# Jesus: Myth, or Man? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 7, 2016, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392 "2016-01-07T03:02:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/261 "2016-01-08T18:39:49Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > It’s up for grabs in Scholarly circles whether Jews at that time and place even had an expectation that there was going to be some “the Messiah” figure–they, or a lot of them, might have thought there would be several, or that that a Messiah is just a type of person rather than a special specific prophesied person, and there are other ideas attested as well. > > And there is no clear, strong grounding for any claims about what jews at that time “would have said” or “would have found believable” about a wide range of ideas about the concept of Messiah, because the diversity we _do_ see in relevant sources, together with what we know about how much was lost, makes any such claim a weak one at best. > > We just don’t know a lot of the stuff we assume we know when it comes to this. There was indeed a range of opinion over time as to who a “messiah” was (one figure or several? Did it have to be a Jew? Note again, the only individual specifically identified as a messiah was Cyrus, a Persian) - but there was also a lot of commonality within that range. Cyrus as the messiah: [Cyrus the Messiah? The Historical Background to Isaiah 45:1 : Fried, L. S. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive](https://archive.org/details/CyrusTheMessiahTheHistoricalBackgroundToIsaiah451) It isn’t factually and historically the case that a messiah is an incoherent or undefined concept, so that anyone or anything could possibly be a messiah. The commonality is that the messiah is, was, or is going to be a _success_ - that he will “save” the Jews. The term originally referred to the “anointing” of a person for a task (priest or king): that “task” was saving the people. Hence Cyrus, a king, could be “anointed” for the purpose of saving the Jews from captivity. The proof was in the pudding: Cyrus was anointed because he carried out the task. The controversy arose when that individual became a longed-for expectation. Was this figure to be a king or priest? Would he save the Jews, or the entire world? Would it usher in the end of days, or just a respite? Messiah-as-failure, though, isn’t within the original concept. ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/262 "2016-01-08T18:55:01Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > > [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > > > I have read a great deal about it. What books would you recommend? > > FWIW this looks to be a relevant work … > I haven’t read it. Oy vey :smack: ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/263 "2016-01-08T18:57:11Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > You’re telling me you’ve read a great deal about it, yet think there is a clear consensus about what the jewish expectation of messiah was? > > What books do _you_ recommend? [The Jewish Encyclopedia, for starters.](http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10729-messiah) It’s a bit out of date, but I’m not aware of any ancient documents that have come to light recently which would greatly affect this question. In the time frame of Jesus’s life, there was not _absolute_ uniformity of Jewish expectations about the Messiah, but expectations did fall within a fairly narrow band. All sources for a substantial time before the life of Jesus that mention the Messiah agree that the Messiah will be kingly and power, defeating enemies and reigning on earth. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/264 "2016-01-08T19:08:41Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > People say all manner of things, but I’ve never seen this asserted in any informed discussion. What is asserted is that a humiliating death by crucifixion would mitigate against respecting the victim as the mashiach. On some google searching, the best reference I can find is the Wikipedia article on the Criterion of Embarrassment, which asserts that John P Meier’s work _A Marginal Jew_ argues no one would have made up the story of the crucifixion since it was so shameful. There’s one–assuming Wikipedia is accurate in saying Meier said that. (In searching though I did find this other book tangentially but possibly interestingly relevant by a (conservative evangelical) scholar David Chapman titled _Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion_ which, in the preface, seems to show pretty well that until recently, specifically _Jewish_ perceptions of crucifixion hadn’t really been studied. The rest of the book goes on to try to close that gap in the scholarship, and along the way (according to a review of the book) gives both examples of it being regarded as shameful _and_ examples of it being regarded as a mark of martyrdom.) Anyway it could be that the idea that this was an embarrassing death for Jesus which “no one would have made up” simply because of the shamefulness of crucifixion is an idea more common among apologists than historians. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/265 "2016-01-08T19:09:50Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > Oy vey :smack: What’s that about? ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/266 "2016-01-08T19:10:28Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Did you read his autobiography? I even included a link. Yes, although it was years ago. > [@DrDeth](#): > > I even included a link. You wrote: “He knew the Sanhedrin, was related to them, was part of that caste.” [ul] [li]Where does he reference the Sanhedrin or, for that matter, Hillel?[/li][li]To what cast are you referring? The Nasi?[/li][/ul] ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/267 "2016-01-08T19:15:37Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > [The Jewish Encyclopedia, for starters.](http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10729-messiah) It’s a bit out of date, but I’m not aware of any ancient documents that have come to light recently which would greatly affect this question. > > In the time frame of Jesus’s life, there was not _absolute_ uniformity of Jewish expectations about the Messiah, but expectations did fall within a fairly narrow band. All sources for a substantial time before the life of Jesus that mention the Messiah agree that the Messiah will be kingly and power, defeating enemies and reigning on earth. Yes, that article I have read. To my recollection it makes no representation as to how complete our understanding is, or as to whether there’s a clear scholarly consensus on what _the_ range of messianic views was – rather, it only explains those things we _do_ know that some Jews said at some time. I can’t read the thing right now though. Do I recall incorrectly? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/268 "2016-01-08T19:17:42Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > Oy vey :smack: You do know, by the way, that you broke a rule on the modification of quotations, correct? And not in a trivial way. You made it look like I was responding to something I was not responding to. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/269 "2016-01-08T19:25:37Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > Yes, although it was years ago. > You wrote: “He knew the Sanhedrin, was related to them, was part of that caste.” > > [ul] > [li]Where does he reference the Sanhedrin or, for that matter, Hillel?[/li][li]To what cast are you referring? The Nasi?[/li][/ul] Hillel was dead before Josephus’s time, but is included in some of his histories- but not his autobiography. Have you read: [http://sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/autobiog.htm](http://sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/autobiog.htm) He was actually around at the time of the execution of James the Just. He was part of the Priestly order of Jehoiarib and was known and major force in Jerusalem at that time. > **[The Sanhedrin](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-sanhedrin)** > > Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism. “The earliest record of a Sanhedrin is by Josephus who wrote of a political Sanhedrin convened by the Romans in 57 B.C.E. Hellenistic sources generally depict the Sanhedrin as a political and judicial council headed by the country’s ruler.” > **[The Jewish Encyclopedia: Talmud-Zweifel](https://books.google.com/books?id=iFpLAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA143&lpg=PA143&dq=Josephus%2Bat%2Bfirst%2Bsought%2Bto%2Bannul%2Bthe%2Bdecision%2Bof%2Bthe%2BSanhedrin&source=bl&ots=3WoRVGWnLm&sig=mL75MIXzqIfymuaQ6fWJ_bVv4Gg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiB17-i-JrKAhXH1R4KHe2lAKQQ6AEIIjAB#v=onepage&q=Josephus%20at%20first%20sought%20to%20annul%20the%20decision%20of%20the%20Sanhedrin&f=false)** [https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud\_0002\_0011\_0\_10345.html](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0011_0_10345.html) He was actually an envoy of the Sanhedrin. Can’t you read for yourself? Do you have any cites that dispute what I am claiming? ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/270 "2016-01-08T19:27:39Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > On some google searching, the best reference I can find is the Wikipedia article on the Criterion of Embarrassment, which asserts that John P Meier’s work _A Marginal Jew_ argues no one would have made up the story of the crucifixion since it was so shameful. There’s one–assuming Wikipedia is accurate in saying Meier said that. No.The argument was not that Jews would not respect a crucified preacher, but that they would not respect a crucified preacher as the Mashiach. Jews have a fairly robust list of [**martyers**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Jewish_martyrs), and to suggest that we would not respect them because of the degrading nature of their death is ignorant, ludicrous, and insulting. As for Meier, you would do well to actually read the book. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/271 "2016-01-08T19:36:14Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > As for Meier, you would do well to actually read the book. Which one? ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/272 "2016-01-08T19:46:59Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Hillel was dead before Josephus’s time, but is included in some of his histories- but not his autobiography. You misses the point. You speak of Josephus being part of some cast and seem to suggest that this is supported by his autobiography. The closest thing to a cast associated with the Sanhedrin was the House of Hillel. Or, to quote [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin) … > [@](#): > > Before 191 BC the High Priest acted as the ex officio head of the Sanhedrin,[citation needed] but in 191 BCE, when the Sanhedrin lost confidence in the High Priest, the office of Nasi was created. After the time of Hillel the Elder (late 1st century BCE and early 1st century CE), the Nasi was almost invariably a descendant of Hillel. The second highest-ranking member of the Sanhedrin was called the Av Beit Din, or “Head of the Court” (literally, Av Beit Din = “father of the house of judgment”), who presided over the Sanhedrin when it sat as a criminal court. Yet his Autobiography makes no reference to the Sanhedrin, makes no reference to the Nasi, and makes no reference to Hillel. So, again, where in this Autobiography is there support you your contention that “He knew the Sanhedrin, was related to them, was part of that caste”? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/273 "2016-01-08T19:53:24Z")
Ehrman in “Did Jesus Exist” argues that Paul wouldn’t normally have believed Jesus could be the Messiah because of the crucifixion–but the idea isn’t just that the Messiah isn’t supposed to die or be defeated, the idea is that by being crucified, Jesus was put into a state of shame and humiliation. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/274 "2016-01-08T19:58:35Z")
In summaries of Meiers’ work, I am finding it said that he does in fact argue that Jesus wouldn’t have been believed in because crucifixion is _shameful_, not just because it disqualified him from messiahship. (Gentile converts would not have cared so deeply, if at all in many cases, about the latter issue. And here I am, to be clear, changing the subject slightly since I’m talking explicitly about greek and roman culture now as well as jewish culture.) Do you disagree that he argues this? ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/275 "2016-01-08T19:59:14Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Ehrman in “Did Jesus Exist” argues that Paul wouldn’t normally have believed Jesus could be the Messiah because of the crucifixion–but the idea isn’t just that the Messiah isn’t supposed to die or be defeated, the idea is that by being crucified, Jesus was put into a state of shame and humiliation. According to you. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/276 "2016-01-08T20:02:21Z")
> [@bup](#): > > I agree. While recognizing it’s not ironclad proof, what we have makes me think they were basing it on a real guy. One piece of prophecy fulfillment I didn’t see mentioned in this thread is that the Messiah is supposed to have been dead 3 days and then resurrected. Nobody would have \*ever \*said three days meant “dying on Friday and missing from the tomb by the time anyone showed up Sunday dawn,” until there was a need to do so. Actually, that’s precisely the way Romans counted time. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/277 "2016-01-08T20:04:20Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > According to you. I guess I recommend you read the book? Or something? I don’t know what game we’re playing. It’s at Kindle location 2336 and following. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/278 "2016-01-08T20:08:12Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > You misses the point. You speak of Josephus being part of some cast and seem to suggest that this is supported by his autobiography. The closest thing to a cast associated with the Sanhedrin was the House of Hillel. Or, to quote [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin) …Yet his Autobiography makes no reference to the Sanhedrin, makes no reference to the Nasi, and makes no reference to Hillel. > > So, again, where in this Autobiography is there support you your contention that “He knew the Sanhedrin, was related to them, was part of that caste”? As I said, He was part of the Priestly order of Jehoiarib. I never mentioned Hillel or the Nasi. You didnt even bother to read his autobiography, then.\* " Now, as soon as I was come into Galilee, and had learned this state of things by the information of such as told me of them, I wrote to the sanhedrim at Jerusalem about them, and required their direction what I should do. Their direction was, that I should continue there, and that, if my fellow legates were willing, I should join with them in the care of Galilee. But those my fellow legates, having gotten great riches from those tithes which as priests were their dues, and were given to them, determined to return to their own country. Yet when I desired them to stay so long, that we might first settle the public affairs, they complied with me. So I removed, together with them, from the city of Sepphoris, and came to a certain village called Bethmaus, four furlongs distant from Tiberius; and thence I sent messengers to the senate of Tiberius, and desired that the principal men of the city would come to me: and when they were come, Justus himself being also with them, I told them that I was sent to them by the people of Jerusalem as a legate, together with these other priests, in order to persuade them to demolish that house which Herod the tetrarch had built there, and which had the figures of living creatures in it, although our laws have forbidden us to make any such figures; and I desired that they would give us leave so to do immediately. B \* Nor have you read my other cites, such as [https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud\_0002\_0011\_0\_10345.html](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0011_0_10345.html) \*overall command given to Josephus by the Sanhedrin, since his account of his operations in Galilee (contained in the Life) is extremely vague, and gives the impression that he conceals more than he reveals. Josephus may have acted on his own responsibility when he sought to supersede John. In any case there is no justification for the theory that Josephus was never sent to Galilee but seized control there against the wishes of the Sanhedrin even before the outbreak of the revolt. In fact Josephus seems to have come to Galilee only after Cestius Gallus’ defeat, which marked the beginning of the revolt. The position of the Sanhedrin’s envoy was a difficult one, since the local Galilean leaders had no wish to accept a man who had been appointed over them by the central authority in Jerusalem.\* and _Born in Jerusalem into an aristocratic priestly family belonging to the mishmeret of Jehoiarib, through his mother Josephus was related to the Hasmonean dynasty._ Look, I keep giving you cites. You keep disputing my points but have no cites or facts to back up your claims. You are clearly not cognizant of the history of that era and area, and keep refusing to read my cites. ---
**Author:** ![Jayhawker\_Soule](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/57b2e6/32.png) [@Jayhawker\_Soule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayhawker_Soule)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/279 "2016-01-08T20:11:36Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > In summaries of Meiers’ work, I am finding it said that he does in fact argue that Jesus wouldn’t have been believed in because crucifixion is _shameful_, not just because it disqualified him from messiahship. What summaries specifically? And what does it mean to say that “Jesus wouldn’t have been believed in”? Finally, why do you refuse to acknowledge that Jews respect, admire, and “believe in” our martyred sages despite their martyrdom? We do not, however, believe in them as the Messiah and we certainly do not promote them as deity. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2016, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/280 "2016-01-08T20:16:00Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > What summaries specifically? The very brief one for which he’s cited as an example at the wikipedia article mentioned above, and Carrier’s summary in _Proving History_. > [@](#): > > And what does it mean to say that “Jesus wouldn’t have been believed in”? I don’t know, I put the book away already, but what rides on knowing a definition for this term? Any plausible reading seems fine to me. > [@](#): > > Finally, why do you refuse to acknowledge that Jews respect, admire, and “believe in” our martyred sages despite their martyrdom? We do not, however, believe in them as the Messiah and we certainly do not promote them as deity. Because that has nothing to do with anything we’ve been talking about, and because I have not said anything contradicting it? Here: I hereby acknowledge that Jews respect, admire, and “believe in” their martyred sages despite their martyrdom while not, at the same time, believing in them as the Messiah or promoting them as deity. Feel free to hold me to that. 😕 ETA: Like, I’m _really confused_ because the above “acknowledgment” is exactly the view _for which I’ve been arguing._. I am saying that _others_ have wrongly argued that jews “would not have believed in” Jesus because of his crucifixion, and I have been arguing that they were wrong to so argue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392.md?page=15)