Isn't assuming jesus ever existed a bit of wishful thinking?

• The majority of people in the world today assume or believe that Jesus Christ was at the very least a real person. Perhaps he wasn't really "the Messiah", perhaps he was not "The Son of God", and perhaps he didn't actually perform miracles and rise from the dead, but he really was a great moral teacher who traveled around Galilee with followers and got arrested by the Jews and crucified by the Romans right? Not likely. In fact, a close examination of the evidence shows that the best explanation for the story of "Jesus Christ" is what we call "mythology". The case that I will be outlining here is that there never was any "Jesus Christ" nor any meaningful real life basis for the story of "Jesus Christ". Like many other religious figures, "Jesus Christ" began as a theological concept, was later used as a character in allegorical stories, and was then historicized as someone whom people believed really existed. The belief in a literal "human" Jesus most likely emerged as eucharist rituals and theology developed around the concept of the "flesh" and "blood" of Christ and these concepts merged with allegorical narratives about the figure. What is the basis for the claim that "Jesus never existed"? Actually, there are many important facts that support this conclusion. First let's look at an outline of some of the major points in this case: The Gospel of Mark was the first story of Jesus that was written, and all others are dependent on it The Gospel of Mark shows clear signs of being written as an allegorical fiction Virtually every detail of the life of Jesus comes from "Old Testament" scriptures Some of the details of the life of Jesus are based on mistranslations of the Hebrew scriptures Jesus' crucifixion on Passover defies historical believability, yet makes perfect sense metaphorically The Gospels make many claims that are contradicted by the historical record The earliest writings about Jesus, from Paul and others, contain no details of his life Many statements in the letters of Paul only make sense if Paul does not view Jesus Christ as a historical person There is not one single writing from or about Jesus during his supposed lifetime Philo, a prolific Jewish writer who lived from 20 BCE to 50 CE, wrote extensively about the political and theological movements throughout the Mediterranean, and his views foreshadowed Christian theology, yet he never once wrote anything about Jesus. Not only this, but he actually wrote about political conflicts between the Jews and Pontius Pilate in Judea All of the non-Christian references to Jesus can be shown to have either been introduced later by Christian scribes or were originally based on Christian claims There is no evidence of any knowledge of a tomb of Jesus (empty or occupied) prior to the Gospel stories There were many conflicting beliefs about who Jesus Christ was in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries, including beliefs that he had never existed on earth "in the flesh" The Catholics made purely theological arguments as to why Jesus Christ had to have existed "in the flesh"

• Answer:

  Why the ignorance when the majority of people have the education and intellect to be able to understand the evidence of history?! The bible is what is called "Faction" A fictional story set in a factual time and place. Thus the time, place and real historical characters are all correct but the fictional characters and stories are not! There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record - that is right - not one! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are well recorded! There is not a single contemporary record from any source and even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death! He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record? Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death! Pilate is recorded in the Roman record as a somewhat lack luster man but no mention of a Jesus, a trial or crucifixion that would surely have been used to make him look brighter! At best he was an amalgam of those others but almost certainly never existed!