I saw a fair bit of the Lost Tomb Of Jesus on Tuesday night (the first day it was available on Canadian TV). It was boring and surely could have been a half hour instead of over 2 hours.
This finding doesn't shatter my disbeliefs in any way, whether the discovery is genuine or not. In fact, if true, this discovery only reinforces my Jesus theory.
In case you haven't been paying attention to my blog posts on the Jesus myth, I'll briefly summarize:
Around 50 AD, there were many common myths, common stories, and even common expectations (of a Messiah) going around in the land of Judea.
The Jews were getting their butts kicked around by those pesky Romans (a situation that peaked 70 AD).
Paul had a vision. Now Paul may or may not have existed, but someone definitely got the ball rolling around the time Paul supposedly had his dream. Paul's writings predate those of the Gospels by anywhere from 20-80 plus years. He never mentions the virgin birth, in fact the only thing he mentions about Jesus as a person, is that he was crucified and he was resurrected, which he stole from the Dionysus story.
Paul's story came at a great time, as mentioned above, the Jews were getting fed up at their tyrannical egomaniacal God, who seemed to be allowing their life on earth to be crap despite their faith. A loving God and Messiah was just what many of these people needed and the focus on an eternal heaven where death was better than life worked great in the sales pitch.
As the years went by, lots of juicy tidbits were added. I can see the Jon (Morgan Fairchild, Yeah that's the ticket) Lovitz's of the time, coming up with all sorts of answers to fill in the gaps of the mythological figure Jesus' life. And of course, they weren't the most creative people on the planet either, as they just usurped more from Dionysus, added some Mithra stuff, some sun god theory, and a bunch of others, until finally, the New Testament was written.
It makes sense that they used common names and maybe even along the way, Jesus' whole family was based on the findings from that tomb that was recently rediscovered. There was lots of time from Paul's dream to when the Gospels were written to use those names, and even drop or ignore the supposed child of Jesus and Mary.
Again, 42 historians were alive between 1 and 37 AD, and not one contemporary word was mentioned about the miracle man Jesus. Zero contemporary evidence. Zero secular evidence. And since 37 AD, there has been no secular reason to believe in him either.
Now here are a couple of short Youtube videos on the Myth of Jesus. The first one is very informative, the second is more for entertainment, but it does make some interesting points:
One more thing: Being a Jew, I don't want it to seem that I'm just picking on Christianity, so let me add, the Exodus never happened either.
The show is complete BS. I can't believe thay would put this crap on the discovery channel.
ReplyDeleteThis is right along the lines of the ghost and area 51 documentaries.
Actually it is false that no contemporary secular historian wrote anything about Jesus Christ. In fact there are known more historical documents from secular historians about Jesus then for all of the rest of History's persons COMBINED!!! The only phisical discription we have about Jesus also comes from a comtemporaty secular historian!!! Of course those who want to find a reason not to believe in Jesus will always find a "reason" to doubt, but that doesn't change the fact that Jesus Christ was a real person and that Thousands of witnesses have seen Christ after His Resurrection. If there are people, who don't believe that the Holocost really occured and there are overwhealming evidences to support the reality of it, then why should anyone doubt that there are people that doubt the well documented exsistence of Jesus Christ!
ReplyDeleteCold Turkey, there is absolutely no secular evidence that Jesus ever existed.
ReplyDeleteJosephus wrote about Christianity in 85 AD, close to 50 years "after the fact," it was just observation that Christians existed.
The "witnesses" never wrote a thing down, it was just a story that there were "witnesses." Never happened.
There is mounds of secular evidence that the Holocaust happened. Mounds of contemporary evidence as well.
There is none to support a historical Jesus.
I used to assume Jesus lived as a Rabbi like figure, but then I put two and two together.
Sorry to break it to you. But you really should know that the bible is not a history book. It is about as much of a book of fiction as the Cat and the Hat.
And I'm not looking for reasons not to believe. I'm looking for reasons to believe. There are none.
Hammer, it aint science, that is for sure. But it fits with my theory.
Oh, Damn. I came here for bullshit and politcal correctness. I'll come back when sober.
ReplyDeleteHey, no fair - I wrote something similar about this very thing. lol
ReplyDeleteJust for that, you have to comment on my blog and tell me how wonderful my article is. :)
I found both videos interesting. This subject has endless possibilities for speculation and contemplation. I first became fascinated with the Holy Blood and Holy Grail books. They were the inspiration for The Da Vinci Code. The Greek author Nikos Kazantzakis wrote an interesting variation to this theme in The Last Temptation. The Australian theology scholar Barbara Thiering has some contentious and controversial theories linking Jesus with the characters in the Dead Sea Scrolls. There are conspiracy theories regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls and the hidden significance behind them that the Catholic Church wishes to suppress. Endless fascination and speculation.
ReplyDeleteB-b-b-b-but, the President says Sweet Lord Jeebus existed. So it's gotta be true, right?
ReplyDelete(Because he never lies about anything.)
Lexcen:
ReplyDeleteYou became fascinated by the Holy Blood and Holy Grail book??? The central thesis of which, the existence of the Priory of Sion, is a well documented hoax? Pierre Plantard, the main hoaxer, admitted so under oath. I read that piece of bog roll and couldn't stop laughing...
Anything else you want to confess to?
"Lost Tomb of Jesus" director Simcha Jacobovici is an intellectual poseur using at best specious assumptions, misapplied investigative techniques, "cherry picking" comments by experts and relying on his target audience's pedestrian sentimentality to give him legitimacy. (See Manfred Bietak's article entitled "The Volcano Explains Everything--Or Does It?" in the November/December 2006 issue of the magazine Biblical Archaeology Review regarding Jacobovici's other TV fantasy, "The Exodus Decoded.") Why producer/director James Cameron continues to associate with him is beyond me. His self-justifying claim during the segment following "Lost Tomb" that he's happy that at least he has started the discussion is equally false and pretentious. The discussion has been ongoing for two thousand years and Jacobovici has contributed nothing to it.
ReplyDeletePersonally I thought that Monty Python made the finest documentary about the search for the holy grail.
ReplyDeleteThe thing about reading your blog reminds me about someone getting hit on the head with a 2x4; it feels so good when you stop.
ReplyDeleteI'm still agnostic about whether there was a real Jesus. I understand both arguments. And the John Frum Cargo Cult certainly supports the argument that a religion can be invented around a person who likely never existed. But for me, it does not matter if Jesus was a real person, because I know he was not born from a virgin, he did not heal lepers and cast out demons, and he did not rise from the dead.
ReplyDeleteMy theory is that he started an offshoot of Judaism, but after his death his followers did not make very much headway with the Jews, so they thought "Hey, how about we convert the Gentiles?" Their proselytizing among non-Jews was a consequence of their rejection by the Jews. Therefore, when the Gospels were written, they deliberately tried to make the Jewish establishment look bad.
Lisa, most of you Maritimers are only sober when you wake up in the morning.
ReplyDeleteBeepX2, I had to say something else as you've seen.
Lex, I have a book on the Dead Sea Scrolls, but it is very dusty.
Mike, Bush is an Atheist, that is how good a liar he is. But all politicians lie, it is the nature of their business.
Gert, it went over my head because I'm not up on it, but I'll take your word for it that you found it funny.
Xaur, long time no see. Yep, it wasn't science, but it still fits my theory.
Jack, Life of Brian was better.
Anon (Rickey?), when you get your head hit by a 2 X 4 are you alone?
Tommy, I can agree with you that by the time the NT was finally edited and written, the Christians didn't want to piss off the Romans who were in control and had numbers, so they had to pick on somebody and there were no Palestinians present, so it had to be the Joooooos.
Gert, ouch! I hang my head in shame. No more confessions for now.
ReplyDeleteMost politicians are jew lawyers
ReplyDeleteHere's a detailed account of the 'Life and Work' of Pierre Plantard.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, this is a more important issue than many realise. Dan Brown's 'The Da Vinci Croc' leans heavily on the Priory of Sion, which he presents as 'Fact' [ahem...]. Millions now not only believe Jesus not only existed but that his offspring is among us (perhaps sitting next to you on the bus?). Let's not forget that 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' were a hoax too...
It's not too surprising that there aren't historical records of an itinerant preacher named Yeshua who was executed for fomenting rebellion. And it makes more sense to me that the Jesus stories accreted around an actual itinerant preacher than that Paul invented one from scratch. Aside from the consideration that it's simpler, I think an invented Jesus would have been a much less interesting person. Unlike folk tales around characters like Hercules, which we've discussed before, stories about Jesus would have all been created to make a religious point, so the really odd ones like cursing the fig tree and launching a tirade as a dinner guest are less likely to be made up.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the question is really one of degree. We're agreed that the miracle stories aren't true, so the Biblical Jesus isn't 100% real. At the other extreme, even if Jesus is made up, it's very plausible that real incidents involving contemporary preachers made there way into his story, so he's more than 0% real. I think there's at least a 20% core of reality in the story; you'd probably go for a lower number.
I shun the demons Flash and Javascript, so I haven't seen the video portions of your post.
Loose the dialup, Gary.
ReplyDeleteGary, Paul didn't give any information of the details of Jesus' life and personality, even according to Christian non secular historians.
ReplyDeleteThose were added afterwards...add ons to Paul's story.
Anon (Rickey), in English we say "Lose", not "loose" the dialup. You should try to get a refund from your ESL teacher.
Has anyone else noticed that the word "loose" is more and more often being used instead of "lose"? I even saw it written on TV tonight. I predict that in the future loose will actually mean and be pronounced lose - it's becoming that common.
ReplyDeleteSir, here are some secular historians who have refered to Jesus: Tacitus, the roman historian Suetonius, Pliny the younger, Epictetus, Lucian,Aristides, Galenus, Lampridius, DioCassius, Hinnerius, Libanius, Ammianus, Marcellinus, Eunapius, Zosimus.
ReplyDeleteanother secular writer, Thallus in A.D. 52, wrote of the suns failure to give light from noon to until 3 o clock and said that it must have been due to an eclipse. However, we both know that Christ was crucified at the time of the passover, which was the time of the full moon, and there cannot be an eclipse of the sun at the time of the full moon. Yet this writer felt he must offer some naturalistic explanation for the phenomenon of the sun's ceasing to give light. The histority of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Ceaser. Julian the apostate also endeavored to destroy Christianity. also read the book by Julian the Apostate who tried to destroy Christianity but ended up proving unknowingly in that very book. Dont thats all though, there theres so much more that I dont have the time to type. You seem to be a reasonable man so try to reason.
unless you dont believe in truth.
Also look at the fact that all of the Apostles died martyr's deaths exept John. They died for the truth, which they saw with their own eyes. Open your heart to the truth.
None of your references were contemporary Smash. They were all after "the fact." Try again.
ReplyDeleteThe Christ story is bunk.
Based on historical standards, the first recorded writing about Jesus was 20 years after his life. Granted this relied on the memory of the writer and the oral tradition of the church for this writing to be accepted. Yet if you look at any writings or records of the Roman empire etc the closest gap between the events that actually happened and when they were recorded for histories sake was bigger than 100 years.
ReplyDeleteFor me this adds credibility to the account. Josephus, a jewish man who didn't necessarily believe in the the Jesus who performed the miracles, believes in the man Jesus. This historian makes a reference to Christus or Chrestus who had caused a disturbance within the Roman occupied Israel.
There are many questions about the accounts of the gospels and epistles that cannot be dodged, or explained away. Feel free to throw whatever questions you have at me because I won't be convinced otherwise. However I'll always gain from honest critical inquiry and God can handle it! So far I've only seen straw man arguements on this post. Put up some real evidence - not just the conspiracy theories that have been around forever.
Steve and Karen, the first account of Jesus by Paul was just a gnostic account of Jesus. Nothing was stated about his personal life. There were many people waiting for a Messiah figure to appear at that time, and quickly Paul's gnostic dream figure evolved into a real person way after the fact. It didn't take long for a whole history of the man to be invented and bought by more and more people, so by the time of Josephus, he could observe actual people who believed that Jesus was a real person and they called themselves Christians.
ReplyDeletehi.. How are you all.?As I am quiet new in Jewish, looking around for some Jewish information> Got something important here. Nice to get it.
ReplyDeleteThis piece http://goo.gl/DT6FN of video helped me forgive and let go of my frustration.