# Was Jesus Real or a Myth? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 22, 2015, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360 "2015-02-22T18:39:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/121 "2015-02-25T02:13:49Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > So because a book was written in recent times and can be discredited means a book written in ancient times with no existing means of factual discreditation is also completely fabricated? > > Not a leap I’m willing to take. actually, joseph smith fabricating the book of mormon is a pretty good example that the bible/gospels could/would be simply made up in a similar fashion ---
**Author:** ![SeekerofTruth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@SeekerofTruth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeekerofTruth)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/122 "2015-02-25T02:25:05Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Actually you did say exactly that. “all the events portrayed in life via the gospels can be found in Old Testament stories”. But it looks like you’re acknowledging now that that’s not true, so let’s move on. Well, EXCUUUUUSE ME! :smack: If you’d read my other posts you’d have read that I said that the details of Jesus’ life were basically founded on three main sources, the Old Testament, current literature like the Odyssey in which the gospels writers, particularly Mark, drew heavily on tales of Odysseus, and mythology peculiar to the times or earlier about dying/rising gods. > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > This is incorrect. I am quite willing to read and learn from scholarly books and articles, or even non-scholarly ones, that are not written by Christians, if they are honest and well-written. I’ve read scores of such books and articles. However what you’re saying about the three that you named is flatly untrue. > > \*\*First of all, the three books that you’ve cited provide don’t justify your claims about gospel stories being copied from pagan mythology. \*\* Since others in this thread have already informed you of this fact, I won’t post anything further on that, other than suggesting that you should probably read books before you cite them as sources. It’s always highly embarrassing when you cite a book and it says the exact opposite of what you claim it says. > > Second, when you say that those three authors are “well respected historians in the scholarly community”, you’re flat wrong. What’s your source for this claim? I find it likely that you have no clue about the credentials of any of these three individuals. (Or perhaps you just don’t know what the words “historian” and “scholarly community” mean.) > > Earl Doherty is not a historian or a scholar. He has never written a single scholarly article or book, nor held any academic post, nor done anything at all with any connection to the scholarly community that I know of. I’ve read part of his book and like [others](http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusindex.htm) have found it to be absurdly dishonest and dumb. Can you name a single instance in which any actual scholar has cited Doherty, except perhaps to debunk him? If not, then what’s your basis for the claims he’s a “well respected historian in the scholarly community”? > > Richard Carrier has a degree in history, which puts him a little closer to credibility to Doherty but not much. As far as I know he’s never held an academic post. Since he makes no effort to hide the fact that he’s motivated by hatred of Christians, it’s not surpising that most other historians aren’t impressed by him. > > Robert Price is actually an academic, but not in the field of history. As best I can tell, he’s written more about Cthulu than about anything related to history. > > Look, you’ve made specific claims about stories being found in ancient mythology. For instance, you said that the story of Jesus walking on water can be found in the _Odyssey_. You said that there’s a pagan mythological story about Dionysius/Bacchus turning water into wine. If such things were true, then citing the precise ancient texts which contain them would be easy. Since you’re totally unable to cite _even one_ ancient mythological text that supports your case, the most likely explanation is that no such texts exists. > > Let’s look at one simple example. You say that the _Odyssey_ contains the story of Jesus walking on water. I’ve read the _Odyssey_ and I don’t recall it making any mention of Jesus, or any mention of anyone walking on water. Based on that, the obvious conclusion is that you’re just making %#$& up. However, it’s possible that I merely don’t remember the incident; after all, it’s been more than 10 years since I read the _Odyssey_. So if you’re actually telling the truth, it would be extremely easy for you to prove it. Simply tell me which book of the _Odyssey_ contains the story in question, and give the numbers of the lines at which it occurs. I could then look it up in my copy of the _Odyssey_ and see whether or not you’re telling the truth. What’s stopping you from doing so? > My, how convenient. That’s kind of like what I’d expect you to say if there wasn’t any church father who had ever said any such thing. Read “The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark” by Dennis R. MacDonald For example, one among dozens of plagiarisms by Mark of Homer: 1 the mythical twins, Castor and Polydeuces, were referred to as the sons of Zeus who was a god of thunder. In Mark the sons of Zebedee are referred to as the Sons of Thunder. Coincidence? Why of course! :rolleyes: 1. Circe’s dialogue with Odysseus is nearly identical to the dialogue between Jesus and the demons in the city of Gadarene. Coincidence? Why of course! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: 2. Two spots in the first ten chapters of the Odyssey where gods walk on water. Jesus walking on water in the Sea of Galilee where a raging storm gathers–Auolus’ bag of winds unleashing a storm in the Mediterranean (Sea of Galilee) Coincidence? Why of course! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Dozens of other “coincidences” in the way Mark is deliberately rewriting the Odyssey but very cleverly as if to disguise the similarities yet show them in plain sight. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/123 "2015-02-25T02:28:20Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > actually, joseph smith fabricating the book of mormon is a pretty good example that the bible/gospels could/would be simply made up in a similar fashion But Smith was, by all indications, a real person. No one is arguing the inerrancy of the Bible. Some are claiming that the central figure himself was fabricated, which is not a strongly defensible position. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/124 "2015-02-25T02:33:41Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > But Smith was, by all indications, a real person. > > No one is arguing the inerrancy of the Bible. Some are claiming that the central figure himself was fabricated, which is not a strongly defensible position. do you understand the difference between what is probably true and what is actually true? do you think that difference is substantial or inconsequential? ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/125 "2015-02-25T02:40:28Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > Hello again, Christian apologist **Sage Rat**. You may not remember me, but I’m one of the many who have debated this topic with you here at the Dope in the past. (see: [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11859038&postcount=64), for example). > > I’d like to re-present myself as an increasingly cautious & forensically restrained advocate of the ahistoricist/mythicist position; one who utterly rejects all the sloppy and poorly-evidenced bulldada (not a synonym of “bullshit”) of the crackpot mythicists… > > No, as I explained above in my first reply to the OP [_here_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18159303&postcount=85), I reject such ludicrously improbable assertions and hold to a position for which there’s actually considerably more reliable (and ‘more reliable’) evidence to justify: That the Jesus myth began not as a purely fictional invention but rather as an accretion of legend and hype and over-devotion to an idealized messiah figure loosely based on the “first messiah” figure who was actually a rebellious Rabbi/Teacher, probably named Jeremias, who lived approximately 100 BCE… And this is from **ambushed** in 2009: > [@Alternatives to miracles performed by Jesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/alternatives-to-miracles-performed-by-jesus/519342/64): > > I understand, **Sage Rat** , that the ahistoricist position seems quite preposterous and needlessly extreme to you, as it does to nearly everyone else. You, like most, probably see it as some kind of zealously rabid atheism or perhaps just an argument taken to fanatical extremes. > > That’s healthy skepticism, and far from denigrating it, I praise such understandable reluctance quite highly. The initial reaction _should_ be considerable skepticism! And the truth about myself is that I utterly condemn and despise extremism among atheists as well as among anyone else, including myself (and have taken a lot of heat my from my fellow atheists for my harsh criticism of atheist extremism, which they claim is an attempt to silence atheists). We’ve discussed Doherty’s hypothesis before. Can we all agree that it is, at best, a minority opinion? That’s not to dismiss it. Indeed, I’ve come to concede that the Christian mythicist hypothesis is not crackpottery and it is not grounded in ignorance about historical methods and ancient sourcing. Or at least Doherty’s version isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/126 "2015-02-25T02:52:28Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > do you understand the difference between what is probably true and what is actually true? do you think that difference is substantial or inconsequential? One could argue with regard to ancient history it is largely inconsequential. It really makes absolutely no difference whether Jesus was a historical figure or not. But the logic of historical factualism does not lend itself to the suggestion that Jesus was an ahistorical figure. That Joseph Smith fabricated the Book of Mormon does not provide any insight into whether Jesus was real or not. ---
**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:** [February 25, 2015, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/127 "2015-02-25T03:28:08Z")
> [@SeekerofTruth](#): > > Read “The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark” by Dennis R. MacDonald Hold on a second. Previously you referred me to three books, which were supposed to justify your claims about the Gospels being copies of Pagan myths. Unfortunately for you, we here on this board are familiar with those books, and know that they don’t say what you claim they say. That, of course, is on top of many other claims that you have made and haven’t supported. Now don’t you feel some obligation to own up to the fact that everything you’ve said here has turned out to be false? Do you really expect to have much credibility after everything untrue that you’ve said? Now regarding MacDonald’ s book, I’ve already read it. It does not say what you claim it says. (Are you seeing a pattern here? Do you notice how citing books that you’ve not actually read keeps backfiring on you? Might you perhaps consider that you should read sources before referencing them?) I’ll list your mistakes in a moment. First I’ll point out that while MacDonald is a real scholar, unlike those other guys you named, his work is far outside the mainstream. The great majority of scholars don’t take any part of the book as correct. You name his book and treat its conclusions like established facts. Shouldn’t you at least mention its many well-known flaws and the many scholarly refutations of it? Don’t you feel an obligation to present an accurate picture of scholarly opinion? Now on to your mistakes: Your first mistake is to claim that MacDonald says that Mark “plagiarizes” and “deliberately rewrites” Homer. Actually MacDonald goes to considerable length to establish that he isn’t making that argument. MacDonald claimed that Mark used the literary technique of mimesis, which was common in historical writing at that time. Even if everything MacDonald claimed was true, it would not give us any reason to doubt that Mark was a historical non-fiction work. If you had read MacDonald’s book before telling me to read it, you would know that. > [@](#): > > For example, one among dozens of plagiarisms by Mark of Homer: > > 1 the mythical twins, Castor and Polydeuces, were referred to as the sons of Zeus who was a god of thunder. In Mark the sons of Zebedee are referred to as the Sons of Thunder. And how is this supposed to prove that Mark copied anything from Homer? Castor and Polydeuces don’t appear anywhere in Homer. > [@](#): > > 1. Circe’s dialogue with Odysseus is nearly identical to the dialogue between Jesus and the demons in the city of Gadarene. Coincidence? Why of course! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Having read both dialogues, I can’t say that I see them as “nearly identical” or even very similar. Here, for instance, is a quote from Circe: “Son of Laertes, sprung from Zeus, Odysseus of many devices, go now to thy swift ship and to the shore of the sea. First of all do ye draw the ship up on the land, and store your goods and all the tackling in caves. Then come back thyself, and bring thy trusty comrades.” Perhaps you could help me out by telling me which verse in Mark is nearly identical to this. > [@](#): > > 1. Two spots in the first ten chapters of the Odyssey where gods walk on water. Jesus walking on water in the Sea of Galilee where a raging storm gathers–Auolus’ bag of winds unleashing a storm in the Mediterranean (Sea of Galilee) Coincidence? Why of course! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: As I said earlier, if there was a passage in the Odyssey where someone walked on water, you should be able to give the book number and line number where it occurs. You haven’t been able to do so. Why not? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/128 "2015-02-25T04:15:06Z")
> [@dougie\_monty](#): > > “The question is abusive and flagrantly leading.”–E. G. Marshall > [@dougie\_monty](#): > > Dear Pot: Yes, I am black. (SIGNED ) Kettle. I have no idea what point you think you are making with these drive-by posts, but they come across as threadshitting. Knock it off. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/129 "2015-02-25T04:57:27Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I have no idea what point you think you are making with these drive-by posts, but they come across as threadshitting. > > Knock it off. > > [/Moderating] The first item could only be understood with the original title of one of the merged threads. The second pointed out that what I was being criticized for, was something I had been on the **receiving** end of, time and time again. I hope a double standard isn’t being followed here. ---
**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:** [February 25, 2015, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/130 "2015-02-25T05:44:14Z")
> [@SeekerofTruth](#): > > the Book of Acts is riddled with historic inaccuracies and was likely written a few centuries after the events Can you quote a single scholar who says that the Book of Acts was written “a few centuries after the events”? According to [this source](http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/acts.html), the range of dates offered by scholars for Acts is 80-130 AD, with general leaning towards the early part of that range. The earliest partial manuscript of Acts (called p45) dates from the early second century, and multiple church fathers in the second century quoted and referenced Acts as well as Luke. Most obviously, Acts is a first-person narrative so it must have been written while Luke was still alive. If it was written a few centuries after the events, that would be at earliest in the third century. How do you reconcile your claim about the date of Acts with these facts? How could the book have been written long after the manuscripts of it existed? That doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. And if it’s “riddled with historical inaccuracies”, could you tell us what they are? I mean actually tell us, rather than merely listing another book that you haven’t read? ---
**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:** [February 25, 2015, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/131 "2015-02-25T06:24:18Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > We seem to be at odds. I’ve always thought that when there were just a few (less than five, a number I selected myself) references to a historical figure, Historians believed it was PROBABLE that said figure existed, but that without extensive, independent, cross verification, it was still a reference, and not actual proof of existence. We mathematicians do lots of proofs. Historians generally don’t. The enormous majority of historical writing, in my experience, makes no mention of proof. Generally when there’s a reference to an individual in ancient historical writing, historians will proceed under the assumption that the person existed, unless there’s a very strong argument to the contrary. For example, Spartacus is known from just two historical sources, both written more than a century after the event. I have never seen anyone doubt his existence. Many pre-Socratic philosophers are known from just a few sentences, written several centuries after their death. I have never seen anyone doubt their existence either. With Jesus we have an extremely large body of writing, written remarkably soon after the event, and of relativity high quality. (The gospels are unusually detailed and precise, when contrasted with other biographies from ancient times.) Hence there’s virtually unanimous agreement that Jesus existed. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/132 "2015-02-25T07:06:25Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > Actual historical records, as used by actual historians, are almost entirely made of second and third hand accounts. Actual historians are quite happy to accept that. Well, we’re not _happy_, really. You just make do with what you’ve got, don’t you ? I mean, I know I’d be a lot happier with a recorded speech or two, maybe an official hagiography… hell, I’d take\* 50 Shades of Gordian : a knotty Twilight fanfic by Megas Alexandros\*. ---
**Author:** ![SeekerofTruth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@SeekerofTruth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeekerofTruth)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/133 "2015-02-25T07:07:40Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Can you quote a single scholar who says that the Book of Acts was written “a few centuries after the events”? According to [this source](http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/acts.html), the range of dates offered by scholars for Acts is 80-130 AD, with general leaning towards the early part of that range. The earliest partial manuscript of Acts (called p45) dates from the early second century, and multiple church fathers in the second century quoted and referenced Acts as well as Luke. Most obviously, Acts is a first-person narrative so it must have been written while Luke was still alive. > > If it was written a few centuries after the events, that would be at earliest in the third century. How do you reconcile your claim about the date of Acts with these facts? How could the book have been written long after the manuscripts of it existed? That doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. > > And if it’s “riddled with historical inaccuracies”, could you tell us what they are? I mean actually tell us, rather than merely listing another book that you haven’t read? ITR, I will be frank. I think you are asking me to write long dissertations to waste my time which you have no intention of reading or considering, other than to just write more challenges to make me write even more to make me try to prove this or that which you can then challenge all over again, and on and on. It’s clear we’re never going to arrive at a consensus. I don’t feel compelled to follow the path you’ve choosen to lay for the direction of this conversation. I will say I never write anything without having sourced it in some way or read it somewhere. Some things I cannot source without hours of research, and then just so you can again call it fraud or inaccurate. You’re perfectly free to call me on things I state but you’ll have to do the legwork to prove me wrong. My general thesis still stands: Jesus was possibly a real man, but he was an ordinary man who never resurrected. There is no hard historical evidence for a resurrection; there is little enough hard evidence for a crucifixion as it is. Everything Christians use to support the resurrection i.e. “the empty tomb” is just Christian conjecture which must be taken on faith and most of us around here deal in facts. Where is the empty tomb; show it to me and I will believe. Show me the blood off the slab in that tomb that oozed from Jesus’ body that has been tested that should contain only one set of human chromosomes (Mary’s) and I will believe. Until you can, I and most others will assume that most likely, Jesus was a myth cobbled together from a variety of outside sources such as other gods, legends, literature, stories being passed around hundreds of years after the legends first sprung up. As for the claim the apostles dying horrible deaths is proof enough that they believed in Jesus so he must have resurrection—well, for God’s sake how do Christians make those claims when there’s absolutely nothing in the historic records they even existed, much less went out into all the world to preach the gospel and died horrible martyrdom??? :eek: That is so naïve as to be utterly pathetic. Sorry :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/134 "2015-02-25T08:01:44Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Well, we’re not _happy_, really. You just make do with what you’ve got, don’t you ? > I mean, I know I’d be a lot happier with a recorded speech or two, maybe an official hagiography… hell, I’d take\* 50 Shades of Gordian : a knotty Twilight fanfic by Megas Alexandros\*. Ahh, but I never said you were happy about not having first hand accounts. I said you were happy to accept the fact that you \*do \*have second hand accounts. In contrast, **Robert163** claims that second hand accounts are not historical records at all, and therefore we have no historical records of Jesus or Alexander. Which is of course absolute bollocks. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/135 "2015-02-25T08:18:58Z")
Well, **SeekerofTruth** , details matter. What else are you here to debate? Your thesis needs to be defended. When people attack it you will need to come with arguments that defeat those thrown against it. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/136 "2015-02-25T08:28:34Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > Simple question: Do you believe that Alexander the Great existed? Then provide eyewitness accounts and/or actual historical records of the day that establishes his fact. What about physical artefacts, such as coinage minted at the time of his reign and bearing his name? Or the actual, undisputed tomb of his father (not some likely forgery with ambiguous, regionally-common names) Where are the physical artefacts of Jesus’ existence? ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/137 "2015-02-25T08:35:15Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > What about physical artefacts, such as coinage minted at the time of his reign and bearing his name? Or the actual, undisputed tomb of his father (not some likely forgery with ambiguous, regionally-common names) > > Where are the physical artefacts of Jesus’ existence? You mean like the “actual, undisputed tomb of his father”? Good luck with that one. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/138 "2015-02-25T08:36:25Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > But Smith was, by all indications, a real person. Once again - Jesus isn’t Smith in this scenario, he’s the Angel Moroni. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/139 "2015-02-25T08:38:24Z")
> [@Steken](#): > > You mean like the “actual, undisputed tomb of his father”? Good luck with that one. 😉 😃 ---
**Author:** ![SeekerofTruth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@SeekerofTruth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeekerofTruth)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2015, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360/140 "2015-02-25T08:44:30Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > Well, **SeekerofTruth** , details matter. What else are you here to debate? Your thesis needs to be defended. When people attack it you will need to come with arguments that defeat those thrown against it. I don’t mind defending, but Champion refutes every single source I raise. I’m not drawing this stuff off crazed bloggers; I’m drawing it off reputable scholars which Champion then goes on to say are not reputable scholars, no matter who I source. At that point it’s not authority, it’s opinion. Carrier and Price are just as respected in the circle of scholars as are Champions, but I imagine Champion draws a tight little network of unknown scholars around him who agree with most of what he and his idols teach. Anything outside that tight little network is rubbish. Or maybe a I capsulize an argument the author made and then Champion retorts, “Have you read the book?” Well, no I haven’t read the book. Am I suppose to read the entire library before I make a commentary? I’m not a scholar but I try to get as close to reliable source as I can and if it’s a source like Richard Carrier, Champion comes in and says, “Well, on page 93 sentence 35, words 3 through 13 he says Osirus might have been sliced into three sections not four and his penis was not cut off as the legend goes so that proves Osirus could not have been the source for Jesus supposedly riding into Jerusalem on two donkeys” or some other intellectual gibberish. I mean it’s like he’s trying either to prove he’s some great scholar who reads 200 books a week on this stuff or he argues just for the sake of trying to win a point. My arguments are not scholarly. I don’t pretend to be a scholar and if being a scholar as well-read as Champion were a criteria for commenting on this board there’d be nobody here but Champion. That’s how it lays. I’m sorry. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-jesus-real-or-a-myth/713360.md?page=8)