• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Invention Of Jesus

Nah, don't buy it myself, During early persecution of Christians, they came in for a lot of abuse for their beliefs, but there are no records (as far as i am aware) of people calling out 'Jesus?- pish ! You made him up!' (remembering that when persecution began there were still plenty people around who would know if Jesus was a myth or not) I'm not particularly spiritual (though I believe in some higher power) , I believe in Jesus as a man (and by and large, a very nice and pleasant man!) But I agree that a myth was created AROUND Jesus and we will never know what he thought he really was or what he believed he stood for.:)
Skepticism wasn't exactly big business at the time. You didn't exactly hear people saying "Jupiter? Pish-you made him up, or Hercules? Pish-you made him up, either. It just wasn't done, probably because people were superstitious and didn't want to potentially offend a god they didn't even really know.
 
Skepticism wasn't exactly big business at the time. You didn't exactly hear people saying "Jupiter? Pish-you made him up, or Hercules? Pish-you made him up, either. It just wasn't done, probably because people were superstitious and didn't want to potentially offend a god they didn't even really know.

Yes, but how were the disputes between beliefs conducted back then ? "Your god it's just a shallow idol, mine is the Real Thi..." and then the guy was grilled by a lightning... It's a little weak as a point, you see. How to overthrow a superstition with another ? With few speech and lots of blades ? With false miracles ? With a Stevie Wonder song ?
 
Yes, but surely by using a familiar known setting, set a mere decade or two in the past, people would be bound to call them out on Jesus not existing! Jesus existed , of that I am certain. He himself set himself up to fulfill certain criteria expected of him, and after he died his followers made up a lot of other stuff.

But the core 'History' of Jesus - baptised by John The Baptist, preached (in a unique and confusing way - ie. parables) for a few years, gathered some followers, caused bother beside the temple and was crucified - isn't disputed by any reputable historians (again, that I have come across!)
 
Yes, but how were the disputes between beliefs conducted back then ? "Your god it's just a shallow idol, mine is the Real Thi..." and then the guy was grilled by a lightning... It's a little weak as a point, you see. How to overthrow a superstition with another ? With few speech and lots of blades ? With false miracles ? With a Stevie Wonder song ?
Well, given that one of the few things the Roman Empire made a point of was religious tolerance. If you were prepared to pay your taxes, you could worship your own gods, provided you accepted that Roman Emperors were gods too. In cases of religious dispute, such as a demarcation dispute between priests whose deities seem to have governance over the same area or pursuit, the matter would be referred to the court system and ultimately if not resolved it would eventually on the desk of the Pontifex Maximus who was the final arbiter. No doubt there was also religious thuggery involved, but really the Jews of the day were much like the M.E. is today i.e. a hotbed of sedition and terrorism, tho they called the assassins Sicarii (as in Judas Sicarii/Escariot). Naturally it all ended in tears.
Trajan's Column.jpg
 
Behold! The Jewish Jesus

It's time Christians faced up to the fact that Jesus was Jewish to the core, writes Howard Jacobson, presenter of a new documentary

Source: The Guardian
Date: 8 Jan, 2009

The full article is here:

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.amp...3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s


I haven't quoted from this for a specific reason.

What's the point?

Does it really matter?

As the Old Testament has zero factual merit, consequently anything which relies on same has a manifestly, specious foundation.

Should he have existed, Jesus wasn't the offspring of a hegemonic, devine, entity.

Is the debate therefore regarding historical, cultural and religious distinctions of that era?
 
Behold! The Jewish Jesus

It's time Christians faced up to the fact that Jesus was Jewish to the core, writes Howard Jacobson, presenter of a new documentary

Source: The Guardian
Date: 8 Jan, 2009

The full article is here:

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/09/christianity-judaism?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA=#aoh=15826554128433&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/09/christianity-judaism#aoh=15826554128433&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s


I haven't quoted from this for a specific reason.

What's the point?

Does it really matter?

As the Old Testament has zero factual merit, consequently anything which relies on same has a manifestly, specious foundation.

Should he have existed, Jesus wasn't the offspring of a hegemonic, devine, entity.

Is the debate therefore regarding historical, cultural and religious distinctions of that era?

That a debate exists at all is down to the fact that a lot of people rely upon at least most of this stuff being true to be able to live through the day.

If it is proven that their belief is based on myth, or even simply misunderstanding of ancient happenings, where are they to go ?

The props will have been kicked out from under them.

As I always say, believe in whatever you want. Just don't push it on people who do not wish to know it.

INT21.
 
This probably deserves a thread of it's own, and indeed may even be too toxic to discuss (which in itself says something), but can anyone explain what causes the Jews to become so reviled .

When did this all start ?

INT21.
 
This probably deserves a thread of it's own, and indeed may even be too toxic to discuss (which in itself says something), but can anyone explain what causes the Jews to become so reviled .

When did this all start ?

INT21.
It's probably best not to go there.
 
You are probably right.

Which speaks volumes .
 
This probably deserves a thread of it's own, and indeed may even be too toxic to discuss (which in itself says something), but can anyone explain what causes the Jews to become so reviled . When did this all start ? INT21.
The problem has a number of points of origin. The Jews were always a very insular and stand-off-ish religious culture that regarded everyone else in the world with a measure of hostility as being either Gentiles or Slaves. The blood libel about Jewish cannibalism can be traced to captured Seleucid hoplites allegedly held as prisoners in the Temple of Solomon annex during he Macabee Rebellion, who allegedly saw their comrades being sacrificed and eaten by the officiating priests. This seems pretty damn unlikely given the Levitivcal dietary rules, but rumors persisted for centuries about Jews sacrificing Gentile children on Passover and using their blood to flavor their matzohs. Notably Apollonius of Tyana said of the Jews "We must pity a people who cannot even eat beside their fellow man", in reference to the cautious dietary laws of the Jews. In fact the Levitical dietary prohibitions are very sensible advice if you live in a world without refrigeration. Post refrigeration... not so much, but it isn't as if I have never eaten shellfish on the turn and lived to regret it.

Then there is the issue that the Jews kept getting chucked off their Promised Land, and became the region's perennial refugees. Ultimately this turned the Jews into successful merchants, and they pioneered elements of money lending, tax collection, and tax avoidance via gold notes. The latter, a system that still operates successfully. The Jews also used their insular society to harbor a very effective criminal class. Then there is the issue of jealousy at Jewish success. The fact that Jewish merchants were able to form a bloc in most cities and force out non-Jewish merchants was heavily resented. Obviously being forced to become money lenders during the Middle Ages was calculated to aggravate the populace against the Jews and was a deliberate choice by the Papacy.

Also the success of Jewish scholars who were seen as locking up academic promotion was also bitterly resented by non-Jews and was historically seen as another bloc. The fact is that the Jews as a group look after each other and prefer to see Jews getting promoted, and so they push and publicise each other, and this gets them places. On the other hand, the Jews have produced a large number of excellent academics in virtually every discipline and have loads of well deserved Nobel prizes, and the world has benefited immensely from their academic contributions.

Then there is the separate issue of the Jews in Russia. The hatred of the Jews in Russia is due to the fact that they became the tax collecters for the Russian nobility, and hence became hated by the non-Jewish peasantry, and despised by the Russian nobility as their lickspittles. The Russian nobles were also quick to see the opportunity to deflect blame for their horrible crimes onto the Jews and were authors of many pogroms as a result. This in turn led to a general suspicion of the Jews that culminated in the writing of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as a means of slandering the Jews for all time, and it still gets trotted out by anti-Semites now and again.

Then there is the whole issue of Israel... This earned the Jews a lot more hatred, and the enmity of the Arab world, however that seems to have been dying down for a while as the Arab world has its own problems in light of the Arab Spring and all the regime changes. Jew hating just doesn't have the same lustre when another Muslim sect is blowing you up.

Basically, the Jews are smart and hard working, but not above some dishonesty, while also being seen to be insular outsiders and not willing to acculturate themselves, but resented when they do as they take things over, as they are hard working and competent, and willing to put in time others won't in order to get promoted and build things up. It may not be the "absolute best recipe" for how to permanently piss people off, but it seems to have worked often enough to earn them a good deal of hatred, sometimes for good reason, but mainly from jealousy and misunderstanding. I would add that the hostility goes both ways, and there are plenty of Jews who really don't like or trust non-Jews, and historically that is also not without reason.
 
Last edited:
Oh, come, Myth.

Surely you have faith that the membership can broach this challenging subject without lapsing into current geopolitical and crude cultural stereotypes?

I think that @Mythopoeika care in approaching a subject that can evolve from volatile to explosive very fast is reasonable. The sheer multiplicity of silent readers all around generates an imprevisibility factor in discussions like this one.

I also hope, like @Yithian, that the same way most of the subjects trated by the regular posters / commentators, this discussion can be enlightening and civile.

@AlchoPwn comment is well balanced, informative, objective and honest. Let's take it as a lead to develop such delicate subject.
 
Indeed, the 'real' Jesus was a Jewish, brown man from the Middle East. He was a rabbi and taught social justice. Many Christians I know (and I am a Christian too) can visualise him in this reality and extol his background.

We are not all blinkered fundamentalists.

The anti-semitism of Europe stems from the mediaeval period, when the notion of the blood libel gained traction. England was one of the first nation states to expel its Jews, wholesale, in 1290. This followed earlier bloody pogroms and violence related to the myths of the blood libel:

https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Pogroms-1189-1190/
 
Indeed, given the geographical location of his birth it'd ludicrous to portray him as being white.
On the contrary, Jesus is obviously a very Aryan looking Jew, and always has been. I mean, look at all the centuries of art depicting him from Roman times. I mean, have you ever seen Muslim art depicting Jesus as a Semite? I think not. In fact they are so bad at drawing there aren't even any decent pictures of Mohammed, so perhaps he was white as well?
 
Skepticism wasn't exactly big business at the time. You didn't exactly hear people saying "Jupiter? Pish-you made him up, or Hercules? Pish-you made him up, either. It just wasn't done, probably because people were superstitious and didn't want to potentially offend a god they didn't even really know.

so is there any evidence to back this up? Not saying you are wrong - as always I'm very interested.
 
so is there any evidence to back this up? Not saying you are wrong - as always I'm very interested.
Sorry, my post was meant as a humorous dig at different cultures and their attitudes towards religious art. My honest opinion ( humor aside) is that I think the jury is still out on the question of the existence of Jesus, let alone what he looked like.
 
My honest opinion ( humor aside) is that I think the jury is still out on the question of the existence of Jesus, let alone what he looked like.
I read somewhere that Jesus was supposedly a short fellow with a hunchback. This website seems to suggest that I may have read that in my Colin Wilson books.
https://www.riaanbooysen.com/barbelo/physical-appearances-jesus-and-paul
“The Romans issued a wanted poster for Jesus, which still survives, describing him as short (about four foot six), bald-headed, and hump-backed“

That means he was shorter than my Mum (4’ 11”) and she is the shortest person I know.

T63
 
If you check out that link up there, it's a bunch of Romans of later years quoting each other. There was no Roman "wanted poster" of Jesus. The Romans really didn't care. They considered the inhabitants of Judaea to be among the more annoying of their subjects, but not (yet) prone to insurrection, and were happy to leave law enforcement where possible to the hereditary king as long as the taxes were paid an no one was frightening horses in the street. During the period of his life there were several other people wandering around Judaea claiming to be prophets. The establishment Jews of the period were the people that were demanding that he be arrested, as I remember for heresy, but I'm not a scholar of the period so please correct me, and if he in fact attacked the money-lenders that would also not have been popular in the establishment. There are enough mentions in Roman documents of a Joshua with followers who was a minor annoyance that I think we can assume he existed. The terribly interesting process is what happened next - how the mythos was created and institutionalized, which was a pretty messy business. And of course he looked middle-eastern, that's where he came from. There is ongoing turmoil in the "where and when did the Jews arise" area right now, but it's pretty sensible to assume they were what we now call Bedouins.
 
The problem has a number of points of origin. The Jews were always a very insular and stand-off-ish religious culture that regarded everyone else in the world with a measure of hostility as being either Gentiles or Slaves. The blood libel about Jewish cannibalism can be traced to captured Seleucid hoplites allegedly held as prisoners in the Temple of Solomon annex during he Macabee Rebellion, who allegedly saw their comrades being sacrificed and eaten by the officiating priests. This seems pretty damn unlikely given the Levitivcal dietary rules, but rumors persisted for centuries about Jews sacrificing Gentile children on Passover and using their blood to flavor their matzohs. Notably Apollonius of Tyana said of the Jews "We must pity a people who cannot even eat beside their fellow man", in reference to the cautious dietary laws of the Jews. In fact the Levitical dietary prohibitions are very sensible advice if you live in a world without refrigeration. Post refrigeration... not so much, but it isn't as if I have never eaten shellfish on the turn and lived to regret it.

Then there is the issue that the Jews kept getting chucked off their Promised Land, and became the region's perennial refugees. Ultimately this turned the Jews into successful merchants, and they pioneered elements of money lending, tax collection, and tax avoidance via gold notes. The latter, a system that still operates successfully. The Jews also used their insular society to harbor a very effective criminal class. Then there is the issue of jealousy at Jewish success. The fact that Jewish merchants were able to form a bloc in most cities and force out non-Jewish merchants was heavily resented. Obviously being forced to become money lenders during the Middle Ages was calculated to aggravate the populace against the Jews and was a deliberate choice by the Papacy.

Also the success of Jewish scholars who were seen as locking up academic promotion was also bitterly resented by non-Jews and was historically seen as another bloc. The fact is that the Jews as a group look after each other and prefer to see Jews getting promoted, and so they push and publicise each other, and this gets them places. On the other hand, the Jews have produced a large number of excellent academics in virtually every discipline and have loads of well deserved Nobel prizes, and the world has benefited immensely from their academic contributions.

Then there is the separate issue of the Jews in Russia. The hatred of the Jews in Russia is due to the fact that they became the tax collecters for the Russian nobility, and hence became hated by the non-Jewish peasantry, and despised by the Russian nobility as their lickspittles. The Russian nobles were also quick to see the opportunity to deflect blame for their horrible crimes onto the Jews and were authors of many pogroms as a result. This in turn led to a general suspicion of the Jews that culminated in the writing of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as a means of slandering the Jews for all time, and it still gets trotted out by anti-Semites now and again.

Then there is the whole issue of Israel... This earned the Jews a lot more hatred, and the enmity of the Arab world, however that seems to have been dying down for a while as the Arab world has its own problems in light of the Arab Spring and all the regime changes. Jew hating just doesn't have the same lustre when another Muslim sect is blowing you up.

Basically, the Jews are smart and hard working, but not above some dishonesty, while also being seen to be insular outsiders and not willing to acculturate themselves, but resented when they do as they take things over, as they are hard working and competent, and willing to put in time others won't in order to get promoted and build things up. It may not be the "absolute best recipe" for how to permanently piss people off, but it seems to have worked often enough to earn them a good deal of hatred, sometimes for good reason, but mainly from jealousy and misunderstanding. I would add that the hostility goes both ways, and there are plenty of Jews who really don't like or trust non-Jews, and historically that is also not without reason.
Just poking around in this older thread and I do have to say: "Harbor a criminal class"? "Not above some dishonesty"? Don't think so and no more than all the other people in the world. "Prefer to see Jews geting promoted"? Not in my observation. Why the Russians persecuted them and they were driven out of other countries? Something to do with wanting the land and accumulated assets probably. And a great target when the people in power were doing a poor job and needed to deflect. And in every society there were a normal number of poor Jews. You can't both see them all as successful merchants, teachers and money-lenders and also enjoy Fiddler on the Roof, which was in fact extremely accurate because my grandmother told me it was. An objectionable lot of unverifiable generalizations in this post.
 
Back
Top