What is implied if Jesus' historicity was not doubted?

[maryhelena]

GDon

The title of your thread asked the question: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
Your OP went on to define what you mean by 'historical Jesus'. ''By 'historical Jesus', I mean a figure living around 30 CE who inspired the Gospel stories, even if the Gospel stories themselves are false''.

The question in the title of your OP can be investigated via the writings of those who wrote about the gospel Jesus story. As I previously wrote - while that could be an interesting exercise it is also a futile exercise - for the simple reason that the numbers of doubters, if found, do not settle the issue at hand.

The issue at hand is the number of doubters.

So - you get 100 doubters against 1000 believers - what then ? This is an exercise in futility......

[rgprice]

GD's question has merit, its perfectly fine to catalogue such statements. I think a more pertinent question, however, is whether there was anyone who expressed any knowledge of a Jesus person independent of the Gospel accounts. To my knowledge there is no evidence for any such person. Every statement about Jesus and person who discussed Jesus was discussing the person described in the Gospel stories.

[andrewcriddle]

[........................................

But also, when it comes to Celsus and the like, while we don't have record of them stating that "Jesus never existed", it is also clear that they presented no alternative knowledge of Jesus either. In other words, they did not say, "Oh yes, we know who he really was, we have an account of him that shows he really did this or that and was just a common criminal." No, that's not what they say. Instead, they, like everyone, worked from the Gospel stories and from the claims made about Jesus. They merely made critical remarks about "what was said about Jesus".

In other words they themselves possessed no "facts" that contradicted the claims of Christians, they were just expressing doubts about the claims being made. They made logical, philosophical, and theological objections.

The fact that they didn't present factual objections doesn't indicate that they were agreed on the facts, merely they they were equally ignorant of any facts.

Celsus presents a hostile alternative account of Jesus supposedly from a Jewish source.

Andrew Criddle

[StephenGoranson]

Thanks, GakuseiDon, for giving an example showing that some ancient people did claim cases of non-existence.

[maryhelena]

GD's question has merit, its perfectly fine to catalogue such statements.

OK.... catalogue away....

I think a more pertinent question, however, is whether there was anyone who expressed any knowledge of a Jesus person independent of the Gospel accounts. To my knowledge there is no evidence for any such person. Every statement about Jesus and person who discussed Jesus was discussing the person described in the Gospel stories.

[GakuseiDon]

Thanks, GakuseiDon, for giving an example showing that some ancient people did claim cases of non-existence.

You're welcome. I think it's an important point to keep in mind, that there was a certain amount of skepticism about fantastic beliefs in ancient times. Origen also writes on this:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en161.html

Before we begin our reply, we have to remark that the endeavour to show, with regard to almost any history, however true, that it actually occurred, and to produce an intelligent conception regarding it, is one of the most difficult undertakings that can be attempted, and is in some instances an impossibility. For suppose that some one were to assert that there never had been any Trojan war, chiefly on account of the impossible narrative interwoven therewith, about a certain Achilles being the son of a sea-goddess Thetis and of a man Peleus, or Sarpedon being the son of Zeus, or Ascalaphus and Ialmenus the sons of Ares, or AEneas that of Aphrodite, how should we prove that such was the case, especially under the weight of the fiction attached, I know not how, to the universally prevalent opinion that there was really a war in Ilium between Greeks and Trojans? And suppose, also, that some one disbelieved the story of OEdipus and Jocasta, and of their two sons Eteocles and Polynices, because the sphinx, a kind of half-virgin, was introduced into the narrative, how should we demonstrate the reality of such a thing? And in like manner also with the history of the Epigoni, although there is no such marvellous event interwoven with it, or with the return of the Heracleidae, or countless other historical events. But he who deals candidly with histories, and would wish to keep himself also from being imposed upon by them, will exercise his judgment as to what statements he will give his assent to, and what he will accept figuratively, seeking to discover the meaning of the authors of such inventions, and from what statements he will withhold his belief, as having been written for the gratification of certain individuals. And we have said this by way of anticipation respecting the whole history related in the Gospels concerning Jesus, not as inviting men of acuteness to a simple and unreasoning faith, but wishing to show that there is need of candour in those who are to read, and of much investigation, and, so to speak, of insight into the meaning of the writers, that the object with which each event has been recorded may be discovered.

It may have been one reason why early Christians wanted to insist that the Roman gods were real -- since they could apparently perform real acts of healing and weather divination -- but they were in fact demons. Because if the Roman gods didn't exist at all, then how would that reflect on Christian claims about Christianity?

[Peter Kirby]

Thanks, GakuseiDon, for giving an example showing that some ancient people did claim cases of non-existence.

According to Eusebius, Agrippa Castor wrote that Basilides invented prophets for himself that had no existence (E. H. 4.7.6-7):

Of these there has come down to us a most powerful refutation of Basilides by Agrippa Castor, one of the most renowned writers of that day, which shows the terrible imposture of the man.

While exposing his mysteries he says that Basilides wrote twenty-four books upon the Gospel, and that he invented prophets for himself named Barcabbas and Barcoph, and others that had no existence, and that he gave them barbarous names in order to amaze those who marvel at such things; that he taught also that the eating of meat offered to idols and the unguarded renunciation of the faith in times of persecution were matters of indifference; and that he enjoined upon his followers, like Pythagoras, a silence of five years.

[dbz]

So - you get 100 doubters against 1000 believers - what then ? This is an exercise in futility......

And imagine if a Middle-platonic first century "doubter" knew the "truth" that the Monad existed and that Christ devotees held deluded positions on reality! Much like we regard the deluded position held by modern Flatulenceearth devotees.

How much media content would a first century "doubter" produce just to specifically refute Christ devotees rather than the more numerous deluded Osiris devotees, etc. ?

Would any Christ devotee curator maintain such media content (cf. Archimedes Palimpsest)?