 1:18-20).
Reason #2 – Ingathering of the Jewish Exiles – Jesus did not do this.
More...............
jewsforjudaism.org
The concept of the Messiah has its foundation in our Jewish Bible, the Tanach, which teaches that all of the following criteria must be fulfilled before any person can be acknowledged as the Messiah:
Reason #1 – The Messiah must be from the Tribe of Judah and a Descendant of King David AND King Solomon – Jesus did not qualify.
The Messiah must be a member of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10) and a direct descendant of King David & King Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12-14; 1 Chronicles 22:9-10). Genealogy in the Bible is only passed down from father to son (Numbers 1:1-18).
There is no evidence that Jesus really had this pedigree, and the Christian Bible actually claims that he did not have a “birth-father” from the tribe of Judah descending from King David and King Solomon (Matt. 1:18-20).
Reason #2 – Ingathering of the Jewish Exiles – Jesus did not do this.
More...............
SIX REASONS WHY JEWS DON'T BELIEVE IN JESUS
jewsforjudaism.org
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Actually Rav
A Hebrew word that can be used as a title for teacher, or spiritual guide.
Rabbi is the commonly used word to describe a teacher or mentor in most modern Jewish movements. Rebbe is a Yiddish-German word that connotes a spiritual leader and master of theology in the Hasidic movement. Hasidic Jews refer to the leaders of different Hasidic dynasties as rebbes. A rebbe is required to be a tzaddik, or righteous man, in the eyes of God. Rebbes are also sometimes associated with the Baal Shem Tov who Tzvi Freeman noted was a teacher who not only touched your mind and heart.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Understood. It's easy to see the linguistic evolution of the word Rav to Rabbi. Does Rav also mean "leader"?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
There's no such thing as magic or miracles. Ergo, the odds of anyone in the Bible, Torah or Quran having such powers is slim to none.Jesus did not do everything that the Messiah was supposed to do. Jesus did not gather all the Jews to Israel. Jesus did not fight the forces of evil in the world and overcome them at the head of an army led by a descendent of King David.
The concept of the Messiah has its foundation in our Jewish Bible, the Tanach, which teaches that all of the following criteria must be fulfilled before any person can be acknowledged as the Messiah:
Reason #1 – The Messiah must be from the Tribe of Judah and a Descendant of King David AND King Solomon – Jesus did not qualify.
The Messiah must be a member of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10) and a direct descendant of King David & King Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12-14; 1 Chronicles 22:9-10). Genealogy in the Bible is only passed down from father to son (Numbers 1:1-18).
There is no evidence that Jesus really had this pedigree, and the Christian Bible actually claims that he did not have a “birth-father” from the There'tribe of Judah descending from King David and King Solomon (Matt. 1:18-20).
Reason #2 – Ingathering of the Jewish Exiles – Jesus did not do this.
More...............
SIX REASONS WHY JEWS DON'T BELIEVE IN JESUS
Jesus was apparently nothing like the Messiah that all the Jews expected. It's a truly wonderful exegesis that somehow squares the circle of expectation vs reality. And actually coming up with a workable concept (albeit somewhat convoluted but still workable)
One, being less generous, could hypothesize that this was part and parcel of how the religion developed over time. That it was an attempt to re-jigger the Old Testament concept of a Messiah to be nearly the total opposite but STILL BE THE MESSIAH. To lend credence to an otherwise fringe sect that was probably difficult to differentiate from any number of other apocalyptic jewish sects the area was famous for at the time. If anything it's quite brilliant approach. Leverage a known theological concept to make the new faith more "rooted".
In a sense you see this even in Roman religions. In order to make imperial rule more acceptable to those being conquered by the Romans, the Romans would integrate local religions into their pantheon. We can even see it in Islam where Jesus is acknowledged not just as a person but a prophet of God. A means of integrating religions not only to ease the transition of the people being converted but also to lessen the potential disagreements that may arise between competing sects.
Easy.
The belief that the disciples thought they saw Jesus after the crucifiction is based on Christian writings and testimony going back to the original apostles/eyewitnesses and in testimony that goes back to the earliest days of the church.
Therefore, it is not a legendary account, like some of the miracles in Luke and John probably are.
Even the atheist New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman asserts it as a historical fact that the disciples seemed to think they saw Jesus after he was crucified. Yes, your read that right. The atheist Bart Ehrman.
Anything after that observation is open to interpretation. You are free to believe the disciples got together for coffee in Jerusalem and conspired to lie and fabricate their story.