10.1.15

Jesus 'Never Existed,' says Historical Researcher - Billionaires Australia

Jesus 'Never Existed,' says Historical Researcher

Jesus of Nazareth was a mythical character who never really existed, according to historical researcher, Michael Paulkovich.

Mr Paulkovich said that he found no verifiable mention of Christ
amongst the writings of 125 authors during the ‘time of Jesus,’ from the
first to third centuries.

Instead, followers of Christianity created him as a figure to
worship, the historian says in an article entitled ‘The Fable of the
Christ’ and a book called ‘No Meek Messiah.’

Despite the supposed global miracles’ carried out by Jesus, there was
a distinct lack of evidence for his existence in the historical texts,
he said.

“When I consider those 126 writers, all of whom should have heard of
Jesus but did not – and Paul and Marcion and Athenagoras and Matthew
with a tetralogy of opposing Christs, the silence from Qumram and
Nazareth and Bethlehem, conflicting Bible stories, and so many other
mysteries and omissions – I must conclude that Christ is a mythical
character.

“Jesus of Nazareth was nothing more than urban (or desert) legend,
likely an agglomeration of several evangelic and deluded rabbis who
might have existed.”

In fact, Mr Paulkovich found just one mention within the writings he
studied, and that was fabricated and added later by editors, he claims.
The book called The Jewish Wars by Roman historian Josephus Flavius, was
written in 95 CE. However, Mr Paulkovich says that the mention of Jesus
was not in fact written in the original text, but rather added at a
later stage.

The historian also says that the Bible contains no evidence of the
actual existence of Jesus, saying that Paul, who is often thought of as
the person who spread the religion that would become Christianity, never
mentions Jesus as a real person.

“Paul is unaware of the virgin mother, and ignorant of Jesus’
nativity, parentage, life events, ministry, miracles, apostles,
betrayal, trial and harrowing passion. Paul knows neither where nor when
Jesus lived, and considers the crucifixion metaphorical.’

Mr Paulkovich also says that Jesus himself would have written
personal accounts had he been real, but that the silence proves his
theory that he was a fictional character.

The highly controversial views are likely to be disputed by the
majority of scholars, who agree that Jesus was a Galilean Jew born
between 7 to 4 BC.

Comments

  • Fabulous! It is easy to read Paul's letters and not once does he mention 'Jesus'. He mentions a 'Lord' but that could be anyone.
    If the greatest record keepers of the era, the Jews and the Romans, did not mention a "Jesus" then he must be merely a compilation for the convenience of the power mongers.
    All of the 'events of Jesus life' have been stolen from the stories of Horus, Osiris and Isis. Nothing is new in the stories of the Xtian "Jesus'" life. NOTHING.

    Whether Jesus's existence as a real person is provable or not, it doesn't make the idea that his Dad was the Sky Fairy any more likely. Nor that his mother was a virgin (he was a human, therefore he had a complete genome, so whose DNA comprised the half that was not Mary's?); that he rose from the dead and ascended to Fairyland; that we are all made in the image of the Sky Fairy and only humans have an eternal "soul"; and that if you do not repent your wrongdoing and accept Jesus as your personal saviour the loving and kind Sky Fairy will abandon you and you will burn in hell eternal. The Sky Fairy and his son Jesus also somehow love children so much that thousands of them are born in Africa every year with HIV.
    Come on, do Christians honestly believe in this stuff? When a telescope will tell you we're clearly just not that significant? The universe is far more interesting than these old folk tales, get with it people!

    The Mishnah (c. 200) may refer to Jesus and reflect the early Jewish
    traditions of portraying Jesus as a sorcerer or magician.Other
    references to Jesus and his execution exist in the Talmud, but they aim
    to discredit his actions, not deny his existence.Josephus' Antiquities
    of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the
    biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20. Of the other mention in
    Josephus, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have
    doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities
    20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.Roman
    historian Tacitus referred to Christus and his execution by Pontius
    Pilate in his Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44, 45. The
    very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians make the passage
    extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribe[42] and the
    Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation
    of Christ's crucifixion,although some scholars question the
    authenticity of the passage on various different grounds

    Avatar
    The Mishnah (c. 200) may refer to Jesus and reflect the early Jewish
    traditions of portraying Jesus as a sorcerer or magician.Other
    references to Jesus and his execution exist in the Talmud, but they aim
    to discredit his actions, not deny his existence.Josephus' Antiquities
    of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the
    biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20. The general scholarly view is
    that while the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, is
    most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon
    that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then
    subject to Christian interpolation or forgery. Of the other mention in
    Josephus, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have
    doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities
    20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.Roman
    historian Tacitus referred to Christus and his execution by Pontius
    Pilate in his Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44, 45. The
    very negative tone of Tacitus' comments on Christians make the passage
    extremely unlikely to have been forged by a Christian scribe and the
    Tacitus reference is now widely accepted as an independent confirmation
    of Christ's crucifixion,although some scholars question the
    authenticity of the passage on various different grounds

    "independent confirmation", written almost 90 years after the event. Are you kidding me? Where did he get his information from?