BACK

The Five Proofs that "Jesus" Didn't Exist

There are six proofs that "Jesus"the Sun-God did not exist at all. Keep in mind as you read that each of the six points alone is sufficient proof for this claim. Put together, they make an airtight case, that cannot be denied except by putting oneself in the realm of delusion.

  1. The anti-scientific nature of "Jesus"' life.

    To believe in the "Jesus" of the Bible, we must accept the possibility of both virgin births and resurrections. This means that we must forget about, amongst other things, all our scientific knowledge about the reproductive system and metabolism, as well as our constant observation that neither virgin births or resurrections happen, except through the use of medical technology. To believe that "Jesus" existed is to abandon all rationality.


  2. The historical silence about "Jesus".

    Here is a short list of writers and historians who lived within the same century as the Jesus myth. Remember that of all these, only one (Josephus) is said to have written anything about it, and it is decried by most scholars as an interpolation :

    Caius Suetonius, Josephus, Philo-Judæus, Seneca, Pliny Elder, Arrian, Petronius, Dion Pruseus, Paterculus, Juvenal, Martial, Persius, Plutarch, Pliny Younger, Tacitus, Justus of Tiberius, Apollonius, Quintilian, Lucanus, Epictetus, Hermogones, Silius Italicus, Statius, Ptolemy, Appian, Phlegon, Phædrus, Valerius Maximus, Lucian, Pausanias, Florus Lucius, Quintius Curtius, Aulus Gellius, Dio Chrysostom, Columella Valerius Flaccus, Damis, Favorinus, Lysias, Pomponius Mela, Appion of Alexandria, Theon of Smyrna, Justus of Tiberias.

    This argument is sometimes called an argument from ignorance, but this is mistaken. We should not disbelieve in "Jesus" because of the silence, but because the silence is not a rational expectation. Imagine if no television station, no newspaper and no book reported anything about the moon landing. Such a thought is ridiculous ! Should we believe that God himself came down to Earth, performed incredible miracles, and no one wrote about it ?


  3. The Gospels are not historical evidence.

    To be historical evidence, a piece of literature must be contemporary (otherwise it is hearsay, which is not evidence) and be relatively consistent (if it is indeed about a real event).

    The Gospels do not fulfill either basic criteria. The earlier Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, is widely acknowledged to have been written no earlier than 65 CE (and that it was probably written between 70-73 CE), which is more than 30 years after the fact. This is hearsay, and has to be thrown out.

    As for the contradictions in the Gospels, they have been listed elsewhere. See for instance The myth of Jesus' birth. Also see the famous Easter Challenge, which Dan Barker has issued as a challenge to all Christians to try to reconcile all the contradictions of "Jesus"' crucifixion. So far, no one has managed to present such a coherent story. Our only possible conclusion is that the Gospels are highly incoherent.


  4. The "Jesus" muth was derived from other messianic myths.

    The "Jesus" Sun-God is part of a process of memetic evolution, by which myths draw from earlier versions, earlier stories, to form their structure. We should therefore expect that the "Jesus" myth would draw most heavily from a recent messiah, which it does. This messiah was called Mithra, the object of Roman worship. Mithra was born of a virgin on December 25th, had twelve companions, was "the way, the truth and the light", could redeem the souls of the dead, was celebrated with baptism, anointing, bread and water, and consecrated wine, was risen after three days, had a sacred day on Sunday, etc.

    Another way we know that myths are evolutions of each other is through their shared attributes : passover, virgin births, blood sacrifices, the winter solstice, crucifixion and resurrection. Myths originate from Sun Worship - all messiahs are fundamentally Sun-Gods.

    The fact that all the Gospels were derived from a much earlier "Q Document" proves this evolution. For more information on the Q Document, see the relevant section on the web site Early Christian Writings.


  5. The ignorance of early Church Fathers about "Jesus"' earthly life.

    Why do the Church Fathers, those who would most need to use the "Jesus" myth in their preaching, say nothnig about it until the second century (and even then, in few instances) ? If "Jesus" had actually existed, the first thing they would have preached was "Jesus"' life, not the mythological aspects of "Jesus". Yet they did the exact reverse !

    On the bizarre lack of knowledge of "Jesus"' life in the first century, see A Conspiracy of Silence. Also see the Top 20 of Missing References to the Gospel Jesus in the New Testament Epistles for the most fatal examples.