On The Preponderance Of The Evidence

In his article titled ‘Jesus: A Man of History’ in the December 18th issue of the biweekly magazine The New American, Steve Byas quotes from a couple of Roman historians of the early second century C.E. as evidence to make his case.  However, he fails to note that there is also evidence that such references were interpolations - ‘revisions’ - from Christian forgers in later years, attempting to buttress their case.*  With extremely scant actual historical evidence for their case.  (Including for the Nero/Christian persecution widely-believed business.  Tell a lie big enough and often enough, etc. etc.)  

I don’t want to make this particular blog a definitive ‘take’ on this whole subject.  I just want to mako one point here.  Which is to say: 

On the preponderance of the evidence, then, the most honest conclusion that a truth seeker - a genuine truth seeker - can come to, in my opinion, in regards to This Matter, is that:-

the story of Jesus as conveyed to posterity in the so-called New Testament of the Jewish Bible is a fable; having been concocted out of whole cloth - and with the aid of the stories of various god-men and even “saviors” extant at the time - by one very learned member of the Jewish priestly line in particular (Josephus Flavius), or, as is most likely the case, in conjunction with craftful members of the household of the imperial Flavian dynasty, of god the father Vespasian and sons Titus (to become the concocted Son of Man of Jewish lore) and Domitian;

in order primarily to get the Jews to ‘cease and desist’ in their incessant rebelling against the yoke of Rome - because of their deep belief in a militant Messiah who would lead them to victory against their enemies - and, rather, “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Luke 20:25) and “be subject to the governing authorities” (Romans 13:1);

and as a consequence of this deception, the Jewish priestly class ‘lived to fight another day’ - after the destruction of their Temple by the man therein painted as their militant Messiah, having come to chastise them for being so stiff-necked as to think to stand against the might of Rome; with the story of the concocted pacifistic Messiah, ‘historically’ placed back at the beginning of the generation that would not pass away until the destruction of the Temple would occur, pointing to his ‘Coming’ by way of various plot devices - not only becoming the leaders of a (cover) new religion but the political leaders of their former enemies as well.  The religious and political leaders, then, of the day.  And for many days to come.

Until rightful

kingdom come.

God movmng in mysterious ways…

I rest my case.

For now.

—

* See, e.g., Acharya S/D.M. Murdock’s excellently researched book ‘The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold’, especially, in this context, pp. 51-2.  Also see her ‘Who Was Jesus?: Fingerprints of The Christ’.  In which she quotes, e.g., researcher F.F. Bruce (’New Testament History’): 

   “Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent on these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic.”  (p. 84)