What Archaeology Is Telling Us About the Real Jesus

[guillaumeb]

From well into the article:

“I don’t know any mainstream scholar who doubts the historicity of Jesus,” said Eric Meyers, an archaeologist and emeritus professor in Judaic studies at Duke University. “The details have been debated for centuries, but no one who is serious doubts that he’s a historical figure.”......

I heard much the same from Byron McCane, an archaeologist and history professor at Florida Atlantic University. “I can think of no other example who fits into their time and place so well but people say doesn’t exist,” he said.

And also:

Scholars who study Jesus divide into two opposing camps separated by a very bright line: those who believe the wonder-working Jesus of the Gospels is the real Jesus, and those who think the real Jesus—the man who inspired the myth—hides below the surface of the Gospels and must be revealed by historical research and literary analysis. Both camps claim archaeology as their ally, leading to some fractious debates and strange bedfellows.

To read more of this fascinating article:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/12/jesus-tomb-archaeology/

[Kablooie]

1. And then there are those who think that Jesus is here with us right now.

And he's the president of the US.

Honestly. Some of his followers believe this.

[guillaumeb]

2. Perhaps some do believe that. I have not seen any evidence, but.......

Trump as an object lesson on the danger of narcissism?

[Mariana]

4. Oh, I don't believe they really think he's Jesus.

They think he's better than Jesus.

[wasupaloopa]

3. Other contries have a "Jesus" who's story is very similar to Jesus in the bible. I have a book

Last edited Wed Nov 29, 2017, 10:48 PM - Edit history (1)

about an Indian Jesus. They did not call him Jesus, he has a different name but I misplaced the book and don't recall his name.

[guillaumeb]

6. And there is Mithras. eom

[monmouth4]

5. And, of course, there's Mary Magdeline, shoved to the back, was she his wife, did they have children

So many questions. MM made out to be a loose woman,etc. and other negative stories about her. Makes me angry.

[guillaumeb]

7. Many believe Mary Madeline to be a hero.

I would agree.

[monmouth4]

9. Me too and she has been shut out. She was a teacher and spread his gospels. Sad..n/t

[guillaumeb]

17. A patriarchal society has little room for a female leader. eom

[Voltaire2]

8. Scholars who study Jesus are generally starting

from a position of belief. They are in divinity schools, or that peculiar branch of archeology, biblical archeology.

The problem for the historical Jesus is a lack of actual evidence. No contemporary accounts. He didn’t write anything. Whatever he did, at the time he did it nobody bothered to record it. At best the earliest gospel was written decades later.

When you have scholars debating “miracles” you are no longer discussing archeology or history, the discussion is theological.

By the way the tomb is now dated to the reign of Constantine, about 300 years after the alleged god-man was killed.

[Bretton Garcia]

10. No "mainstream" scholars doubt historical Jesus?

1) The mainstream is composed of believers sworn to faith, not empirical evidence or science.

2) In formal logic, the Geographic argument is an appeal to at best, common opinion. Which has little standing in logic and science.

3) Or at best, it was the logical fallacy known as an Appeal to Authority.

Real science relies on empirical evidence; not the say-so of everyday people, or self-styled experts on fairies and so forth.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. A few thousand words, to answer "nothing"

There are still no archaeological discoveries that tell us about Jesus. There are plenty that tell us about general life in 1st century Judaea, but all the article can do to connect that with Jesus is "imagine" and "suppose".

The one artifact that did claim a connection with Jesus, that ossuary with family names on, wasn't mentioned, I guess because it doesn't seem to have much credibility these days: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ossuary

[MineralMan]

12. Well, I read the entire article. Aside from demonstrating

that there were places in that part of the world at that time, I saw no mention of actual evidence of a historical Jesus in the article. Lots of "could have been," "might have been," and similar statements, but nothing I would call evidence. There is evidence of the culture, architecture and other aspects of life at that time, but not of an individual person.

In my opinion, no such evidence will every be found, due to the granularity of evidence that minor after a couple of millenia. Documenting how people lived, what their buildings were like, what sort of pottery and other items were in use is well within the purview of archaeology, but finding evidence of an individual who was not celebrated with statuary, inscriptions, etc. is unlikely.

Oh, well...

[Voltaire2]

21. There is one potential source of documentary evidence from the era that is still

being worked on. It is a library from Herculaneum (part of the Pompeii disaster) that contained thousands of scrolls, many of which have survived, but all of which are so damaged by time and the initial disaster that recovering them has been up to now impossible. New imaging techniques are being tested to see if they can be read without needing to unroll them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herculaneum_papyri

It is unlikely that there would be any christian references in them. But as the date - 79 CE - is in the right range, it is always possible.

[MineralMan]

22. It's always good to hear of new scrolls.

There are many things that could be found. Not just relating to that subject area. I hope they can recover some text.

[Bradshaw3]

40. If there is no mention of a Jesus you won't hear about it

However, if there is the slightest, even one word, about someone called Jesus it will be spread worldwide as proof of a supernatural, miracle-slinging son of God whose existence is now proven once and for all.

[Cartoonist]

13. Jesus, the man

I used to be content with accepting Jesus' existence, but not divinity. Not anymore. Articles like this reinforce my disbelief in his existence.

Just show me some proof. Anything will do. This type of religion posing as pseudo-science is a joke.

[trotsky]

14. With proof, there cannot be faith.

Murdoch and the FOX empire own NatGeo now. They have become a laughingstock. Why promote FOX bullshit on DU?

[Cartoonist]

15. NatGeo

Repubs destroy everything they touch. Sad to see people here on DU spreading RW nutjobbery.

[guillaumeb]

19. Your preferred narrative is on display.

But regular readers already know this.

[guillaumeb]

18. A weak attempt on your part to discredit.

[trotsky]

20. Just putting your news in context.

People have a right to know where news is being sourced from, and you can't stop me pointing it out.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/nov/14/how-fox-ate-national-geographic

This year (2015) has seen the “TV guys” finally take over for good: the acquisition of nearly all National Geographic’s assets was announced in September. Fox, for years the dominant partner in the supposedly equal relationship, would no longer be subject to the Society’s eccentric board. National Geographic Television still exists, though people interviewed here speculate that it won’t for much longer.

[guillaumeb]

30. More double standard?

Do you also challenge anything sourced from the Wall Street Journal, or the many news sources owned by right wing people?

[trotsky]

31. #Whataboutism

One of your favorite tools.

I'll point it out whenever it needs pointing out, but particularly for you because of your biased agenda.

[guillaumeb]

33. So you admit to a double standard.

And attack my motives by framing my posts as evidence of, in your words, a "biased agenda".

Thank you for the admission, and the confirmation.

[trotsky]

36. Yep. Guilty.

I call out bullshit from hypocrites more frequently than I do for non-hypocrites, I freely admit. Which of course is not a personal attack, but just a simple statement of fact.

But it is a double standard indeed. You got me, g. Well done.

[guillaumeb]

38. More confirmation, as if it were needed, of what I posted.

Interesting and revealing technique.

[trotsky]

39. Of course it's confirmation! I just admitted it!

You don't let much slip by, do you?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

16. I dont know any mainstream scholar who doubts the historicity of Jesus,

Eric Meyers is either lying or needs to read more. There is basically zero evidence of a historical Jesus.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

23. Ummm, I'm yet to see actual convincing evidence of the existence

of this Jesus guy. No records of any kind. If mainstream scholars are that gullible, then god help us all.

[guillaumeb]

24. #23, see #16

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

25. I wonder what other non-existent, unprovable things

those mainstream scholars believe in.

Again, I'm yet to see anything remotely convincing. Two thousand years from now I'm sure warring religions will have sprung up around all of the many comic book characters they make movies about.

[guillaumeb]

26. Again, perhaps you should enlighten these scholars and show them the error

in their thinking.

Alternatively, you could admit that Jesus existed while debating the importance of that existence.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

44. How about I admit that Santa Claus exists?

Likewise the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.

Heck, there are gazillions of Santa Claus sightings every single year. Photographs, even.

Can't recall anything remotely similar with that Jesus guy. And even allowing for the lack of digital cameras back then, he simply does not show up in the historic record.

As has been stated above, those scholars are starting from a place of belief, so they're not at all concerned that Jesus may not have ever lived. I'm really weird in that I like to have my knowledge grounded in actual fact, and I'm constantly fact-checking stuff. Which is especially important these days, but that's another subject entirely.

[guillaumeb]

45. This reveals your own opinions,

but proves nothing other than that you hold those opinions.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

46. And your insistence that Jesus

really existed reveals your own opinions, and proves nothing other than that you hold those opinions.

Touting scholars who start out already believing, and then say that they believe he lived, is as close to pure circular reasoning as can exist.

Of course, this guy Jesus, whether or not he lived, has greatly influenced a lot of human history, and sadly an awful lot of that has been for the worse.

[guillaumeb]

47. I did not actually write the article.

And your attacks on the scholars are your opinions, unless of course you have proof of the accusations. If you have such proof, feel free to present it here.

But you obviously have the right to your feelings and personal opinions.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

48. You didn't write it, but you are defending it.

I don't find the argument that he existed because so many people are convinced he existed, to be very compelling.

Again, it would be at least as easy to declare that Superman, Batman, Captain America -- need I go on? -- existed.

[trotsky]

28. I don't think you read post #16 correctly, FYI. n/t

[blimablam]

27. Real Jesus is as real as santa clause or Spider-Man

[guillaumeb]

29. A scholarly opinion, or a personal opinion?

If the former, feel free to document your statement.
If the latter, your personal opinion is noted.

[blimablam]

32. I think both. they all have books written about them and people use those books to verify their

existence.

[guillaumeb]

34. I understand your viewpoint, even as I reject it.

But again, I understand.

[blimablam]

35. there is other proof other than the bible on Jesus?

[guillaumeb]

37. Yes. I suggest a Google search.

And welcome to DU, and the discussion.

[blimablam]

53. Got a BA in ancient European history.

[marylandblue]

54. What's your opinion of the reference in Josephus to

"the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James"

[EvilAL]

59. Forgery.

Been known for some time now.

Josephus also never mentions Nazareth despite having been to pretty much everywhere in Galilee. None of his maps or writings mention Nazareth.
Leading people to believe that it did not even exist at the time of Jesus.

[guillaumeb]

56. Congratulations.

So you are accustomed to research.

[pandr32]

41. A historical Jesus is very different and not supernatural

Life in Judea during Roman rule before the destruction and massacres of the 66AD time frame was not easy for the average people there--they lived under a strict religious rule and did not have the rights Roman citizens did.
The Roman taxes (including their increasing appetite for Jewish productivity and goods/agriculture) while increasing tithing at the Temples due to corruption squeezed people to the breaking point. It was at this time Jesus lived and died--leaving his brother, James the Righteous, struggling in his place (he lived on for a few more decades). Many credit the uprisings and Roman brutal response to James death--not Jesus'.
This is not what Christians believe thanks to the fact that it is Paul's (Saul of Tarsus--a Roman citizen of questionable character and psychological health) is the original author of Christianity, and the rest (since Paul) is a compilation. All of it has little to nothing to do with Jesus' life and struggles.
Jesus was Jewish and not the same person as the man in the myth. The Bible is not historical--save a few references to actual people, places, and events amongst its many pages and stories, and it is certainly not inspired by "the word of God."

[guillaumeb]

42. I agree with your title,

and some of your response in the body of the post.

[pandr32]

43. Mahalo

[marylandblue]

55. Which parts do you agree or disagree with?

[guillaumeb]

57. Not a part of this thread.

This thread is a discussion of Jesus as He can be found in the archeological record.

[marylandblue]

58. Got it. You can comment on an irrelevant post, but questions about your comment are irrelevant.

[trotsky]

60. Par for the course, unfortunately.

And he wonders why no one takes him seriously.

[guillaumeb]

62. Following the example of an atheist here. eom

[marylandblue]

63. Shouldn't you be following the example of Jesus instead?

[guillaumeb]

64. Can I do both?

And do you also follow the advice of Jesus, or Gandhi if you prefer, to be the change you wish to see?

[marylandblue]

65. What I don't do is say I am doing something because someone else did it

And neither did Jesus or Ghandhi.

[Mariana]

67. Do to others as you would have them do to you

According to the book that's what Jesus said, but we wouldn't want to be literalist, would we? It's entirely possible that Jesus really meant for his followers to do to others as you would have them do to you, unless you don't feel like it, then just do whatever the fuck you want to do.

[trotsky]

68. Unfortunately a lot of Christians are only in love with the first part of the golden rule.

"Do unto others."

And they do.

[Lordquinton]

66. That atheist was probably following the example of a theist

Because theists here like to do everything they can to not answer questions, but throw fits when they get their antics thrown back at them.

So, how about answering the question?

[Lordquinton]

61. It's what this subthread is about

Why do you refuse to answer? Why has this become such a pattern for you?

[struggle4progress]

49. What archaeological and historical research can yield is this: an improved understanding of that era

and its people

From such understanding, we may get a better grasp of what the Jesus stories might have meant to early listeners -- and perhaps a better grasp of the original intent of the stories

[guillaumeb]

50. An excellent point.

Archeologists are not working to prove the divinity of Jesus, but the existence as it can be determined and/or inferred from archeological records.

[underpants]

51. Great comments. I feel as though I can take this discourse to another level though

[guillaumeb]

52. Hmmmmmmm.

Capable of multiple levels of meaning.