Two legendary men, both equally mythical… And I know I’m not making any friends here with this, but I just felt like going off on a rant. This one goes out to anyone dealing with loved ones who expect them to accept the Truth of Christ’s sacrifice for our sins.
We have only the vaguest of records of the man from the actual time in which he lived. The Gospels were compiled at least 60-90 years after his death, and the authorship of parts of the New Testament is certainly under question if not conclusively proven to be false (Paul did not write all of the letters attributed to him, more on that further down). We have many, many reasons to doubt the authenticity of the synoptic records as “historical” documents.
Dear Tacitus may mention that a man called Christus was put to death by Pontious Pilate for getting the masses all riled up, but this does not in any way demonstrate that all of the stories surrounding him (Yeshua, not Tacitus) are true. There are no records of the dead rising from the grave or walking among men outside of the Gospels. (I’m thinking Roman soldiers would have written home about that sort of thing.) There are no records of the sun going dark from noon until three, or of stars not following their accustomed patterns at the time of his birth. (The Romans certainly would have mentioned either event.) Heck, his birthday wasn’t even “established” until four centuries after his death.
There is not a single book in the Bible that has not been extensively rewritten and edited by multiple hands. Paul himself may have been only a pen name for Marcion. “Paul” quotes from the Greek OT, even though he was claiming an education from the Pharisees (Hebrew, not Greek). The epistles, written only (only! I have a hard time remembering what I had for lunch last week, much less what I was doing and saying twenty years ago) one generation after the death of Christ, do not support the Christ story. In some cases, they flatly contradict the teachings in the Gospel. Additionally, some of the quotes that Paul cites in them come from versions of the OT that were not published until after his death. Neat trick, that.
To regard the books of the Bible as anything other than a set of stories meant to give identity to a minority culture, which provides some insights into possible historical conditions in the history of Judea– but more insight into the cultural history of the region– is to take a very liberal approach to what one considers an acceptable source for research. Anyone who desires unquestioning acceptance of the “historical” Jesus, or maintains that their “knowledge” of Christ is any more accurate than our knowledge of the Green Man, Lord of the Forest, symbol of the rebelliousness and the power of youth, Robyne Hude, needs a reality check.
They can start with the links below:
Some people will say:
The Bible is the word of God because the Bible says the Bible is the word of God.
I don’t need to have proof to belive in Jesus. I believe in things when there isn’t any proof.
I say:
People are DNA’s way of making more DNA.
Interesting blog, have a lovely day
Comment by kookychic — February 3, 2008 @ 8:33 pm