Atheist Nexus Logo

The “Historical Jesus” is a Sideshow

Does anyone have a count on how many books and other media materials purport to describe the “real” Jesus? There are so many theories describing a human Jesus that the most important fact about Jesus is lost: the gospel stories about him are mostly myth, if not completely myth.

It was the myth of Jesus that gave him importance. If the stories were based on some real human named Jesus, he was a very insignificant historical person. But, his followers created a mythical Jesus with the gospel stories. It was the myth of Jesus that was the foundation of Christianity. Myths are not true…they are lies. Christianity was built on lies. Today, even many Christians understand that the Jesus story is not true; but, fail to understand that an untruth is a lie.

The search for the historical Jesus is an exercise in grasping at straws to save Christianity. It is a sideshow because the big tent began to collapse with the Age of Reason. The descriptions of a historical Jesus are rationalizations, distracting from the hard truth that Jesus Christ never existed.

Non-believers should avoid being dragged into the delusion of the “Historical Jesus” and concentrate on exposing the lie at the heart of Christianity.

"The only qualification to be a member of Nexus is to be a nontheist. Other than that we are a community. Civil debate is welcome in the forum, but should not be tolerated in individual groups (unless this is the purpose of the group), and on member pages." - Brother Richard.

Views: 87

Comments are closed for this blog post

Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 4:11pm
John - I was not referring to you, my post was directed to the people who left comments that I deleted. Your comments were perfectly legitimate.
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 3:25pm
"Civil debate is welcome in the forum, but should not be tolerated ... on member pages." - Brother Richard http://www.atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/stop-the-madness-and-a

If you have a perspective that you would like to share with the AN community, then write your own blog. Don't just use me as a foil for your arguments because it makes you look like you have an agenda or ulterior motive for discrediting me. You can promote your agenda on your own page.
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 2:23pm
Fair enough, Matt. Let's drop it. "Tired of responding" was the point I tried to make several comments ago.
Comment by Matt VDB on September 17, 2010 at 2:00pm
Hi Diana,

"Other people have disagreed with me. But, I do not find them as defensive of the Bible as you, unless they subscribe to an ideology that places an extra high value on the book. "

Perception is everything. You obviously don't know me very well and I don't expect you to run background checks on me, but if you had, you would have found that for every post I make defending the historicity of a certain item, I make a post discrediting the historicity of another. Just in the last two months I've explained how the miracles in the Bible are either exaggerrations of faith healer tricks or mere parallels with the OT, I've explained how the resurrection story could have naturally arisen from a set of disappointed acolytes and believers, I've argued that Jesus was likely a fire-and-brimstone preacher rather than the hippy-dippy nice guy Christians (and some atheists) usually see him as, etcetera... You've only seen the parts where I 'defend' the Bible on a given subject. But that's a matter of perception: I attack it all the time too.
What I am against is people making exaggerated claims about the Bible (or any other historical subject for that matter); I'm defensive concerning truth and what can be reasonably demonstrated, not the Bible.

"And, Atheist Nexus does attract people who are not really atheists; so, we are a little extra-sensitive to people's demeanor in their comments."

I haven't seen many fake atheists coming around here to be honest, but either way, you can see from many of my other posts that I am not one of them.

Either way, can we drop the tack of implying that I'm some kind of undercover believer? I'm getting incredibly tired of responding to those accusations.
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 1:39pm
John - you are correct, it is innappropriate for me to reference my book in my blog posts. I was thinking of my blog as my personal space; but, I reread the rules and that is not the case.

The "small print" I added to my blog post was intended as a method of addressing people who post really broad comments that would require a lot time to compose a response. It was also intended to discourage those who just want argue with me or become nasty. But, I should not have referred to my book in the "small print."
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 12:42pm
@ Фелч Гроган I guess you missed the conversation I had with your friend a couple of months ago in which he called me "a piece of shit." Either he or AN deleted his profile after his insults and now he back under a different name. Can you understand why I just don't want to talk to him?
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 12:30pm
My last comment on this topic:

"Why would an atheist's head explode because another atheist says that the "Historical Jesus" is not important?
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 12:19pm
Matt,
Particularly during the last couple years, I've spent a lot of time talking with atheists. Many do just enjoy a good debate and can be somewhat righteous. But, the tenor of conversations I have had with other atheists on the topics on which you and I have discussed was different. Other people have disagreed with me. But, I do not find them as defensive of the Bible as you, unless they subscribe to an ideology that places an extra high value on the book. And, Atheist Nexus does attract people who are not really atheists; so, we are a little extra-sensitive to people's demeanor in their comments.
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 11:33am
Sigmund,
We share very common thoughts on the subject. Plutarch wrote during roughly the same time period as the presumed time of the gospels. He was a high priest of Apollo and quite a scholar. He wrote about religious, philosophical and historical topics. And, his history is critiqued as containing fabrications about real people to fit his philosophical and religious perspectives. No one reads his accounts of pagan gods and then goes in search of real people as the inspiration for those gods. Yet, the Bible, an extremely religious book, is often treated with so much less skepticism than Plutarch.

I think the big problem with Jesus is Joshua. (Jesus and Joshua are the same name.) Joshua's story is treated as if it is a legendary story about a human, rather than a euhemerized story of a god. A significant portion of my work was describing the story of Joshua the god behind the story of Joshua the hero. With Joshua as a god in Palestine long before the 1st century CE, it becomes very unlikely that Jesus was a real person.
Comment by Diana Agorio on September 17, 2010 at 11:18am
Glen - Matt was downright polite compared to the other two. But he has been posting on my blog for a few days now and I notice a pattern. I appreciate his enthusiasm for my favorite subjects; but, his comments do not match his profile.

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service