Jesus H Christ: Fiction or Fact


I am inclined to fiction.

You can have your say but please let your say not be the bible this or that; it doesn’t qualify as evidence.

Here and here is some good reading too.

Advertisements

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

75 thoughts on “Jesus H Christ: Fiction or Fact

  1. Tish Farrell says:

    Peter Nothnagle’s essay is totally fascinating. It shows us what we basically know – that humans like a good yarn, and that stories are constantly repeated and remade, which is fine until other agendas kick in, and fiction is presented as truth instead of parable.

    Liked by 5 people

  2. john zande says:

    Agreed. Fiction. A metafictional device invented by 1st century crisis cultists and misinterpreted by the northern diaspora… where the church actually begun (Syria and Turkey, not Israel). Read all the non-synoptic gospels (70+ of them) and this is the only possible conclusion.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. melouisef says:

    What does the H stand for?

    Like

  4. Arkenaten says:

    Excellent essay. Nothnagle tackles this in a no-nonsense, common sense manner.
    The day someone of Ehrman’s standing/popularity comes out and admits Jesus was a work of fiction then the religious will be obliged to sit up and begin to take notice. I suspect he already believes he was a fictitious character but hasn’t managed to sort out in his mind the best way to confess.

    Liked by 1 person

    • makagutu says:

      While Ehrman can reach a big crowd, it is the efforts of small time bloggers like us that has a much bigger effect. We relate with those who frequent our sites almost at a personal level.
      Ehrman is unlikely to go public

      Like

  5. shelldigger says:

    Fiction for anyone with the ability to think for themselves.

    Fact for the rest of them…

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Excellent links. I’ll spend some time perusing them.

    Like

  7. atheistsmeow says:

    Fiction. I have not seen or heard of anyone finding any evidence, & until they do, (unlikely at this stage) I’m not buying.
    I will also check out your links, Makagutu.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. The main problem I have with Mr. Nothnagle’s argument is that he spends good time refuting the reliability of the New Testament, and then goes right ahead and uses the NT as evidence for his own assertions. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth here, and Christians are going to seize on that rather than actually contemplate the dubious nature of the Bible itself. I mean, if the NT is worthless in itself, then it’s worthless as evidence for anything.

    This raises a serious problem: without any evidence either way, there’s nothing which justifies any conclusions about the existence of Jesus. That’s a big gap in knowledge that many Christians would be happy to insert a god into. Without any concrete independent accounts, that will always provide a refuge for Christians to shrug and say, “But I think he’s really real.”

    I think his point could have been better made if he just stuck to the unreliability of the NT.

    Liked by 1 person

    • makagutu says:

      I think most people fall in the trap you mention above and don’t know how to get themselves out of it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Nan says:

      SB, I don’t know if it’s the same thing, but in my book, I pretty much pointed out the fallacy of the bible as a source of inspiration. Yet in chapters about other topics, I used scripture to prove a point. I did this because I was trying to reach believers … and their point of reference is the bible.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Well, my problem is essentially that Mr. Nothnagle says biblical texts can’t be relied upon for any assertions, and then makes an assertion which relies on some parts of the New Testament to be true (specifically, that the epistles had to have been written for a bunch of different churches). He’s arguing from the same position, which diminishes the overall point he’s making.

        This is different than making arguments from different positions in that one doesn’t have to rely on all the positions to be congruous (although it does help for overall persuasive reach, but that’s a whooole other ballgame). Making different arguments is simply trying to reach people via multiple routes. What Mr. Nothnagle did was make one argument that was internally inconsistent.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. koppieop says:

    Historically interesting, but personally I think it is irrelevant. Even if one day evidence convinced me that Jesus existed and, likewise, that the (merciful??) Christian God exists, and that the Immaculate Conception and the Holy Spirit are real, it wouldn’t change my unbelief in any of the so-called miracles, and I wouldn’t send them one single prayer..
    .-

    Like

  10. Real real me says:

    I know your firm opinion about this one, we’ve discussed it. 😀

    Happy new year 🙂

    Like

  11. Love the article “Jesus, Fact or Fiction?”
    Well researched and logical presentation.

    Like

  12. I know this was made as bait, and that’s fine, I’ll take your bait. You don’t want us to use the Bible because in your mind that is just one big “fairytale” even though if you look at every historical document we have ever found during those time periods, it backs up what this historical document states in its pages. But here is my response to your bait that you are just itching to start a troll war with.
    “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”
    C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

    Like

    • john zande says:

      I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher

      Could you identify anything Jesus said which was genuinely revolutionary (new) regarding morals/behaviour?

      Like

      • Can you identify what he said that wasn’t? Just an example: Turn the other cheek, and when that one is slapped, you offer the other.

        Like

        • makagutu says:

          when was the last time you gave the thief who stole your money your ATM card and pin number?

          Like

          • I haven’t but that’s the point! It goes against our very nature. It’s not what we want to do or what makes sense to us to do. Once you know Jesus it changes everything. Here’s another truth for you to chew on that comes from the Bible. “Whoever isn’t against us is for us.”

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            So you are saying your Jesus pronounced a teaching that is unwise and unnatural because I am sure you will not give the man who has murdered your daughter, your son to kill too.

            Like

        • john zande says:

          Turn the other cheek is hardly original or new to jesus. It’s an ancient theme espoused by numerous sages long, long, long Jesus.

          Lao Tzu, said it this way: I treat those who are good with goodness. And I also treat those who are not good with goodness. Thus goodness is attained

          Zhuangzi said it this way: Do good to him who has done you an injury.

          Rishabha said it this way: My Lord! Others have fallen back in showing compassion to their benefactors as you have shown compassion even to your malefactors. All this is unparalleled.

          Mahavira said it this way: Man should subvert anger by forgiveness, subdue pride by modesty, overcome hypocrisy with simplicity, and greed by contentment.

          In Hinduism its said this way: A superior being does not render evil for evil; this is a maxim one should observe; the ornament of virtuous persons is their conduct. One should never harm the wicked or the good or even criminals meriting death. A noble soul will ever exercise compassion even towards those who enjoy injuring others or those of cruel deeds when they are actually committing them–for who is without fault?

          And Siddhartha Gautama said it this way: Conquer anger by love. Conquer evil by good. Conquer the stingy by giving. Conquer the liar by truth.

          So, back to the question, if Jesus was a “great” moral teacher, as you contend, can you name a single new moral directive he gave…

          Surely a “great” teacher would have something new/original/revolutionary to say, right?

          Like

          • I never said he was just a great “moral teacher” I said that he was the Son of God. And what you are going to find new/original/revolutionary is not the same thing that they would have thought of back 2000 years ago. Jesus preached that if you hated someone you had done the same thing as killing them. You had committed murder. He preached that in order to follow him you had to leave your old self behind. Now to me and you these are not revolutionary or new thoughts, but to the Greeks and Jews at the time they were. Here is the thing: even if I put all the evidence out on the table and spelled out in black and white for you how Jesus is the Savior of the world, would it still even sway your view? If not then is there really a reason to have this discussion?

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            There are no gods, saying Jesus was the son of god makes no sense.
            I am open to the evidence of what Jesus is saving the world from.

            Like

          • john zande says:

            He preached that in order to follow him you had to leave your old self behind.

            That’s neither new, original, or revolutionary either. It’s the central theme in all eastern religions. In fact, it’s pretty much the central theme in every religion that requires devotion to a godhead.

            As The Buddha said:

            One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma. For it is when one sees the Dhamma that they see me; and it is when they see me that they see the Dhamma.”‘ [S 22.87]

            And to save you the bother of having to look it up, “Dhamma” (Drhma) has no exact English equivalent. It means many things, but in general, it means ‘right way of living’ and ‘path of righteousness’.

            The root of the word is “dhri”, which means the thing that regulates the course of change by not participating in change, but that principle which remains constant.

            Now to me and you these are not revolutionary or new thoughts, but to the Greeks and Jews at the time they were.

            Nonsense. Buddhism, for example, was known throughout the Middle East. In fact, it’s speculated that Jesus himself was a Buddhist. The Indo-Iranian religions were infused with eastern thought, and those religions in-turn influenced those on the Levant and in Greece.

            Here is the thing: even if I put all the evidence out on the table and spelled out in black and white for you how Jesus is the Savior of the world, would it still even sway your view?

            No, that’s not the thing. You made a claim, stating Jesus was a “great moral teacher.” I asked you to back that claim up.

            You have failed to do so.

            So, unless you can demonstrate something, anything Jesus said which was truly original, or revolutionary, or simply new, you’re just going to have to accept the fact that your statement is wrong: Jesus was not a “great moral teacher.”

            Liked by 1 person

          • Your answer to even if I could pull all the evidence out it would still not sway you tells me you are not truly looking for anyone to give evidence, you are simply looking for others to join you in this half thought out blog post.

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            You have gone down to insults?
            This blog post only directs people to links. If you have a problem with that, take a rope

            Like

          • john zande says:

            And again, that has nothing to do with the claim made.

            You said Jesus was a “great moral teacher.”

            I asked you to back that statement up.

            So far, you have not.

            Can you?

            Like

          • And once again I never said he was a great “moral teacher”. I claimed and continue to claim that he was the Savior of the world. He is my Lord and Savior. My quote that you are questioning is stating that he couldn’t just be called a great moral teacher. He either is who he says he is or a mad man. There is no middle ground. So once again the burden of proof is on your side to prove that either he wasn’t. In any debate the burden of proof is always on the negative. Maybe if other than arguing online if you actually debated in real life more with people you would know this.

            Like

          • john zande says:

            You wrote “great moral teacher”

            So, are you admitting he wasn’t a great moral teacher?

            Yes, or No?

            And perhaps you should look up Burden of Proof, and save yourself any future embarrassment. The burden of proof is on the person making the postitive claim.

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            From whom and what was he saving the world?
            You are committing a fallacy by claiming a false dilemma which I told you earlier is not the case. Do you read? Did you read the two links?

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            Waiting for the answer you will be given

            Liked by 1 person

          • makagutu says:

            When I look at all these, their authors speak plainly and they are practical things.
            To turn the other cheek does not in my view mean the same thing as treating your accuser with kindness. If does, then either Jesus did not speak plainly and as such we can’t know what he meant or he spoke plainly and gave an impossible command.

            Liked by 1 person

      • makagutu says:

        Asking for revolutionary is asking for too much, just ask for anything he taught that he wasn’t quoting someone

        Liked by 1 person

        • john zande says:

          Well, that is essentially what I’m asking our friend here to provide. Something, anything that hadn’t been said before, and often said much, much better by others.

          So far, he’s not doing too good.

          Like

    • makagutu says:

      I know this was made as bait, and that’s fine, I’ll take your bait.

      How do you know? Why would I bait such a one as you? Did you even read the linked articles.
      You don’t know my views about the bible. You are unqualified to make a comment about them.
      So you think there are only two options, madman or son of god? Myth, is the most plausible option.
      And I don’t like to engage with simple minded people like yourself who think every post contrary to their childish beliefs is an invitation to trolls or the author is a troll.

      Like

      • You can’t honestly sit there and tell me that he never existed? There is too many historical documents that aren’t the Bible that state he did. There was a man named Jesus of Nazareth born of Mary. It’s just up to you to determine what you think about his existence. I point to the fact that if this was just some myth like the Greek gods of the same time era, don’t you think this would have gone the same way as them?

        Like

        • makagutu says:

          Have you read anything else other than your bible?
          What are these documents? Do you have a list?

          You can’t honestly sit there and tell me that he never existed?

          I am lying as am typing this. I got tired sitting

          Like

We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s