Gday all,
Well, fortunately there is the second approach which for some mysterious reason is never employed. That is to examine the accusation from purely logical perspective. However, there is one very important factor which is far more powerful and absolutely indisputable in establishing that Jesus did exist. That is the fact that his enemies never accused him of never having existed. Why is this remarkable and absolutely devastating to that argument of nonexistence? Simple, because the Jews vehemently hated Jesus and his teachings were considered blasphemous both during his ministry and after the time of his described death.
False.
It appears you are not aware of the actual evidence -
The NT letter of
2 John specifically refers to Christians who do NOT :
"acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh".
Porphyry said the same :
"For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist"
Numerous early Christians believed Jesus was a phantasm, a ghost, an illusion :
“Marcion, I suppose, took sound words in a wrong sense, when he rejected His birth from Mary...”
Basilides, in mid 2nd century, denied Jesus was really crucified, and the physical resurrection :
"Christ sent, not by this maker of the world, but by the above-named Abraxas; and to have come in a phantasm, and been destitute of the substance of flesh..."
Minucius Felix, in mid 2nd century, explicitly denies the incarnation and crucifixion along with other horrible accusations."...he who explains their ceremonies by reference to a man punished by extreme suffering for his wickedness, and to the deadly wood of the cross, appropriates fitting altars for reprobate and wicked men ... when you attribute to our religion the worship of a criminal and his cross you wander far from the truth", and also: "Men who have died cannot become gods, because a god cannot die; nor can men who are born (become gods) ... Why, I pray, are gods not born today, if such have ever been born?" -
Celsus also called Jesus a “shadow” (according to Origen) :
“Whereas our Jesus, who appeared to the members of His own troop--for I will take the word that Celsus employs--did really appear, and Celsus makes a false accusation against the Gospel in saying that what appeared was a shadow. “
Celsus, in late 2nd century, attacked the Gospels as fiction based on myths :
"Clearly the christians have used...myths... in fabricating the story of Jesus' birth...It is clear to me that the writings of the christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction"
Porphyry, in late 3rd century, claimed the Gospels were invented :
"... the evangelists were inventors – not historians”
Julian, in the 4th century, claimed Jesus was spurious, counterfeit, invented :
"why do you worship this spurious son...a counterfeit son", "you have invented your new kind of sacrifice ".
Julian was “convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.. ”
Seriously Radrook, if you want to discuss these subjects. I recommend you study the evidence rather than just repeating faithful falsehoods.
There was a great deal of early doubt about Jesus, and his stories.
Kapyong
