Did Jesus Exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Enochian
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 50
  • Views Views 23K
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Enochian

Active member
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Religion
Agnosticism
Remember the Gospels and Acts were composed AFTER Paul's letters.
Gerd Lüdemann says:
"Not once does Paul refer to Jesus as a teacher, to his words as teaching, or to [any] Christians as disciples."
and
"Moreover, when Paul himself summarizes the content of his missionary preaching in Corinth (1 Cor. 2.1-2; 15.3-5), there is no hint that a narration of Jesus’ earthly life or a report of his earthly teachings was an essential part of it. . . . In the letter to the Romans, which cannot presuppose the apostle’s missionary preaching and in which he attempts to summarize its main points, we find not a single direct citation of Jesus’ teaching."
According to Richard Carrier, Paul's letters indicate that Cephas etc. only knew Jesus from DREAMS, based on the Old Testament scriptures.
1 Cor. 15.:
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."
The Scriptures Paul is referring to here are:
Septuagint version of Zechariah 3 and 6 gives the Greek name of Jesus, describing him as confronting Satan, being crowned king in heaven, called "the man named 'Rising'" who is said to rise from his place below, building up God’s house, given supreme authority over God’s domain and ending all sins in a single day.
Daniel 9 describes a messiah dying before the end of the world.
Isaiah 53 describes the cleansing of the world's sins by the death of a servant.
The concept of crucifixion is from Psalm 22.16, Isaiah 53:5 and Zechariah 12:10.

- - - Updated - - -

Jesus is the same Rising Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah.

Paul only ever indicates 2 sources of Jesus info, Scripture (the LXX) and dream teachings.

Paul never indicates Cephas or anyone else was a disciple of Jesus. Apostle doesn't mean disciple.

Philo independently confirms Jesus is the same Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah:
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13541
 
Which part of your post does actually prove your claim? I couldnt find a connection.
 
Let me try to format better:

Remember the Gospels and Acts were composed AFTER Paul's letters.

Gerd Lüdemann says:

"Not once does Paul refer to Jesus as a teacher, to his words as teaching, or to [any] Christians as disciples."

and

"Moreover, when Paul himself summarizes the content of his missionary preaching in Corinth (1 Cor. 2.1-2; 15.3-5), there is no hint that a narration of Jesus’ earthly life or a report of his earthly teachings was an essential part of it. . . . In the letter to the Romans, which cannot presuppose the apostle’s missionary preaching and in which he attempts to summarize its main points, we find not a single direct citation of Jesus’ teaching."


According to Richard Carrier, Paul's letters indicate that Cephas etc. only knew Jesus from DREAMS, based on the Old Testament scriptures.

1 Cor. 15.:

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."

The Scriptures Paul is referring to here are:

Septuagint version of Zechariah 3 and 6 gives the Greek name of Jesus, describing him as confronting Satan, being crowned king in heaven, called "the man named 'Rising'" who is said to rise from his place below, building up God’s house, given supreme authority over God’s domain and ending all sins in a single day.Daniel 9 describes a messiah dying before the end of the world.

Isaiah 53 describes the cleansing of the world's sins by the death of a servant.

The concept of crucifixion is from Psalm 22.16, Isaiah 53:5 and Zechariah 12:10.
 
Let me try to format it better for you:

Just because Paul did not refer to Jesus, does not mean he does not exist.
So your thread title "Jesus never existed" is false based on what you presented here.

Second, I do not know whatever this LXX is or Sir Lüdemann is, but this whole Bible thingy (OT, NT, LXX or whatever) is corrupt...and therefore cannot be used as reference, and certainly not to disprove the existence of Jesus.

Islam is an Abrahamic religion. So it shares its roots with Christianity and Judaism. However, this doesn't mean that Islaam is based on these two religions. Only the source is the same.
That is why there are so many similarities between these religions.
 
Ümit said:
Second, I do not know whatever this LXX is or Sir Lüdemann is, but this whole Bible thingy (OT, NT, LXX or whatever) is corrupt...and therefore cannot be used as reference, and certainly not to disprove the existence of Jesus.
Click to expand...

The historicity of Jesus is based on Paul's letters such as this passage.

Even secular historians view Paul's letters as reliable.
 
Enochian said:
The historicity of Jesus is based on Paul's letters such as this passage.

Even secular historians view Paul's letters as reliable.
Click to expand...

Is the historicity of Jesus ONLY based on Paul's letters or are there more sources?
And are you just claiming that all historians unamiously agree with each other that Jesus is just fiction?

Is that what you are telling us?
 
Ümit said:
Is the historicity of Jesus ONLY based on Paul's letters or are there more sources?
And are you just claiming that all historians unamiously agree with each other that Jesus is just fiction?

Is that what you are telling us?
Click to expand...
I agree with Umit here.

@Enochian, you say that all non religious historians consider Paul's letter to be true. Yet most most historians agree Jesus existed. So how can those same letters tell you Jesus did not exists?
Also, saying a certain thing are not mentioned somewhere is not proof it does not exist. I do not write about the sun every time I write something, yet, the sun is still shockingly still there!
 
Well atleast she is partly correct, the European Jesus never existed and is a creation of Europeans.

The middle eastern Isa(A) existed, whether the "gospels" of thomas and co are in anyway reflective of reality is another thing. Muslims take what is in the Quran and that's it.
 
One correction to your post. Actually St. Paul did not exist. It was the Church who later on "created" something with the name St. Paul to combat the religion of Jesus and to gain power through the newly created character. Most Christians today are actually Paulians, followers of so called Apostle Paul. They form most doctrines around Paul, not Jesus.
 
Saira Khan said:
One correction to your post. Actually St. Paul did not exist. It was the Church who later on "created" something with the name St. Paul to combat the religion of Jesus and to gain power through the newly created character. Most Christians today are actually Paulians, followers of so called Apostle Paul. They form most doctrines around Paul, not Jesus.
Click to expand...


Do you understand that the teachings of Jesus are based on Paul?

For example, Paul was the one who originally taught the concept of loving your neighbor etc. in Rom. 12.14-21; Gal. 5.14-15; 1 Thess. 5.15; and Rom. 13.9-10.
 
Enochian said:
Do you understand that the teachings of Jesus are based on Paul?
Click to expand...

Rather you can say that Paul's teachings are based on Jesus to some extent. Paul (if any) was converted to faith in Jesus (in 33 CE). Even for those who believe that Paul existed, he never met Jesus in person and he only had heard of Jesus, his teachings and his miracles. Paul was so influenced by all he heard about Jesus that later on he termed Jesus to be the son of God (by his own extreme enthusiasm for Jesus).
 
Saira Khan said:
Even for those who believe that Paul existed, he never met Jesus in person and he only had heard of Jesus, his teachings and his miracles.
Click to expand...

Paul never says Jesus performed miracles.

The Gospel miracles are plagiarized off the Old Testament.

Here is just one example:

It happened after this . . . (Kings 17.17)

It happened afterwards . . . (Luke 7.11)

At the gate of Sarepta, Elijah meets a widow (Kings 17.10).

At the gate of Nain, Jesus meets a widow (Luke 7.11-12).

Another widow’s son was dead (Kings 17.17).

This widow’s son was dead (Luke 7.12).

That widow expresses a sense of her unworthiness on account of sin (Kings 17.18).

A centurion (whose ‘boy’ Jesus had just saved from death) had just expressed a sense of his unworthiness on account of sin (Luke 7.6).

Elijah compassionately bears her son up the stairs and asks ‘the Lord’ why he was allowed to die (Kings 17.13-14).

‘The Lord’ feels compassion for her and touches her son’s bier, and the bearers stand still (Luke 7.13-14).

Elijah prays to the Lord for the son’s return to life (Kings 17.21).

‘The Lord’ commands the boy to rise (Luke 7.14).

The boy comes to life and cries out (Kings 17.22).

‘And he who was dead sat up and began to speak’ (Luke 7.15).

‘And he gave him to his mother’, kai edōken auton tē mētri autou (Kings 17.23).

‘And he gave him to his mother’, kai edōken auton tē mētri autou (Luke 7.15).

The widow recognizes Elijah is a man of God and that ‘the word’ he speaks is the truth (Kings 17.24).

The people recognize Jesus as a great prophet of God and ‘the word’ of this truth spreads everywhere (Luke 7.16-17).

- - - Updated - - -

Saira Khan said:
Rather you can say that Paul's teachings are based on Jesus to some extent. Paul (if any) was converted to faith in Jesus (in 33 CE). Even for those who believe that Paul existed, he never met Jesus in person and he only had heard of Jesus, his teachings and his miracles. Paul was so influenced by all he heard about Jesus that later on he termed Jesus to be the son of God (by his own extreme enthusiasm for Jesus).
Click to expand...

The teachings of Jesus are based on Paul.

I just gave an example.

Also its a basic academic fact.

Kurt Noll says "Early post-Pauline writings transmit favourite Pauline doctrines (such as a declaration that kashrut need not be observed; Mk 7:19b), but shifted these declarations to a new authority figure, Jesus himself."
 
So again, what is your claim now?

- Did Jesus exist?
Based on what you have presented here so far and disregarding all other evidences about the existence of Jesus, you still cannot possibly answer this question.
- The story of Jesus in the Bible was based on Pauls writings?
I could not care less about what false stories are told in the Bible about Jesus because the whole Bible is as corrupt as it can get.
- Cephas was an apostle and not a disciple of Jesus?
Again, I couldn't care less...but how can an apostle be a "messenger" without learning this message first? so aren't all apostles once disciples?
- Philo independently confirms Jesus is the same Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah?
So? I do not get the point here...should that be a different Jesus?

- So the whole Bible about Jesus is not reliable but the writings of Paul about Jesus (who has never ever seen Jesus in his whole life) is reliable?
In my opinion both are equally unreliable.

 
Ümit said:
So again, what is your claim now?

- Did Jesus exist?
Based on what you have presented here so far and disregarding all other evidences about the existence of Jesus, you still cannot possibly answer this question.
- The story of Jesus in the Bible was based on Pauls writings?
I could not care less about what false stories are told in the Bible about Jesus because the whole Bible is as corrupt as it can get.
- Cephas was an apostle and not a disciple of Jesus?
Again, I couldn't care less...but how can an apostle be a "messenger" without learning this message first? so aren't all apostles once disciples?
- Philo independently confirms Jesus is the same Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah?
So? I do not get the point here...should that be a different Jesus?

- So the whole Bible about Jesus is not reliable but the writings of Paul about Jesus (who has never ever seen Jesus in his whole life) is reliable?
In my opinion both are equally unreliable.
Click to expand...


How come Muslims don't point out the Gospels are fiction?

I gave one example above of a miracle of Jesus being plagiarized from the Old Testament.

I showed Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is based on Paul.

Jesus riding on a donkey is from Zechariah 9.

The cleansing of the temple as a fictional scene has its primary inspiration from an ancient faulty translation of Zechariah 14.21 which changed 'Canaanites' to 'traders'.
 
Enochian said:
How come Muslims don't point out the Gospels are fiction?

I gave one example above of a miracle of Jesus being plagiarized from the Old Testament.

I showed Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is based on Paul.

Jesus riding on a donkey is from Zechariah 9.

The cleansing of the temple as a fictional scene has its primary inspiration from an ancient faulty translation of Zechariah 14.21 which changed 'Canaanites' to 'traders'.
Click to expand...

Muslims do not point out the Gospels are fiction, because it isn't. The Gospels are Divine revelations to Isa as (Jesus). We believe the original Gospels as it were revealed to Jesus as truth. However, the Gospels in that original form does not exist anymore. the message is lost.
Therefore, the Gospels as we know today is corrupt and cannot be trusted anymore.
Besides, God gave us a replacement of the Gospels, which is the Quraan. That overwrites the content of the Gospels. In the presence of the Quraan, the Gospels have no authority anymore.
 
Ümit said:
Muslims do not point out the Gospels are fiction, because it isn't. The Gospels are Divine revelations to Isa as (Jesus). We believe the original Gospels as it were revealed to Jesus as truth. However, the Gospels in that original form does not exist anymore. the message is lost.
Therefore, the Gospels as we know today is corrupt and cannot be trusted anymore.
Besides, God gave us a replacement of the Gospels, which is the Quraan. That overwrites the content of the Gospels. In the presence of the Quraan, the Gospels have no authority anymore.
Click to expand...

If Islam doesn't understand the Gospels are fiction, thats a huge red flag to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top