# 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:** 20
**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 14, 2016, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/381 "2016-01-14T20:13:15Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Doesn’t narrative mean it was fabricated? Not to the best of my knowledge. So, for example, see [**here**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative). ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/382 "2016-01-14T20:33:34Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > Not to the best of my knowledge. So, for example, see [**here**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative). hmmm… ok but you still haven’t reported any - facts -. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/383 "2016-01-15T00:47:34Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Doesn’t narrative mean it was fabricated? Not in English. it simply indicates the description of a series of events, regardless whether it is factual or imaginary. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/384 "2016-01-15T11:49:18Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > Doesn’t narrative mean it was fabricated? > > For example, when Kennedy called up troops and boats to blockade Russian missels, was that a “narrative” or, is it part of actual, historical fact??? Huh? Not at all. A story can be true or false or historical or mythical or fabricated, but it’s still a story that can be described as narrative. If I tell my husband a funny story about what happened at work yesterday, that’s a narrative. I’ve never seen anyone suggest that “narrative” means “fabricated” before. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/385 "2016-01-15T14:29:55Z")
or rather for someone who knows. . . **TonySinclair** says that he doesn’t see why the baptism of Jesus is one of two events which historians (who accept the historical Jesus) agree on as actually happening, the other being the crucifixion, and why it was seen as more likely than him being born in Nazareth. Are there in fact historians who accept the historical Jesus but reject that? It doesn’t seem likely so I suspect that him being from Nazareth is just taken as a fact rather than an “event.” Does anyone know if this is correct or not? ---
**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 15, 2016, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/386 "2016-01-15T14:33:14Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > hmmm… ok Reluctant acceptance? 🙂 > [@Robert163](#): > > but you still haven’t reported any - facts -. Sorry, but sometimes in the study of history ‘facts’ are unverifiable and have to be inferred - granted a problematic task. So let me offer a couple of ‘facts’ … [ol] [li]The Josephus reference to James is widely considered authentic. It’s import is not what he might have believed to have happened, but his assumption that “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James” was fully adequate to disambiguate that reference.[/li][li]Paul was actively proselytizing by the mid-first century CE and, unless you’re willing to claim that the epistles were pure fabrications, was addressing communities of nascent Christians in the Jewish diaspora, a diaspora that had familial, commercial, and religious links to Israel.[/li][li]Paul and Luke narrate Pauls’s struggle for legitimacy and a tense relationship with a Jerusalem sect. We can assume that both sources (and particularly Acts) present a self-serving history. But, even adjusting for this bias, we are left with two possible scenarios:[ul][_]The Jerusalem sect was a fact and, given how such sects tend to coalesce around charismatic leaders, having one named Yeshua would not be at all surprising.[_]The entire story was pure fabrication which Paul was able to sell in the diaspora.[/ul]I find the former reasonable and the latter tantamount to conspiracy theory and ad hominem.[/li][\*]The rise of Christianity was not without opposition. See, for example, the article [**Anti-Christian Imputations**](https://www.academia.edu/2519819/Incest_Infanticide_and_Cannibalism_Anti-Christian_Imputations_in_the_Roman_Empire). One thing that seems to be wholly lacking is a mythicist claim - not from the Romans and not from the Jews. Nowhere do we read something like “I have an uncle and three nephews that lived there and they never heard of this sect, much less this Yeshua that you keep talking about.” [/ol]From all the above the simplest explanation - the inference to best explanation - is, for me, the historicity of Yeshua and the Jerusalem cult. I also believe that what we can know about either is minimal. ---
**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 15, 2016, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/387 "2016-01-15T14:59:47Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > Are there in fact historians who accept the historical Jesus but reject that? It doesn’t seem likely so I suspect that him being from Nazareth is just taken as a fact rather than an “event.” Does anyone know if this is correct or not? None that I know of although, as I noted earlier … > [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > In the case of Nazareth, one could easily imagine the author of gMat having Jesus born in Nazareth in order to align the story with Micah 5 - the kind of “filling-in-he-blanks” that has somewhat of a midrashic quality. I can easily imagine historians finding the Nazareth link too convenient. For what it’s worth, Ehrman addresses a more general question raised by some mythicists, that being: [**Did Nazareth Exist**](http://ehrmanblog.org/did-nazareth-exist/). ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/388 "2016-01-15T18:14:05Z")
I should apologize for intruding among obviously knowledgeable scholars in an area where I’m just an interested ignoramus. However a wise man said scholars can hone their own understanding by explaining to a moron; I’m happy and humble enough to play such a moronic role. :o > [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > Thanks. Actually, I should have said “from Nazareth.” Did you explain this? I’d heard that Matthew:2 “spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene” might connect to the Old Testament Nazarites. (That makes no sense, right? 😕 ) But what’s the connection to the Michah book? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > [@septimus](#): > > The historic Jesus, whatever his other attributes, had distinctive abilities to heal. > [@TonySinclair](#): > > I don’t see how you can say healing wasn’t central to Christianity, since the Gospels were among the founding documents of Christianity. By definition, whatever they emphasized was important. I also note that healing was one of several magical powers that believers in Jesus are supposed to have (Mark 16:18, although its authenticity is disputed). > [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > [also addressing septimus] That is a non sequitur. I don’t now how my comment could be _both_ a tautology and a non sequitur. The centrality and consistency of healing stories in the Gospels make Jesus a healer. Was he a charlatan healer? I thnk instead he probably had great talent. (Vaguely related: in the story that Moses was a magician it’s clear that Pharaoh’s priests were also magicians. Moses was simply the better magician.) ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/389 "2016-01-15T18:26:56Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > Reluctant acceptance? 🙂 > > Sorry, but sometimes in the study of history ‘facts’ are unverifiable and have to be inferred - granted a problematic task. So let me offer a couple of ‘facts’ … Well, an inference is not a fact… I’m not sure who told you that it was. But, they were wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/390 "2016-01-15T18:31:22Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > [list=1] > [li]The Josephus reference to James is widely considered authentic. It’s import is not what he might have believed to have happened, but his assumption that “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James” was fully adequate to disambiguate that reference.[/li] so? this proves Josephus heard someone mention jesus/james. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/391 "2016-01-15T19:24:22Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > None that I know of although, as I noted earlier … > > > [@](#): > > > > In the case of Nazareth, one could easily imagine the author of gMat having Jesus born in Nazareth in order to align the story with Micah 5 - the kind of “filling-in-he-blanks” that has somewhat of a midrashic quality > > . > I can easily imagine historians finding the Nazareth link too convenient. OK, I thought you just made a typo before, but it seems you are actually saying that Matthew has Jesus born in Nazareth, rather than Bethlehem, to align with Micah 5. But Matthew gives no indication that Mary and Joseph had ever heard of Nazareth until after they returned from their Flight to Egypt, and Micah 5 is about Bethlehem. Please clarify. > [@](#): > > For what it’s worth, Ehrman addresses a more general question raised by some mythicists, that being: [**Did Nazareth Exist**](http://ehrmanblog.org/did-nazareth-exist/). Thanks for the link, but I have to say I don’t understand a couple of his arguments. He says it would be no big deal if it turned out that Nazareth didn’t exist during Jesus’ time — “then he merely came from somewhere else.” But I think it would be a huge deal, since “Jesus of Nazareth” is referred to in all four Gospels (and Acts), and Nazareth is an important component of the infancy narratives, along with other less significant events. If the writers can’t even get mundane details of time and place right, how can they be trusted in their more incredible claims? He also refers to a collection of coins found in an excavation, and says that the fact that there were some 15th century coins in the collection is irrelevant, since some Hasmonean coins were also in the collection. That makes no sense – surely a collection can be no older than its youngest coin? I have to think he meant that there was some way to tell that the old coins and younger coins weren’t associated, but he doesn’t say that; he says they were from the same excavation, and he calls them a collection. This is very sloppy writing, especially when his only cite for the older coins is a verbal conversation. To be fair, it’s a blog, not a scholarly article, but it’s still confusing. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/392 "2016-01-15T19:34:42Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I should apologize for intruding among obviously knowledgeable scholars in an area where I’m just an interested ignoramus. However a wise man said scholars can hone their own understanding by explaining to a moron; I’m happy and humble enough to play such a moronic role. :o On the off chance that you’re including me, I’m a rank amateur. If I were a scholar, I would have the patience to debate minutiae, instead of just what interests me at the time. > [@](#): > > Did you explain this? I’d heard that Matthew:2 “spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene” might connect to the Old Testament Nazarites. (That makes no sense, right? 😕 ) But what’s the connection to the Michah book? Yeah, I just asked him a similar question. > [@](#): > > I don’t now how my comment could be _both_ a tautology and a non sequitur. Because your comment had more than one claim. I was disputing that healing wasn’t a central theme. If I am correctly understanding **Jayhawker** , he was saying that the fact that there were consistent tales of healing does not imply that the healing was historical. There are consistent tales of levitation in _Harry Potter_. ---
**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 15, 2016, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/393 "2016-01-15T19:44:23Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > so? > > this proves Josephus heard someone mention jesus/james. You persist in ignoring the fact that it suggests more than this. it suggests that Josephus believes that “brother of Jesus” is sufficient to disambiguate his reference to James. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/394 "2016-01-15T19:46:04Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > so? > > this proves Josephus heard someone mention jesus/james. I think that your point was conceded long ago. No, we cannot give you ironclad proof that Jesus existed; all we can give is plausibility. If you think that ironclad proof is a minimum requirement for something to worship, I don’t think your position is unreasonable, but that’s not the topic. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/395 "2016-01-15T19:51:10Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > or rather for someone who knows. . . > > **TonySinclair** says that he doesn’t see why the baptism of Jesus is one of two events which historians (who accept the historical Jesus) agree on as actually happening, the other being the crucifixion, and why it was seen as more likely than him being born in Nazareth. > > Are there in fact historians who accept the historical Jesus but reject that? It doesn’t seem likely so I suspect that him being from Nazareth is just taken as a fact rather than an “event.” Does anyone know if this is correct or not? When it comes to Jesus, I just read the original documentation (the Bible, the works of the early Christian writers like Irenaeus, the Nag Hammadi library, and the Mandaean scripture), I don’t read what other historians think. So I can’t say who believes what, but I’ll comment that the most likely reason for anyone to disagree with a Nazareth birth is because it conflicts with the Bethlehem birth. Any scholar who is very religious and needs Jesus to have been born in Bethlehem, will presumably argue against a Nazareth birth despite all evidence being that the whole census and pilgrimage to Bethlehem story is a fictional tale that was overlaid onto Jesus’ life. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/396 "2016-01-15T19:53:01Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > You persist in ignoring the fact that it suggests more than this. it suggests that Josephus believes that “brother of Jesus” is sufficient to disambiguate his reference to James. that is an odd detail but if it were the way the - story - was relayed to him it is likely the way he would report it. so what we have is proof that someone mentioned james/jesus, not that the account is actually true. if Josephus had done a biography of jesus that would be a bit more credible. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/397 "2016-01-15T20:01:33Z")
> [@Jayhawker\_Soule](#): > > See, for example, the article [**Anti-Christian Imputations**](https://www.academia.edu/2519819/Incest_Infanticide_and_Cannibalism_Anti-Christian_Imputations_in_the_Roman_Empire). I would consider it a great personal favor if you did not link to sites that made you jump through all kinds of hoops, including giving personal information, in order to see an article. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2016, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/398 "2016-01-15T20:14:06Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > or rather for someone who knows. . . > > **TonySinclair** says that he doesn’t see why the baptism of Jesus is one of two events which historians (who accept the historical Jesus) agree on as actually happening, the other being the crucifixion, and why it was seen as more likely than him being born in Nazareth. I doubt that I said that, but if I did, it was a mistake. I don’t see why it is more likely than him _ **being from** _ Nazareth, i.e. he grew up there. I think he was probably born there, too, just because it would have been unusual for people back then to from Judea to Galilee, but AFAIK there is nothing in the Gospels that can be taken as evidence for it. ---
**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 15, 2016, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/399 "2016-01-15T20:14:20Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > OK, I thought you just made a typo before, but it seems you are actually saying that Matthew has Jesus born in Nazareth, rather than Bethlehem, to align with Micah 5. No. I simply quoted a post that contained the typo. My only point is that gMat 2:23 could well have been written with Micah in mind and therefore, in the minds of some scholars, may not deserve the presumption of historical accuracy. Sorry for the continued confusion. > [@TonySinclair](#): > > Thanks for the link, but I have to say I don’t understand a couple of his arguments. He says it would be no big deal if it turned out that Nazareth didn’t exist during Jesus’ time — “then he merely came from somewhere else.” But I think it would be a huge deal, since “Jesus of Nazareth” is referred to in all four Gospels (and Acts), and Nazareth is an important component of the infancy narratives, along with other less significant events. Two points. It’s no big deal to Ehrman in the same way that it’s no big deal to me. He is not arguing for the historical accuracy of the gospels but for the historicity of the man. This particular blog was an ‘aside.’ That Nazareth shows up in all four Gospels is not at all surprising for those who ascribe to the [**Two-Source hypothesis**](http://www.hypotyposeis.org/synoptic-problem/) or something comparable. It means no more that that a tradition found in Mark was copied. > [@TonySinclair](#): > > If the writers can’t even get mundane details of time and place right, how can they be trusted in their more incredible claims? Now I’m the one confused. Who is suggesting that the “more incredible claims” of the Gospel writers should be trusted? > [@TonySinclair](#): > > He also refers to a collection of coins found in an excavation, and says that the fact that there were some 15th century coins in the collection is irrelevant, since some Hasmonean coins were also in the collection. That makes no sense – surely a collection can be no older than its youngest coin? I have to think he meant that there was some way to tell that the old coins and younger coins weren’t associated, but he doesn’t say that; he says they were from the same excavation, and he calls them a collection. This is very sloppy writing, especially when his only cite for the older coins is a verbal conversation. I agree. > [@TonySinclair](#): > > To be fair, it’s a blog, not a scholarly article, but it’s still confusing. That too. ---
**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 15, 2016, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392/400 "2016-01-15T20:21:26Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > I think he was probably born there, too, just because it would have been unusual for people back then to from Judea to Galilee, but AFAIK there is nothing in the Gospels that can be taken as evidence for it. But the statement itself can and should be evaluated as evidence rather than being summarily dismissed because of its source. One can learn something about weather threats in Kansas from The Wizard of Oz without embracing the idea of Munchkins. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-myth-or-man/742392.md?page=21)