What do you make of the news going around the internet that Jesus is a made up figure of the Romans?

Links?

Oh yeah, I read it. I think it’s plausible, but I haven’t seen the supposed proof.

Mama: Check my Facebook page.

Boring. I’m not confident that we have the ability to accurately research and debunk a conspiracy theory about events that happened 2000 years ago. The historicity of Jesus isn’t nearly as interesting as current day belief, religion, and its effects.

Why would the Womans want to undermine theiw own pantheon and political powew by inventing this wadical wevolutionawy?

I don’t think it is anything new. I have heard for years that some people don’t believe Jesus ever existed. I did not only hear it from what some would call hateful atheists, I know someone who was a devout Catholic for many years who had read up on it and found it plausable, why it is circulating around the internet now I don’t know. It probably benefits the religious right most. People start saying there was no Jesus and the Christians get all wound up, united, stregnthened in their fight against the secularization ofnthe US and world. Nothing like someone trying to take away your religion to make you want your religion to exist forever and fight of those who want to take it away.

Replacing one made-up fictional story with another made-up fictional story.

Not remotely plausible. It’s frustrating that this is getting any attention at all. There are actual coherent, well-argued, well-researched mythicist narratives.

This nonsense is not one of them.

@ragingloli especiawy when they had Bawabas to deal with (and Wodewick).

OK. You are talking about Mithras, the Roman God.

So this is how I would answer in detail.

May I also add wouldn’t it be funny if the English word myth was named after the roman God “Mith—ra-. LOL but it isn’t.

@KaY_Jelly I believe she’s referring to this story, not Mithras.

Jesus existed and was put to death by crucifixion. There isn’t much doubt about that and Tacitus mentions it in his ‘Annals’. The Romans for all their faults wrote in stone. The Internet is written on air.

One view of the life of Jesus is that he was a strong opponent of the Sadducees, who exercised great religious power and who sucked up to the Roman occupiers. In this interpretation, Jesus’ belief in a more personal relationship with God, not dependent on the priests in the Temple, was both a religious and a political rebellion, leading to crucifixion by the Romans.

The story is something made up to see what the reaction is. Can you imagine the Romans wanting a Jesus figure???? He was real.

File that one with “America is a republic, not a democracy and was never meant to be one;” “the Masons rule the world via demonic rites, mystical secret formulas, and special knowledge, they take their orders from the Bilderberg Group which is under the direct control of twelve international Jewish banking families, including the Rothschilds;” “the Holocaust never happened;” “the Protocols of Zion are true” and were not written by the Tsarist Chekka to justify the Russian pogroms of the late 19th century, and “Lincoln and Kennedy were both assassinated because they wouldn’t cooperate with the international banking system (see international Jewish banking families above). Jesus, the worst writer on Fluther can come up with better fiction than this. How cloistered must one be to even entertain any of this pap as truth?

People write things like that to get attention or to entertain others. It’s nothing more.

Bonjour. If they put it on the Internet, it has to be true.

^ or a book

…..........Nothing new…...in 2000 years…...people will wonder if fluther.com existed…..it’s all about perception…...

@zander101
Nah, they will be too busy worshipping Iron Man.

Has this “news” reached the New York Times and Washington Post?

It would be counter productive to make up a story and then spend so much time and resources to try to squelch it.

Jews invented Jesus. Later, Roman bishops decided to ise this fiction for their own ends, so they made the Bible.

Roman bishops did not “make” the bible. It was a compendium written by many many authors over a long time period and collected under one cover.

“If all of the Bibles listed here were traced back to their origins (a work beyond the scope of this writing) the path would lead directly back to the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments that exist today.”
Source

“The Old Testament was compiled and edited by various men over a period of centuries, with many scholars concluding that the Hebrew canon was solidified by about the 3rd century BC.” Source.

“The New Testament is an anthology, a collection of Christian works written in the common Greek language of the first century, at different times by various writers, who were early Jewish disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. In almost all Christian traditions today, the New Testament consists of 27 books. The original texts were written in the first and perhaps the second centuries of the Christian Era…All of the works which would eventually be incorporated into the New Testament would seem to have been written no later than around AD 150.” Source

Yes, Roman bishops DID make the Bible. They chose which of many older Jewish myths would be included in it. Many such writings were rejected. I see someone does not know the real history involved. As I said, many Jewsih religious writings were not included by the Romans who made the Bible. Dan Brown used some of them to claim Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had children. Other older writings told more about Cain and Abel. This person who says I am wrong needs to study much more and be more objective.

(Aaand, i’m outta here.)