Fabricated Jesus theory.

[Elijah John]

There is a theory popular among some if not many here on these boards that Jesus never existed at all. Even as a mortal human being. Or as an historical figure.


Maybe Jesus never existed, maybe he did.

But for those who believe that Jesus never really existed at all, the question is why would anyone bother to fabricate him?

Mythologize an actual human being in a process of hero worship and deification I can understand.

But why make up such a first cenutry Jewish preacher in the first place? What would motivate anyone or any group of individuals to do that?

[polonius]

There is a theory popular among some if not many here on these boards that Jesus never existed at all. Even as a mortal human being. Or as an historical figure.


Maybe Jesus never existed, maybe he did.

But for those who believe that Jesus never really existed at all, the question is why would anyone bother to fabricate him?

Mythologize an actual human being in a process of hero worship and deification I can understand.

But why make up such a first cenutry Jewish preacher in the first place? What would motivate anyone or any group of individuals to do that?

RESPONSE: Because the Jews wanted a king who would return political power from the Romans to the Jews. A messiah. Around Jesus time there were four messiah-candidates all of whom the Romans killed.

[steveb1]

[Replying to post 8 by steveb1]

If Jesus was not an actual, physical human being, then he was indeed a fabrication. Coded metaphor or not, if he didn't actually exist in a tangible fashion, that is still fabrication. Call it invention if you like, or even "euhemerization", still...fabrication. And the narrative events of his life, allegory.

It would be interesting to "decode" those events, and descipher the meanings behind the various metaphors.

Any examples? Ideas?

Yes -
In that one sense, Jesus was a fabrication, but the ancient world did not regard euhemerization in the way we do, as forgery and hoaxing, because they knew that such stories were coded. That is, they were worded in such a fashion that the religiously literate reader would understand that the supposed historical events were standard tropes that represented an author's religious intention.

Scholars point to the fact that the Gospels are a series of tropes of venerable religious archetypes such as the Religious Hero, the sacrificial martyr, the dying-rising god-hero, the savior who binds followers to himself with a meal, the virgin-born savior, the healer, wonder-worker/exorcist, the one who teaches the narrow path rather than the wide path, etc. Moreover, the Gospels seem to be constructed on nothing but multiple exegetics of Jewish Bible tropes - i.e., making Jesus a bearer of Torah virtues, the fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy and a prophet himself, by inventing ("fabricating") sayings, teachings, parables and deeds for Jesus to say and perform which either act out or fulfill one or another Jewish prophecy, theological tenet, or religious hope. In short, the Gospel authors invented a historical Jesus as an instrument of Torah midrash.

This literary practice provided them with an excellent way of euhemerizing the celestial Son, because it presented their idea of what the Son's human life may have looked like, had he ever taken on human flesh in the mundane geophysical world.

Their euhemerization of the heavenly Christ also sharply and with great feeling placed His heavenly suffering, Passion, death and resurrection in present-day human terms. This is probably why most scholars believe that the oldest parts of the New Testament are the Passion Narratives. The four Evangelists, Mel Gibson-like, made Jesus's torture and death as real as possible by simply taking what they knew of Roman crucifixion and applying it to their literarily-incarnated Savior. A taut, dramatic physical illustration of the torment the celestial Christ had undergone in the lower heavens - a presentation of a heavenly Passion drawn down to earth in the starkest terms.

Finally, the Gospels' Passion Narratives emphasize the profound love and obedience that the heavenly Christ had toward the Father's will. The Gospel Jesus goes willingly, obediently, to the Cross - and, even though he balks at the prospect - he does carry out God's salvific plan, against all odds, the heavenly Archons and "Powers" now being represented by his enemies within Judaism and those of the Roman imperial state. The Christ now suffers and triumphs - literarily and imaginatively - in this world, just as he had previously in the heavenly realms.

[Jubal]

Yes -
In that one sense, Jesus was a fabrication, but the ancient world did not regard euhemerization in the way we do, as forgery and hoaxing, because they knew that such stories were coded. That is, they were worded in such a fashion that the religiously literate reader would understand that the supposed historical events were standard tropes that represented an author's religious intention.

Yes,
the Gospel of Mark was clearly based on previous religious writings.

Seems clear he was not writing history - but later on, people came to believe it was, and based more books on Mark's myth.

Jubal

[steveb1]

Yes -
In that one sense, Jesus was a fabrication, but the ancient world did not regard euhemerization in the way we do, as forgery and hoaxing, because they knew that such stories were coded. That is, they were worded in such a fashion that the religiously literate reader would understand that the supposed historical events were standard tropes that represented an author's religious intention.

Yes,
the Gospel of Mark was clearly based on previous religious writings.

Seems clear he was not writing history - but later on, people came to believe it was, and based more books on Mark's myth.

Jubal

Yes, it seems that, once euhemirized, the Markan/Gospel Jesus was understood by the original intended audiences as a midrash or a codified pattern of what an "incarnation" of the heavenly Son could teach us. Later it seems that the Gospels were preached to the uneducated (most citizens of the Roman Empire) and they took the stories as literal/historical fact - with the encouragement of bishops and teachers. Finally the Gospels were declared to be canonical Christian scripture, and the notion of a historical Jesus became deeply embedded in Christianity and in lands where Christianity took root.

[Jubal]

But for those who believe that Jesus never really existed at all, the question is why would anyone bother to fabricate him?

Why would anyone bother to make up Adam and Eve ?
(I'm sure you realise they were not historical.)

Why would anyone bother to make up Isis and Osiris ?
Zeus ? Mithras ? Dionysus ? Xenu ?

People create myths and legends for many reasons.

Jubal