AWAKE! NO. 5 2016 - Did Jesus Really Exist?

by ttdtt 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Saename

  But to open that can of worms is to introduce the idea that every text can be subject to such manipulation and so every one of those passages by ancient authors they cite must be buttressed against it . . . To introduce doubt to a world of black and white fundamentalism is what they are very keen to avoid.

  Very true. Haven't thought about that when I was writing my post. If they wanted to write more extensively on Josephus and Tacitus, they would have to explain how Josephus' second reference to Jesus is a later interpolation, even though its core is original according to the majority of scholars. Unless, of course, they were to claim that the whole passage comes from Josephus directly, which would be entirely absurd and likely foolish. Still, if they wrote that Josephus' second reference had been tampered with, you are right that in essence they would be acknowledging that every historical source and text is subject to manipulation.

  To those followers of the Governing Body, it seems that Paul wrote all of the letters in the New Testament, and there is no further discussion with them. To them, it seems that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written by actual Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and that those gospels were completed before the Jewish revolt in 66–70 CE. Oh, and how fiercely will they defend their notion that Jesus actually prophesied that the Temple would fall . . . because the gospels say it, so they must have been written before the revolt. They don't acknowledge any suggestion that it may not be as clear as the Governing Body tells them it is.

  But if they did acknowledge that, they would be in essence admitting that the the authorship of the Bible is not so clear. Don't even get them started on how the gospel writers actually knew all those details about Jesus, such as what time it was when this and that happened, how Jesus sat down when he sat down, how Jesus said the words he said, and what exactly he said . . . Although I do wonder what they would say to that. Have you ever asked them about it?

  P.S. I'm not sure where my head was when I was writing my first post in this thread. Grant was also a historian...
• 

  Village Idiot

  Did Jesus Really Exist?

  Of course he existed; why everyone knows he was white with a trim Western style beard.
  
• 

  Saename

  Village Idiot - Of course he existed; why everyone knows he was white with a trim Western style beard.

  Exactly... Never quite understood that one...
• 

  Mephis

  Amusingly, Grant wrote a book on the historical Jesus in which his conclusion is that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher expecting the imminent end of the world. Which didn't arrive. So when he says Jesus must have existed, his Jesus is not that of the WBTS and almost every premise they take for granted to make a conclusion is flawed by citing him as support.

  When I asked about some of the issues I saw around gospels and accuracy, I got the 'holy spirit did it' answer and questions about the strength of my faith. Which is the way it always went with awkward questions. The bible is always 100% accurate and correct. Apart from the bits where the writer needs a bit of help from Brooklyn in conveying what he really meant to say...
• 

  Saename

  Mephis - Amusingly, Grant wrote a book on the historical Jesus in which his conclusion is that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher expecting the imminent end of the world. Which didn't arrive.

  Well, this is the dominant scholarly view. The Jews began to have those ideas about the imminence of the end of the world around 150 years before Jesus, as far as I remember, so that is what Jesus believed. It seems that he was born into it as much as people today are born into their respective religions—except that Jesus did change quite a few things when he interpreted the Hebrew religion and its sacred texts.

  Mephis - The bible is always 100% accurate and correct. Apart from the bits where the writer needs a bit of help from Brooklyn in conveying what he really meant to say...

  That is the funniest part of religions. Whenever they try to argue about their beliefs, they always have to say that when author A said B, he really meant C. And when C proves to be inaccurate, as would be the case with prophecies, then it is magically discovered that the author actually meant D. Heck, the generation thing I find so amusing...
• 

  slimboyfat

  Isn't it customary, when asking a question like this, to first explain why the question arises in the first place? There is no sense, anywhere in this magazine, as to who has been asking this question in the first place, who supports the idea, how it originated, or the arguments involved.

  They quote Einstein not once, but twice. The same quote, taking up space in a very short article, already devoid of any real content.
• 

  Simon

  There is more evidence that the Lock Ness Monster and Big Foot exist than Jesus does.

  Eye-witness testimony, even photos.

  Yet we know they don't.

  Simply quoting someone else's baseless belief doesn't pass the bar for being evidence beyond religious circles. The trouble is that they need to quote people from the past because lets face it, more and more if people say they believe in Jesus today it's pretty clear they are a nut.
• 

  stuckinarut2

  In cases like this, it's surprising that the society doesn't just quote its own previous published works in order to "prove" whatever claim they are currently writing about.

  ie: "experts have been noted to have said......"

  Self referential praise and quotes would be suitable.....
• 

  ttdtt

  Funny how in the WHY DOES IT MATTER section - it fails to mention how Jesus (dogs right hand man) will come down on his nice horsey and slaughter 7+ billion innocent people.

  Wonder if they they that would not be a big selling point to normal people?
  :)
  

  I like this "benifit of jesus" coming.

  The earth will fully recover from its present sick state and produce bountiful crops.
  

  SICK STATE? Based on what? COMPLETE and shameless BS!!

  The world produces 1.5 times the amount of food needed for the 7 billion people on it?
  If thats sick - I will take it all the time!

  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-holt-gimenez/world-hunger_b_1463429.html

  http://www.oxfam.ca/there-enough-food-feed-world

  https://overpopulationisamyth.com/food-theres-lots-it#Who_says_there_is_enough_food_for_everyone
• 

  bemused

  Very odd. Why issue an unconvincing article to support the existence of Jesus when most JWs and potential converts presumably had no doubt about the historical Jesus being a real person? All this can achieve is sow seeds of doubt where there were none before.