Sunday, 9 February 2014

Jesus: Man or Myth?

Bob Price often gets a hard time from the academic blogging community. There's a knee-jerk reaction that regards mythicism - the idea that Jesus of Nazareth may never have existed as a historical figure - as so totally outlandish that it deserves little more than contempt. Bart Ehrman has elected to become the poster boy of this disdain, but he's certainly not out on a limb.

So it's interesting to see a thoughtful response that doesn't just go ballistic. Steve Wiggins has read Price's The Christ Myth Theory and its Problems, and posted a short response. It's worth clicking across to read.


  1. In our own modern era, we have the opportunity to watch film footage, see photographs, and listen to recordings of the people who have had an historic impact on civilization. Even so, there are people with agendas who deny the holocaust, believe the moon landing was staged in a movie studio, or think the US government orchestrated 9/11. It would be difficult not to believe, let's say, in Jimi Hendrix, when with a few mouseclicks, you can be watching a video of him doing a cover version of Traffic's "Dear Mr. Fantasy". And, for me, that is exactly the point. Even if Hendrix
    had somehow been created by digitization, I would still enjoy "his" music. In the case of Jesus, I just love the philosophy and teaching.


    1. BB: "I just love the philosophy and teaching."

      What philosophy and teaching?
      The sources for the fake bio/gospel of your "god-man" have been uncovered: nothing original, and some really strange stuff like "sell everything and give it to the poor", I'm guessing that's one you're skipping, along with cutting off hands that sin (an idea not surprisingly ignored by Christians - but embraced by the derivative cult of Islam).

  2. Myth...real flesh and blood people who actually existed made mistakes.

    Real people leave descendants...okay, Jesus didn't, but what about his supposed siblings? His "apostles"? Where are those descendants? Why did they disappear so quick that the early church didn't preserve anything about what happened to them?

    Where are the artifacts which surely would have been treasured - if not outright worshiped? After all, if the saint's artifacts had magical powers, how much more would the God incarnate's stuff be super duper magical - if there had been any? Which there would have been had he been a real person.

    Why is the book of Acts a fake history of the early church when a true history could have been written instead? What were they hiding? They either didn't know their own history or they were trying to obscure it - I can't think of any third reason.

  3. New book on the Jesus myth