# Guys guys. I'm starting to stop thinking Jesus existed.
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [October 29, 2013, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527 "2013-10-29T04:11:43Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 4
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/61 "2013-10-29T19:13:00Z")
> [@Skammer](#):
>
> So Peter and James were talking about Jesus in Jerusalem before Paul wrote his earliest epistles? Wouldn’t there still have been eyewitnesses around? There just doesn’t seem to be enough time to create the Jesus myth out of nothing.
No, the idea is that Peter and James weren’t talking about an earthly Jesus either. That notion (on this hypothesis) isn’t supposed to have arisen until later. Probably after Mark was written.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/62 "2013-10-29T19:59:08Z")
Another important point is that Paul was actively opposed to the Christian movement before his conversion and was trying to stamp it out. So if Jesus was a made-up figure Paul would have known this and have used this as part of his campaign to suppress Christianity. And after his conversion, he would have been specifically refuting the idea that Jesus wasn’t real.
But Paul doesn’t mention it in either aspect. It appears that neither the supporters or the opponents of Christianity raised the issue of Jesus’ existence. Everyone at the time accepted that he had been a real person.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/63 "2013-10-29T20:37:32Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#):
>
> Another important point is that Paul was actively opposed to the Christian movement before his conversion and was trying to stamp it out. So if Jesus was a made-up figure Paul would have known this and have used this as part of his campaign to suppress Christianity. And after his conversion, he would have been specifically refuting the idea that Jesus wasn’t real.
>
> But Paul doesn’t mention it in either aspect. It appears that neither the supporters or the opponents of Christianity raised the issue of Jesus’ existence. Everyone at the time accepted that he had been a real person.
So it’s clear, right, that the suggestion of the OP isn’t that the first believers were intentionally engaging in fiction or deception, but rather, that the first believers were (or were claiming to) have visionary experiences and offer interpretations of OP scripture?
The fact that Jesus wasn’t a physical human wouldn’t have been a criticism of the movement, if they’d never claimed otherwise.
---
### Author:  [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/64 "2013-10-29T20:43:12Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> The basic idea is this. If you read the New Testament books in the order in which they were written, you begin with Paul. Reading Paul as though for the first time, you learn that he has a story to tell about a figure who was crucified and rose from the death, and that this death has redemptive significance. Paul says he got this information from two sources: From scripture, and from that being himself. He calls the being Jesus Christ.
This is incorrect. Paul is, on many occasions, careful to indicate that he received teachings about Jesus from other members of the church, specifically the apostles in Jerusalem, and is passing along those teachings to his audience, or has already done so. While both the Book of Acts and Paul’s own explanation in Galatians agree that Paul persecuted the church until the moment when he heard Christ speaking on the road to Damascus, they also both agree that afterwords Paul sought out the Apostles in order to make sure that his teachings were accurate.
Paul also says, directly, that some of what he taught to his converts is material that he learned from other Christians. The most clear examples are in 1 Cor 15:3 (“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received”) and 1 Cor 11:22-23 (“For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you”). The Greek phrase that he uses is _paralambano apo Kyrios_ (“received from the Lord”), which specifically indicates a tradition or belief transmitted from a teacher or preacher to listeners. Hence Paul is saying that he learned these things about Jesus from other people and not part of his direct revelation on the road to Damascus. ([Cite](http://www.bede.org.uk/price4.htm))
On top of that, Paul’s letters contain many creeds, liturgies, and hymns that were circulating in the early church. In some cases, he specifically says that he is repeating something from others; in other cases, it’s clear from the linguistic evidence. In total, the evidence shows very strongly that Paul learned a large amount about Jesus from what others taught, and not solely from scripture and the Damascus Road revelation.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/65 "2013-10-29T20:59:53Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#):
>
> 1 Cor 15:3 (“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received”)
I don’t see information there about where he had received the information from. What am I missing?
> [@](#):
>
> and 1 Cor 11:22-23 (“For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you”). The Greek phrase that he uses is _paralambano apo Kyrios_ (“received from the Lord”), which specifically indicates a tradition or belief transmitted from a teacher or preacher to listeners.
Do you know of cases where the phrase “receieved from X” is used where it wasn’t directly from X? Also, are there no cases where it _is_ directly from X?
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/66 "2013-10-29T21:13:55Z")
Regarding 1 Cor 11:22-23, there are other passages in Paul where that grammatical construction is used for direct telling, not passing information between intermediate agents. And if 1 Cor 11:22-23 were read in the latter way, it would be a very strange passage. It would be saying “I learned from X that X learned from Jesus that Jesus broke bread on the night of his crucifixion etc…”
Shouldn’t it instead say “I learned from X that X learned from Y (not Jesus, presumably an apostle) that Jesus broke bread etc…”? Why would Jesus teach somebody that Jesus broke bread? Of course that wouldn’t make sense. Paul would have recieved this information (via intermediaries) from a _witness_ to Jesus’s actions, not from Jesus himself.
On the “direct telling” reading, the passage makes perfect sense. Jesus told him what Jesus did on the night he was crucified.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/67 "2013-10-29T21:14:09Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> So it’s clear, right, that the suggestion of the OP isn’t that the first believers were intentionally engaging in fiction or deception, but rather, that the first believers were (or were claiming to) have visionary experiences and offer interpretations of OP scripture?
>
> The fact that Jesus wasn’t a physical human wouldn’t have been a criticism of the movement, if they’d never claimed otherwise.
If that’s your contention, then I think you are wrong.
First, you’re wrong in what Jesus’ followers were saying. There is no evidence that Jesus’ followers regarded him as just a visionary experience. The earliest recorded accounts we have of and about his followers describe Jesus as a human being.
Second, you’re wrong in thinking this wouldn’t have had an effect. If Jesus was a visionary experience rather than a human being, the opponents of Christianity would have been quick to seize on that and use it as a means of denouncing the movement. There is no way that the non-existence of Jesus would have been ignored by anti-Christians.
---
### Author:  [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/68 "2013-10-29T21:14:12Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> The actual words of Paul, in their most immediate sense, seem to imply about Jesus nothing other than “There’s a heavenly being who was crucified by demons, but rose again, and this is good for us. I got this information from scripture, and from that being himself in personal visions and revelations.” Nothing in there about a historical human being at all.
Paul does not say that Jesus was crucified by demons. Rather, he specifically says that Jesus was crucified by humans in positions of authority: “Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” [1 Cor 2:8] Those who wish to argue that Paul didn’t think Jesus was a flesh-and-blood human have to argue that this verse doesn’t refer to earthly rulers, but rather to demons. However the Greek word that Paul uses for rulers is _archon_, which is used throughout the New Testament to refer to kings and other authority figures. It is never used to refer to demons, except once where the phrase _“archon exouisa aer”_ is used specifically to indicate a purely spiritual power. On top of that, if we read 1 Cor 2:8 in its proper context, we see that two verses earlier, Paul very specifically indicated that he was talking about human leaders on earth, which rules out the ‘demon’ theory.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/69 "2013-10-29T21:20:54Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#):
>
> If that’s your contention, then I think you are wrong.
>
> First, you’re wrong in what Jesus’ followers were saying. There is no evidence that Jesus’ followers regarded him as just a visionary experience. The earliest recorded accounts we have of and about his followers describe Jesus as a human being.
>
> Second, you’re wrong in thinking this wouldn’t have had an effect. If Jesus was a visionary experience rather than a human being, the opponents of Christianity would have been quick to seize on that and use it as a means of denouncing the movement. There is no way that the non-existence of Jesus would have been ignored by anti-Christians.
I don’t know… did you read the OP?
Regarding your second point–visionary experiences were par for the course back then. And however strange it might seem to you and me, people tended to beleive them by default so long as the visionary was morally upright and knowledgable about the relevant scriptures or religious lore.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/70 "2013-10-29T21:21:55Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#):
>
> Paul does not say that Jesus was crucified by demons. Rather, he specifically says that Jesus was crucified by humans in positions of authority: “Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” [1 Cor 2:8]
On this the consensus agrees with ahistoricists: “Princes of this world” does not refer to people but to evil spiritual beings.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/71 "2013-10-29T21:26:41Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> On this the consensus agrees with ahistoricists: “Princes of this world” does not refer to people but to evil spiritual beings.
I misremembered. It’s something scholars are divided about. Sorry to not have an online cite, and I don’t claim to have read this myself, but apparently in the book _A Translator’s Handbook for 1 Corinthians,_ on page 46, the author even opines that _most_ NT scholars think it refers to spiritual entities.
---
### Author:  [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/72 "2013-10-29T21:30:20Z")
**Frylock** , I haven’t read as much on this as you have, but what I have read has convinced me that we really don’t have enough evidence one way or the other. I disagree that the most natural reading of Paul suggests that Jesus was a purely mythical figure, but I do think that it’s a plausible, if somewhat unlikely, reading.
The main thing the mythicists have brought to the fore is the weakness of the arguments _for_ a historical Jesus. **Deltasigmna** ’s arguments are simply untrue. There was a flourishing of apocalyptic literature such as the books of Enoch around the turn of the era that show close parallels with later Christian theology and clearly describe a heavenly, purely supernatural being acting as the savior or messiah of Israel. Modern rabbinic Judaism also has its origins in that period, but those traditions didn’t become dominant until after the destruction of the Temple. (Likewise, Gnostic and Docetist Christian traditions seem pretty early and virtually indistinguishable from those apocalyptic and Gnostic Jewish traditions.)
I find the historicisation of a purely mythic figure in a relatively short period of time to be unlikely, and I haven’t read of any similar occurrences, but it seems possible.
All we really have are the NT texts, which are unreliable at best and full of miracles. There’s no other evidence one way or the other. If I say that I saw a werewolf transform from a man into a wolf yesterday, it’s pretty clear that I’m either lying or mistaken. But is it more likely that I actually saw a real person (or real animal) or that I made the whole thing up? I don’t think you can answer that question, or even clearly define the alternatives (since it’s unlikely that I saw NO people or animals yesterday). It’s the same with Jesus.
---
### Author:  [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/73 "2013-10-29T21:39:46Z")
There is no actual evidence one way or the other, but I see nothing unsusual in a Jesus-type figure existing as a real preacher. Such guys were, according to Josephus, not unusual in that time and place - ancient Israel was an unsettled place under Roman occupation, with all variety of religious opinions being pushed by various preachers with millenialism on their minds, culminating in the great revolt.
In point of fact, millenialism is a well-known phenominon in anthropology and shows up all over the world, when a society feels, for whatever reason, that it is under some sort of existential threat, or the authority of the usual traditional authority-figures has been discredited or has started to break down. People start to look for alternatives and to anticipate the end of the order they have known - effectively, the end of the world [though more prosaically, merely the end of _their_ world]. Some seek revolutionaries and other seek mystics.
First-century Israel was clearly such a place.
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/74 "2013-10-29T21:45:20Z")
> [@Alan\_Smithee](#):
>
> The main thing the mythicists have brought to the fore is the weakness of the arguments _for_ a historical Jesus. **Deltasigmna** ’s arguments are simply untrue.
You’ve obviously misunderstood me. The Essenes, to whom I’ve previously referred in this context, are the archetypal example of the sort of thing you’re talking about but the type of apocalypse they envisioned was one led by a conquering victorious Messiah.
This is paralleled in Christian literature of course such as the Revelation of John on Patmos, but what we’re talking about here is a suffering Messiah. Show me where you find THAT in the Jewish tradition.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/75 "2013-10-29T21:53:52Z")
Again, it doesn’t have to be found in “the Jewish tradition.” My claim isn’t that “suffering messiahs were common.” My claim is this: “It is not implausible that a jewish group would interpret the relevant passages as involving a suffering messiah.” My argument for that claim is basically this. For one thing, it’s not implausible because we don’t know enough about the beliefs of jewish sects back then to know what’s probable and what’s not. For another thing, it’s not implausible because several OT passages have “plain readings” that clearly give an impression of a suffering messianic figure. Finally, it’s not implausible because we actually do have an example of a jewish group interpreting the relevant passages as involving a suffering messiah–namely, the early christians.
---
### Author:  [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/76 "2013-10-29T21:54:50Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> You’ve obviously misunderstood me. The Essenes, to whom I’ve previously referred in this context, are the archetypal example of the sort of thing you’re talking about but the type of apocalypse they envisioned was one led by a conquering victorious Messiah.
>
> This is paralleled in Christian literature of course such as the Revelation of John on Patmos, but what we’re talking about here is a suffering Messiah. Show me where you find THAT in the Jewish tradition.
Sorry, you’re right. But as **Frylock** pointed out, we know with certainty that there was at least one. I think I recall reading about a specific non-Christian Jewish example, but I’ll have to look for the reference (and I do remember that the dating of it was rather tentative; some scholars claimed it was forged/interpolated/influenced by Christians, though that seemed very unlikely to me). And based on the variety of the agreed-upon apocalyptic texts and the broad ways they interpret and expand on Jewish scripture, I don’t think you can say that Isaiah couldn’t have been interpreted that way.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/77 "2013-10-29T21:59:21Z")
I don’t know anything about this other than what I just found on Wikipedia, but apparently there may be at least one 1st century BC record of a messianic figure being killed: [Gabriel's Revelation - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel%27s_Revelation)
Could be worth following up on.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/78 "2013-10-29T22:06:48Z")
Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai, active in the second half of the 1st centry CE, says about Isaiah 53:
> [@](#):
>
> The meaning of the words Bruised for our iniquities’ [Isaiah 53:5] is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of his being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer them for them himself.” (What the Rabbonim Say About Moshiach, Douglas Pyle)
Could be Christian influence I guess. But also renders further unsupported the claim that such interpretations among jews at the time would be implausible.
---
### Author:  [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/79 "2013-10-29T22:07:27Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> Again, it doesn’t have to be found in “the Jewish tradition.” My claim isn’t that “suffering messiahs were common.” My claim is this: “It is not implausible that a jewish group would interpret the relevant passages as involving a suffering messiah.” My argument for that claim is basically this. For one thing, it’s not implausible because we don’t know enough about the beliefs of jewish sects back then to know what’s probable and what’s not. For another thing, it’s not implausible because several OT passages have “plain readings” that clearly give an impression of a suffering messianic figure. Finally, it’s not implausible because we actually do have an example of a jewish group interpreting the relevant passages as involving a suffering messiah–namely, the early christians.
Way I see it the likely progression of the development of Christianity went something like this:
(1) Israel at the time was going through severe cultural, religious and political troubles;
(2) As a result, some preacher - called Jesus - started an explicitly millenial movement which predicted the end of the world, along with assorted other teachings;
(3) His activities attracted a following, which sufficiently alarmed the Roman authorities that they had him executed;
(4) Unlike most millenial movements, his movement did not fall apart when he died and the millenium refused to happen;
(5) The reason his movement failed to fall apart: his followers put together an attractive theology based on the suffering messiah’s death - an innovation, and a brilliant one, as usually having one’s messiah killed with no result pretty well proved he wasn’t the messiah in the first place (see Bar Kokhba) - and a notion of delayed millenialism which proved very attractive;
(6) In writing down the accounts of his life and teachings, his followers adapted and emphasized stuff to fit with this modified theology;
(7) Part of which was to look to Biblical (that is, OT) prophesy with an eye to claiming any likely bits as supporting this new, modified theology.
The point is that of course early Christians found bits and pieces which, round peg in square hole fashion, they could interpret as supporting their position: in their worldview, Biblical sources lent legitimacy. A plain reading, however, would not lead a disinterested reader to come to the same conclusion, as one can read the stuff now and see.
---
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [October 29, 2013, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527/80 "2013-10-29T22:17:23Z")
I have a lot of trouble with Paul’s epistles. He thought himself the 13th Apostle and spoke quite a bit about what Christianity should be, but I think it was more of Paul’s version of Christianity and not Jesus. You would think that if Jesus were so anti-woman and anti-homosexual it would appear somewhere in the Gospels.
For ITR champion, how much of Paul’s characterization of Jesus comes from the early church’s trying to figure out Jesus’ nature: all man, all God or half and half?
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527.md?page=3)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guys-guys-im-starting-to-stop-thinking-jesus-existed/672527.md?page=5)