A great source on Christian mythology (read bullshit) can be found at the well researched site Jesus Never Existed (jesusneverexisted.com). I found the whole issue of Jesus’ alleged birth to be particularly interesting.
And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a CITY of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.
(Luke1.26,27)
And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the CITY of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; because he was of the house and lineage of David:
(Luke 2.3,4)

The story is nonsense on several levels, first of all no city of Nazareth existed until well into the 2nd century CE. Next is the fact that Galilee was not a Roman province and would have no reason to respond to a Roman census. And finally, there is no record of Augustus or any emperor conducting a census (the Romans taxed property not individuals). So except for those minor issues the story seems acceptable to the deluded.
The author of the site (and book of the same name), Kenneth Humphreys, takes a large axe to St. John the Lunatic’s Revelation. It appears the early Christian writers weren’t just liars and loons but also notorious plagiarist of even older religious bullshit.

Views: 8

Tags: Census, Jesus, Nazareth, Romans

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Sentient Biped on July 22, 2009 at 11:15pm
On the list of Jesus's - wow!
Comment by Jim DePaulo on July 22, 2009 at 7:00pm
I looked the book up in the regional library but they don't have it. I put in a request for purchase.
A pretty good novel and interesting speculation on and around the crucifiction is I, Judas by Taylor Caldwell. It's much better fiction than is the source material.
Comment by Jim DePaulo on July 21, 2009 at 7:53am
From Jesus Never Existed by Kenneth Humpherys
Was there a Jesus? Of course there was a Jesus – many!

The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua (the successor of Moses) otherwise known as Yeshua ben Nun (‘Jesus of the fish’). Since the name Jesus (Yeshua or Yeshu in Hebrew, Ioshu in Greek, ) originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves’) probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure sporting this moniker, among others.
Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4
To that list of holies a few riff raff from the common herd can be added
Jesus ben Ananias - general agitator who pissed off the Romans who arrested him flogged the crap out of him decided he was a loon and released him.
Jesus ben Saphat. In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee, this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias. When the city was about to fall to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled.
Jesus ben Thebuth A priest who, in the final capitulation of the upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the Temple,
Jesus ben Gamala. During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the ‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. When the Idumeans breached the walls he was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.
But was there a crucified Jesus?
Certainly. Jesus ben Stada was a Judean agitator who gave the Romans a headache in the early years of the second century. He met his end in the town of Lydda (twenty five miles from Jerusalem) at the hands of a Roman crucifixion crew.
Comment by Sentient Biped on July 19, 2009 at 3:55pm
I'll have to go back and look it up - I beleive that the archeological findings were that there was a more ancient village on the same site, then it was devoid of habitation, and later was re-inhabited again. Just not during the time of the Jesus story. Apparently the lay of the land and locations of tombs did not match the gospel accounts. Wish I could be more definitive, but it sounded fairly impressive when I heard it.

For me, even if there was a Nazareth, and even if there was as Jesus, it still does not prove that the gospels are true or that the Jesus character was divine. For example if we said that Jesus was born in the Sears Tower in Chicago and we look there and sure enough, there is a Sears tower in Chicago, and look in the phone book and there is actually someone there named Jesus, it does not mean that the Chicago Jesus is the Son of Yawheh or that he was born in the Sears Tower.

On the other hand, if the supporters of the literal meaning of the gospel are shown to be full of chicken shit, it blows away their credibility. For example, if we say that Jesus was born in the city of Nazareth, 5 mile northeast of Chicago, and we look at a map and see that there is not city 5 miles northeast of Chicago, let alone a Nazareth, then it blows apart that story. Of course there could still be a divine Jesus, but the accounts are all wrong. So how do we pick and choose what to beleive?

I like that the biblical account is being looked at archeologically. What I heard about this was really convincing, but not being a historian or an archeologist, I have to be careful with what I beleive.
Comment by Jim DePaulo on July 19, 2009 at 3:20pm
Ruth,
You are of course right that it is not really possible to prove the absence of something, but consider -
However when we look for historical confirmation of this hometown of a god ...no other source confirms that the place even existed in the 1st century AD.

• Nazareth is not mentioned even once in the entire Old Testament. The Book of Joshua (19.10,16) – in what it claims is the process of settlement by the tribe of Zebulon in the area – records twelve towns and six villages and yet omits any 'Nazareth' from its list.

• The Talmud, although it names 63 Galilean towns, knows nothing of Nazareth, nor does early rabbinic literature.

• St Paul knows nothing of 'Nazareth'. Rabbi Solly's epistles (real and fake) mention Jesus 221 times, Nazareth not at all.

Any evidence of the existance of Nazareth prior to the 2nd century.
The 2nd century gnostic Gospel of Philip offers this explanation:

'The apostles that came before us called him Jesus Nazarene the Christ ..."Nazara" is the "Truth". Therefore 'Nazarene' is "The One of the Truth" ...'

– Gospel of Philip, 47.


'Nazarene' was originally the name of an early Jewish-Christian sect – a faction, or off-shoot, of the Essenes. They had no particular relation to a city of Nazareth.
Comment by Jim DePaulo on July 19, 2009 at 1:20pm
As Daniel mentioned, it may have been one of the many Jesus' (Yeshuas) at the time may have been a Nazarite and that was mistaken for Nazareth.
I don't know of any non-biblical text that does mention it prior to the 2nd century.
Comment by Jim DePaulo on July 19, 2009 at 12:08pm
Jesus of Nazareth - the nowhere man from no place. The whole fabrication smells suspiciously of Greek Mystery cultism. When put up against the myth of Hercules the smell gets real thick.
Comment by Sentient Biped on July 19, 2009 at 11:58am
Carver,

I wish that your would stop saying things that I agree with so overwhelmingly. It's spooky.

There was an Infidel Guy episode on Nazarth and whether it existed or not during the time of the "Jesus" character's supposed birth. That's where I first heard about this issue. I had always assumed that the historical PLACE and SETTING (the census) were validated in some way, and that the Gospels were, at worst, historical fiction and fantasy. It was surprising to learn that the place wasnt there and the historical context itself was fictional.

Following that, there were other controversies. Some suggested that Jesus was a Nazarite, which was apparently a cult that was not connected to Nazareth.

Christianity is a fraud and a delusion, that morphs depending on the needs of religious and political leaders, and the fears and desires of human beings. Same as other religions.

Good topic for discussion. I'm curious about what other historians have to say, either in agreement or disagreement.

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

Latest Activity

matthew greenberg replied to matthew greenberg's discussion Enough already - take down the Brother Richard article from the banner
9 minutes ago
Patricia replied to matthew greenberg's discussion Enough already - take down the Brother Richard article from the banner
16 minutes ago
Patricia liked matthew greenberg's discussion Enough already - take down the Brother Richard article from the banner
20 minutes ago
matthew greenberg posted a discussion
21 minutes ago
Richard Goscicki replied to Richard Goscicki's discussion Marijuana and Atheism
41 minutes ago

Scot Hinson just added their location.
(via Member Map)

1 hour ago
Joan Denoo posted discussions
1 hour ago
Joseph P replied to Joe's discussion S.E. Cupp: I’m a ‘Better’ Atheist than Bill Maher in the group Atheist News
1 hour ago
Joseph P replied to Joe's discussion S.E. Cupp: I’m a ‘Better’ Atheist than Bill Maher in the group Atheist News
1 hour ago
booklover commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
1 hour ago
Joseph P replied to Joe's discussion S.E. Cupp: I’m a ‘Better’ Atheist than Bill Maher in the group Atheist News
1 hour ago
Ceil replied to Ceil's discussion Please help me maintain some sanity... It just isn't true!
1 hour ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service