Mmmm ok... I'll reiterate some of my findings I have posted elsewhere.
Are you familiar with the time line of early Christian Jews? Are you familiar with the Gospel sources from which the modern church is built upon?
Let's just keep it simple.
Hypothesis: There was a man named jesus who died. Now Jesus died in jerusalem which was the academic center for that region. Rome was fully in charge and all events were recorded and sent to Rome. They were all about paperwork those crafty Romans. Certainly events as gargatuan as jesus' miracles, crucifixtion, and rising from the dead would have been mentioned in correspondence form the official scribes of jerusalem back to Rome. Nope.... nothing. Then there is the idea that the high council of Jewish rabbis were called out on passover eve to debate his fate. That is utterly preposterous. No observant jew and certainly not the leaders of that observance would have done so. let's move on to the barrabas story... the idea that Pontious pilot would let a known murderer of romans go is ridiculous. Romans didn't do things like that. they might put your head on a pike at the city gates, but let you go? Nonsense. No liberal policies back then, no pardons.
But let's not get stuck in the small details of which are so numerous and easily to discredit, let's move to the meat of the jesus myth.
So jesus died. okay? No mention of him from the Romans. No mention of him ANYWHERE for about 40 years. Sound plausible? Everyone simply forgot? Like forgetting Lincoln was President after the civil war...
So then the very first mention of jesus comes from saul of tsarsus, 40 some odd years later(possibly even later). He NEVER says anything about the life of jesus, no Mary, no virgin birth, no miracles, no wise man, he knows NOTHING of an earthly jesus. How can this be? Paul wrote more than anyone about Christianity and yet nothing about jesus as a MAN. It is widely documented that all of the following gospels were lifted from paul's writings. To Paul, all events about jesus never happened on earth but in the heavens above. This was quite common in myth writings. To paul, the idea of the savior being a man was impossible.
So, then we again fall into forgetfullness and the next gospels dont appear until decades later where Paul's writings are picked up on, again a common thing in those days, stories told and retold and reworked. The authors of all the gospels never considered themselves to be writing HISTORY, they wrote ALLEGORICALLY. Scribes wrote the history in those times.
So if Paul never mentions jesus as a man or on earth, and is the ONLY source possible for the following gosples writen by Mark (mark who?), John (John who?), Luke...you get the idea....how is it jesus SUDDENLY arrives on earth and the fantastic miracles spew forth? A canard had been pulled. Things weren't going well for the Christian jews, something had to be done.
It was Constantine who saved the religion (for his own earthly purposes of course). It was then the insistence that the gospels were HISTORICAL documents began to emerge. Pagans had heard evrything about Christianity from other myths, which is another point indicating it is a myth. All of the so called "events" revolving around the "life" of jesus can be found from myths of that time period. There is not an original idea to be found. This was one of the great problems...pagans had heard all of this before. They were like what's the big deal..been there, done that. Back to Constantine because EVERYONE likes a winner. He was a winner, and then used his new "found" faith to consolidate his power. This is when the TRUE corruption of Christianity begins. Constantuine takes a relatively failing backwater myth and turns it into HISTORY, again for his own purposes.
I could go on and on...but you get the gist of it I hope.
Jesus was a myth, and not a very original one at that, but funny things happen on the way to the coliseum, now don't they? We could just as easily be worshipping Mithra....
Not me of course.
out.
