[size=15pt]'Jesus NEVER existed': Writer finds no mention of Christ in 126 historical texts and says he was a 'mythical character'[/size]

---

Writer Michael Paulkovich has claimed that there is a little evidence for a person known as Jesus existing in history
Jesus is thought to have lived from about 7BC to 33AD in the Roman Empire
However Paulkovich says he found little to no mention of the supposed messiah in 126 texts written in the first to third centuries
Only one mention of Jesus was present, in a book by Roman historian Josephus Flavius, but he says this was added by later editors
He says this is surprising despite the ‘alleged worldwide fame’ of Jesus
And this has led him to believe that Jesus was a 'mythical character'

Historical researcher Michael Paulkovich has claimed that Jesus of Nazareth was a ‘mythical character’ and never existed.

The controversial discovery was apparently made after he found no verifiable mention of Christ from 126 writers during the ‘time of Jesus’ from the first to third centuries.

He says he is a fictional character invented by followers of Christianity to create a figure to worship.


Writer Micheal Paulkovich has claimed that there is a little evidence for a person known as Jesus existing in history (painting of The Last Supper pictured). Jesus is thought by most historians to have lived from about 7BC to 33AD in Judea in the Roman Empire

The claims were made in an article for Free Inquiry called The Fable of the Christ and a book called No Meek Messiah.

In the article and book, Paulkovich says he found an absence of evidence for Jesus in historical texts.

And he says this is surprising despite his ‘global miracles and alleged worldwide fame.’

WAS JESUS A MIDDLE-CLASS ARCHITECT (IF HE EXISTED)?

Rather than being born in a stable to a carpenter father, Jesus was actually the son of a successful, middle-class and highly intellectual architect.

This claim comes from biblical scholar Dr Adam Bradford, who also says that between the ages of 12 and 30 - the so-called 'missing years' of Jesus' life, when little is known about him - he was studying at religious schools and became the highest-ranking rabbi in Judea.

The radical revision of Christian history would suggest that, in preaching the spurning of worldly possessions for an austere life, Jesus may have been speaking from experience.

Dr Bradford has analysed the Bible's original Greek and Hebrew scriptures to try to establish the truth about Christ's background.

He says a mistranslation of the Greek word 'tekton' to describe the profession of Joseph, Jesus's father, is one of many mistakes that have led to a fundamental misunderstanding of Christ's character.

Dr Bradford claims that while 'tekton' is usually said to mean carpenter, it more accurately means master builder or architect. As an architect, Joseph would have had a higher social status that enabled him to better educate his son.

The 126 texts he studied were all written in the period during or soon after the supposed existence of Jesus, when Paulkovich says they would surely have heard of someone as famous as Jesus - but none mention him.

'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,’ he writes.

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

Of the writings he examined, written from the first to third centuries, he found only one book that contained a mention of Jesus - The Jewish Wars by the Roman historian Josephus Flavius written in 95 CE, but he claims it is fabricated.

Paulkovich says the mentions of Jesus were added later by editors, not by Josephus.

Even in the Bible Paulkovich says Paul, often credited with spreading what would become Christianity, never refers to 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,’ he writes.

‘Paul knows neither where nor when Jesus lived, and considers the crucifixion metaphorical.’


The 126 texts Paulkovich studied (shown here) were all written in the period during or soon after the supposed existence of Jesus, when Paulkovich says they would surely have heard of someone as famous as Jesus - but none mention him, leading the writer to conclude he is a 'mythical character' invented later


Paulkovich says he found little to no mention of the supposed messiah in 126 texts written in the first to third centuries. Only one mention of Jesus was present, in a book by Roman historian Josephus Flavius, but he says this was added by later editors. Pictured is the statue of Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

He also says that silence from Jesus himself is telling, with no personal accounts being written.

‘Perhaps the most bewildering "silent one" is the mythical super-savior himself, Jesus the Son of God ostensibly sent on a suicide mission to save us from the childish notion of "Adam's Transgression" as we learn from Romans,’ he says.

‘The Jesus character is a phantom of a wisp of a personage who never wrote anything. So, add one more: 127.’

He continues: ‘Christian father Marcion of Pontus in 144 CE denied any virgin birth or childhood for Christ - Jesus' infant circumcision was thus a lie, as well as the crucifixion!

‘Reading the works of second century Christian father Athenagoras, one never encounters the word Jesus (or Ἰησοῦς or Ἰησοῦν, as he would have written) - Athenagoras was thus unacquainted with the name of his savior it would seem.’

And he claims even the book of Mark in the Bible, which contains the story of Christ’s resurrection, was doctored later on.

‘The original booklet given the name "Mark" ended at 16:8, later forgers adding the fanciful resurrection tale,’ he says.

‘Millions should have heard of the Jesus "crucifixion" with its astral enchantments: zombie armies and meteorological marvels recorded not by any historian, but only in the dubitable scriptures scribbled decades later by superstitious yokels.’

Paulkovich’s views will surely prove very controversial, as most scholars do not support the theory that Jesus never existed.

Most agree that he was a Galilean Jew born between 7 to 4 BC and who died in 30 to 36 AD.

It is also widely agreed that he was baptised by John the Baptist and crucified on the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.


Paulkovich’s views will prove very controversial, as most scholars do not support the theory. Most agree that he was a Galilean Jew born between 7 to 4 BC and who died in 30 to 36 AD. It is also widely agreed that he was baptised by John the Baptist and crucified (illustrated) on the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2776194/Jesus-never-existed-Writer-finds-no-mention-Christ-126-historical-texts-says-mythical-character.html

Sorry to say guys... I didn't read the post but went straight to the list of books the useless guy read to give him the assertion that Christ never existed. Lo and behold, I saw Josephus and Philo of Alexandria... These books are the background of early Christianity and I even have soft and hard copies that I refer to... And according to Wikipedia,

The extant manuscripts of the writings of the 1st-century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.[1][2] Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.[1][3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus also http://www.bede.org.uk/Josephus.htm

With that alone, I stand to shut him up. So I just posted this for some of the LOGIC guys I dont want to mention and might have seen it elsewhere to know that he was there... but the so called researcher was not looking for him to be there but not to be there... Find me and you shall see me says the Lord.

Jesus, the messager of GOD, existed fine fine, it is his birth, death and lessons that has been turned falsehood by the white people.

ledafaze: Sorry to say guys... I didn't read the post but went straight to the list of books the useless guy read to give him the assertion that Christ never existed. Lo and behold, I saw Josephus and Philo of Alexandria... These books are the background of early Christianity and I even have soft and hard copies that I refer to... And according to Wikipedia,


With that alone, I stand to shut him up. So I just posted this for some of the LOGIC guys I dont want to mention and might have seen it elsewhere to know that he was there... but the so called researcher was not looking for him to be there but not to be there... Find me and you shall see me says the Lord.

LMFAO.
Ever heard the word Circular Logic?


Batman's butler wrote about him, so I guess that means Batman is real.

Apatheist:
LMFAO.
Ever heard the word Circular Logic?


Batman's butler wrote about him, so I guess that means Batman is real.

You should have said Harry Potter is real because you read the books ni

The above tool talking about josephus being an "eye-witness" is very misinformed....he merely talked about "jesus" as the so-called "christ"....referring to him in 3rd person....and nothing magical or divine was said about the alledged "man"...
And the very aspect that it has no valid historical document to verify it discredits it from being sourced on any merit but its own.....like apatheist said ....circular logic

ledafaze: Sorry to say guys... I didn't read the post but went straight to the list of books the useless guy read to give him the assertion that Christ never existed. Lo and behold, I saw Josephus and Philo of Alexandria... These books are the background of early Christianity and I even have soft and hard copies that I refer to... And according to Wikipedia,


With that alone, I stand to shut him up. So I just posted this for some of the LOGIC guys I dont want to mention and might have seen it elsewhere to know that he was there... but the so called researcher was not looking for him to be there but not to be there... Find me and you shall see me says the Lord.

Haba1
Nija people, na wa o.

It is not only amusing , but very alarming at the low level of intellectual girth on display here.

You just admitted that you did not read the post, but you are bold enough to attempt to refute the very post you did not read.
How manage?
The same way you attempt to answer an exam questions without reading the questions?
No wonder the failure rate is sooooo high.

Is that laziness, or dishonesty, or pre-emptive cognitive dissonance?

For , if you had read the post, you would have noticed that the arthur of the article mentioned that the reference to Jesus on the book of Josephus was later redaction, a later act of pius fraud, inserted with the sole aim of giving some semblance of credibility to the myth of Jesus.

The so-called reference to Jesus was simply a heresay reference. In other words, the reference was about the early christians who were followers of a man who had been called jesus. It was a reference to the very myth, and not a proof of it.

ledafaze: Sorry to say guys... I didn't read the post but went straight to the list of books the useless guy read to give him the assertion that Christ never existed. Lo and behold, I saw Josephus and Philo of Alexandria... These books are the background of early Christianity and I even have soft and hard copies that I refer to... And according to Wikipedia,


With that alone, I stand to shut him up. So I just posted this for some of the LOGIC guys I dont want to mention and might have seen it elsewhere to know that he was there... but the so called researcher was not looking for him to be there but not to be there... Find me and you shall see me says the Lord.

Actually you are the one who is dumb and stu.pid. First for not reading the text before attempts at rebuttal, but more directly, because Josephus' texts' reference to 'Jesus' does NOT prove the historicity of 'Jesus', firstly because Josephus was born several years AFTER ''Jesus'' was supposed to have ''ascended into heaven'', and therefore could not have been an eyewitness, only reporting hearsay, and secondly, because the reference in itself has been adjudged an interpolation (forgery/fraud) by researchers. Philo also lived several decades after the alleged life of 'Jesus' so was not an eyewitness either. So essentially, the fact remains that no contemporary of 'Jesus' wrote a single word about him. It was several decades after his alleged ''ascension'' that even the New Testament was written, and the New Testament was written anonymously, meaning we don't know who wrote the 'gospels', with names like 'Matthew', 'Mark', 'Luke' etc merely affixed to the various 'books' of the NT by God knows Whom. All in all, very dodgy for someone that was supposedly ''the Son of God''.

ledafaze:

You should have said Harry Potter is real because you read the books ni

LMAO. Maybe you should have read the whole article instead of the first line.
From the Wikipedia article:

However, critics point out that Josephus wrote about a number of people who went by the name Jesus, Yeshua or Joshua, [17]

Also:

Origen's statement in his Commentary on Matthew ( Book X, Chapter 17) that Josephus" did not accept Jesus as Christ", is usually seen as a confirmation of the generally accepted fact that Josephus did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah. [73][114] This forms a key external argument against the total authenticity of the Testimonium in that Josephus, as a Jew, would not have claimed Jesus as the Messiah, and the reference to "he was Christ" in the Testimonium must be a Christian interpolation. [4] Based on this observation alone, Paul L. Maier calls the case for the total authenticity of the Testimonium "hopeless". [4] Almost all modern scholars reject the total authenticity of the Testimonium , while the majority of scholars still hold that it includes an authentic kernel. [4][115]

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

ROSSIKE:

Actually you are the one who is dumb and stu.pid. First for not reading the text before attempts at rebuttal, but more directly, because Josephus' texts' reference to 'Jesus' does NOT prove the historicity of 'Jesus', firstly because Josephus was born several years AFTER ''Jesus'' was supposed to have ''ascended into heaven'', and therefore could not have been an eyewitness, only reporting hearsay, and secondly, because the reference in itself has been adjudged an interpolation (forgery/fraud) by researchers. Philo also lived several decades after the alleged life of 'Jesus' so was not an eyewitness either. So essentially, the fact remains that no contemporary of 'Jesus' wrote a single word about him. It was several decades after his alleged ''ascension'' that even the New Testament was written, and the New Testament was written anonymously, meaning we don't know who wrote the 'gospels', with names like 'Matthew', 'Mark', 'Luke' etc merely affixed to the various 'books' of the NT by God knows Whom. All in all, very dodgy for someone that was supposedly ''the Son of God''.

I have nothing to say to you... I have seen ur senseless threads.

plaetton:
Haba1
Nija people, na wa o.
It is not only amusing , but very alarming at the low level of intellectual girth on display here.
You just admitted that you did not read the post, but you are bold enough to attempt to refute the very post you did not read.
How manage?
The same way you attempt to answer an exam questions without reading the questions?
No wonder the failure rate is sooooo high.
Is that laziness, or dishonesty, or pre-emptive cognitive dissonance?
For , if you had read the post, you would have noticed that the arthur of the article mentioned that the reference to Jesus on the book of Josephus was later redaction, a later act of pius fraud, inserted with the sole aim of giving some semblance of credibility to the myth of Jesus.
The so-called reference to Jesus was simply a heresay reference. In other words, the reference was about the early christians who were followers of a man who had been called jesus. It was a reference to the very myth, and not a proof of it.

Take a good look at this scenario...

This is colour PINK...
No its not pink, its (a shade of) red.

What do I expect from critics? I expect more than this...

Bring it on.

ledafaze:

I have nothing to say to you... I have seen ur senseless threads.



Take a good look at this scenario...

This is colour PINK...
No its not pink, its (a shade of) red.

What do I expect from critics? I expect more than this...

Bring it on.

You are funny.

The legend of Jesus is amazing . He probably never existed yet our dates are written based on his 'life'!
Hmmm. Emperor Constantine must have been a brilliant man to have concocted a tight story around this figure who was more or less just imaginary!