[[ Free E-pub ]] ↶ Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at All ☝ PDF eBook or Kindle ePUB free

NAILED takes a serious look at the inconsistencies and problems with the Jesus myth, offering a rational take on it all while delving into the actual history behind current beliefs This book is a must read for skeptics and non skeptics alike. [[ Free E-pub ]] ⇠ Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at All ☞ Why would anyone think Jesus never existed Isn t it perfectly reasonable to accept that he was a real first century figure As it turns out, no NAILED sheds light on ten beloved Christian myths, and, with evidence gathered from historians across the theological spectrum, shows how they point to a Jesus Christ created solely through allegorical alchemy of hope and imagination a messiah transformed from a purely literary, theological construct into the familiar figure of Jesus in short, a purely mythic Christ La secrétaire no NAILED sheds light on ten beloved Christian myths Bases d'optique géométrique : Des instruments ardents à la formation des images pour comprendre la vision et les couleurs de l'arc-en-ciel and The Square with evidence gathered from historians across the theological spectrum La Discipline positive dans la classe shows how they point to a Jesus Christ created solely through allegorical alchemy of hope and imagination a messiah transformed from a purely literary When Stars Came Down To Earth: Cosmology Of The Skidi Pawnee Indians Of North America theological construct into the familiar figure of Jesus in short Jeremstar par Jérémy Gisclon, ma biographie officielle a purely mythic Christ One of the most fundamental weaknesses of Christianity is that many, perhaps most Christians are afraid to hold up their faith to the same level of scrutiny as they would to buying a new fridge It makes it difficult to review a book like this because from the outset the discussion is antagonistic It s not my intent to offend, only to review SoThis book has strengths and weaknesses It presents a bunch of factual arguments which aren t in dispute I think pretty much all Christian scholars One of the most fundamental weaknesses of Christianity is that many, perhaps most Christians are afraid to hold up their faith to the same level of scrutiny as they would to buying a new fridge It makes it difficult to review a book like this because from the outset the discussion is antagonistic It s not my intent to offend, only to review SoThis book has strengths and weaknesses It presents a bunch of factual arguments which aren t in dispute I think pretty much all Christian scholars and perhaps most Christians accept that the Book of Mark was written anywhere from 30 100 years after the the events described, and Matthew, Luke and John followed Most people now accept that references to Jesus attributed to Flavius Josephus were added later and not by Josephus There is nothing wrong with his arguments I guess the problem with this book is it s preaching to the converted Christians won t read it or they ll rate it 1 Star Atheists will read it and think it s the greatest thing since sliced bread And that s why I don t think this is a particularly great book It really needs to communicate with Christians to be of value and I don t think it does So 3 Stars I have got to know David Fitzgerald a little as a friend and agreed to review his work I had been looking for a one stop review of the evidence concerning the very existence of Jesus Christ and have to say that this volumethan exceeded my expectations Meticulously researched and developed over a ten year period, this book is the result of a huge amount of painstaking analysis There is no argument not considered and no stone left unturned in an effort to discover any evidence that actual I have got to know David Fitzgerald a little as a friend and agreed to review his work I had been looking for a one stop review of the evidence concerning the very existence of Jesus Christ and have to say that this volumethan exceeded my expectations Meticulously researched and developed over a ten year period, this book is the result of a huge amount of painstaking analysis There is no argument not considered and no stone left unturned in an effort to discover any evidence that actually conclusively verifies the existence of such a character There is none none at all Everything ever written about Christ specifically including all of the New Testament serves and combines to create a construct for the early church members to believe in David s conclusions at every stage of the ten aspects covered leave no doubt in the objective reader s mind that Jesus Christ is as mythological an individual character as any of the now proven myths of the Old Testament Well written and well rounded, fully referenced and brilliantly explained this is a must read for anyone who wants to put the lid on the idea that Christ was real and later Christianity his personal baby The one thing that this volume contains that the Bible and all other pretended proofs of Christ and Christianity do not, is evidence and it is as conclusive as it can get The only reason any reader will not agree is if they have faith in fiction from a preconceived belief in God which must not be offended, rather than a willingness to face and accept evidence of the truth without reservation As I comment in my own books, As long as people want something to be true,than they are willing to face the possibility that it is not, they will not entertain evidence or reason Delusion becomes a choice Jim Whitefield Author of The Mormon Delusion series As other have said, the title overstates the case and some of the so called myths are only held by non scholars, but the book is an excellent summary of the mythicist argument that should leaves anyone who goes into it with an open mind, not already convinced that there must have been a historical Jesus, but that is not the case 1 The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculousThis is a pretty brief introduction, though it briefly refutes the claim that there isevidence for Jesus than Juliu As other have said, the title overstates the case and some of the so called myths are only held by non scholars, but the book is an excellent summary of the mythicist argument that should leaves anyone who goes into it with an open mind, not already convinced that there must have been a historical Jesus, but that is not the case 1 The idea that Jesus was a myth is ridiculousThis is a pretty brief introduction, though it briefly refutes the claim that there isevidence for Jesus than Julius Caesar It doesn t really address the main thrust of this claim, that it is extremely unlikely for people to have invented a man who lived only 40 50 years earlier2 Jesus was wildly famousHe does show that if the Jesus described in the gospels had existed, it is highly implausible that no secular historians would have mentioned him The counter claim, that they weren t interested in that sort of thing, is demonstrably false What this doesn t show, is that there wasn t a less spectacular Jesus, who didn t perform miracles, didn t address crowds of many thousand and didn t clear the moneylenders from the temple He also shows that the claim there are ancient historical witnesses is utterly unreliable.3 Joephus wrote about JesusAlmost all historians accept Josephus was at least tampered with The extent to which this happened is the issue There are many attempt to reconstruct the original but all fail because they have Josephus writing of a rebel executed just a few decades earlier in glowing terms normally reserved for the giants of Jewish history, with no attempt to justify such language Although the book doesn t cover these, it does mention the lack of early mentions of the Testimonium The second argument, that the passage disrupts the flow, is usually countered by it being the equivalent of a footnote The problem here, is that it wouldn t work as a footnote either, it is unrelated to the topic at question, so without examining if there are examples when Josephus did this, it is impossible to judge if this is a valid argument 4 Eyewitnesses wrote the gospelsAgain, this is only believed by fundamentalist Christians and those who are uninformed Nailed makes a brief case that they were not written shortly after the events by people familiar with the culture and geography of the area, and also that the gospel were unknown by the end of the first century, but doesn t cover the growing awareness of them from the mid second century, or just how weak the Christian argument for traditional authorship is 5 The Gospels give a consistent picture of JesusThis is a pretty common claim that is demolished It doesn t in itself show Jesus to be fictional, but does pretty much demonstrate that the gospels were at the least full of fictional elements inserted to sell a specific theology, and that the writers probably had little interest in what any historical Jesus actually said.6 History confirm the gospelsThis is another chapter that shows the gospels to be non historical, which weakens the case for their being good evidence for Jesus as a historical figure, but doesn t support the Mythicist argument7 Archeology confirms the gospelsThis is an odd chapter It mixes geography, archaeology and ancient manucripts, but further demonstrates that not only were the gospels in their original form not historically reliable, but they are corrupted8 Paul and the Epistles confirm the gospelsAnother common claim, but one that comes from people interpreting the epistles from a gospel framework, rather than reading what they actually say and typically doing so in English The book does show that not only does Paul have no interest in the historical Jesus something even conservative scholar accept, coming up with some utterly implausible justifications, such as everyone already knew all the stories and sayings , which even if it were true, would only weaken their own argument , but that he largely talks about a mythical Christ The coverage of the phrase Brother of the Lord , commonly used as evidence for historicity is pretty brief It successfully argues that it does not make sense given the way Paul dismisses James, and that it is not implausible for it to be a later interpretation, but doesn t address the possibility that it did not mean a literal brother and that Paul used the phrase commonly, which might be out of the scope of a summary book like this, relying on some extremely technical readings of Greek, differences between brother of brother in and a brother the brother brother as well comparisons of all times Paul uses the phrase or a similar one9 Christianity began with Jesus and the apostlesThis chapter largely focusses on the multiple Christian sects in early times, and the lack of evidence for the apostles as historical figures, but doesn t do much to advance the overall thesis10 Christianity was totally new and differentThis is another chapter that seems to have little to do with the title The idea that there were multiple dying and rising gods before Jesus is common, but for many, such as Mithras, the evidence does not support the idea that it predates the Jesus cult, but there are genuine examples Though the book alludes to them, and the excuses apologists have made to avoid the problem, it doesn t really go into the details, so it is hard to judge how strong these parallels are Most of the chapter details the growth of Christianity, which isn t really relevant to whether or not Jesus was a real person.11 ConclusionEnds with the unavoidable statement that either Jesus was totally made up, or the early Christians had little to no interest in the real Jesus, but then plumps for the first, which is probably not justifiable on the evidence presented Was surprised to find so many discrepancies in the Jesus story Wow I need to research further. I m pretty much on board with Fitzgerald here For me, whether or not Jesus ever existed he has become a fictional figure As artifacts the bible stories come too late, are too contradictory and outlandish to be taken as primary sources Without any primary sources to establish as a baseline around where, when, and who Jesus may have been to compare with the latter biblical accounts then I regard the texts as fiction The real basis for Jesus may have existed, but for practical inquiry he s b I m pretty much on board with Fitzgerald here For me, whether or not Jesus ever existed he has become a fictional figure As artifacts the bible stories come too late, are too contradictory and outlandish to be taken as primary sources Without any primary sources to establish as a baseline around where, when, and who Jesus may have been to compare with the latter biblical accounts then I regard the texts as fiction The real basis for Jesus may have existed, but for practical inquiry he s been lost to time Or if he continues to exist in some other worldly realm as an all powerful god, it s up to him to make a public appearance to set the historical record straight, if he cares at all what we think of him I hesitate to say he never existed having recently finished reading 1984, I recall the scene of O Brian explaining to Winston s face, that Winston doesn t exist because the party doesn t acknowledge his existence This analogy isn t one to one with the Jesus issue, but there are elements O Brian mentions destroying all records of certain historical events, and convincing or mandating everybody from acknowledging that they ever happened, then for all practical purposes the event never happened In the case of Jesus, the people who destroyed and altered so many records from antiquity were Christians So the piece of primary evidence that could corroborate elements of their doctrine might ve been destroyed by their own hands Fitzgerald s book isn t enough to conclude that Jesus never existed, logically no book really could be I think Fitzgerald is writing directly to other skeptics and atheists, and the book won t gain much traction outside that niche It felt a bit intellectually incestuous to read something so catered to my current mindset I would ve preferred something a bitneutral and academic I ve already started reading a bit of his Mormon book, and it seems like he s really doubled down on appealing to atheist readers Still, I mostly agree with it, so stars for that Nailed Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at AllBy David Fitzgerald While the title may slightly overstate the evidence, this is an excellent overview of the current state of problematic record for Jesus historicity It being nearly impossible to prove a negative, I remain agnostic to a historical persona behind the gospels however, Fitzgerald s drawing on the arguments of Richard Carrier, Earl Doherty, and Robert Price lays out the evidence based on the complete lack of non problematic first century evidence Further, some of the issues in Paul are laid While the title may slightly overstate the evidence, this is an excellent overview of the current state of problematic record for Jesus historicity It being nearly impossible to prove a negative, I remain agnostic to a historical persona behind the gospels however, Fitzgerald s drawing on the arguments of Richard Carrier, Earl Doherty, and Robert Price lays out the evidence based on the complete lack of non problematic first century evidence Further, some of the issues in Paul are laid outclearly here than in many other sources as well as problems with specific missing texts from the first century Fitzgerald draws a quite about bit from Carrier and those familiar with Carrier s work may find certain points repetitive, the overall overview is unique in both it s scope and brevity Even if you remain solidly unconvinced of Christ myth hypothesis, the evidence in this book would be a good guide to some of the best arguments one could have to overcome to truly defeat the position The focus on somewhat facile comparisons between Jesus and Gods are largely left out of the text with only referent to the similarities between mystery meals and the description of the Lord s Supper in Paul s writing This is important because the comparative argument is actually quite easy for historical Jesus defenders to rebut, but focus on incoherence and literary flourish within the text as well as lack of sources for most of the events in the text from without makes it very clear how thin some of the claims made for historicity are I used to think that there was a historical Jesus behind the figure represented in the New Testament However, that Jesus had long since been lost in history because no one cared to preserve anything It seemed that a very ordinary apocalyptic preacher many roamed around that region in those days had undergone a euhemerism That is, until I discovered the works of Richard Carrier.After reading Richard Carrier s, On The Historicity of Jesus , and after reviewing several of his lectures and pre I used to think that there was a historical Jesus behind the figure represented in the New Testament However, that Jesus had long since been lost in history because no one cared to preserve anything It seemed that a very ordinary apocalyptic preacher many roamed around that region in those days had undergone a euhemerism That is, until I discovered the works of Richard Carrier.After reading Richard Carrier s, On The Historicity of Jesus , and after reviewing several of his lectures and presentations preserved on YouTube, I became convinced there s not even a historical figure behind the myth Jesus, it seems, is just as unreal as Osiris, Hercules, Perseus, etc But Carrier s Historicity is rather large About 900 pages or so, Nook edition It s not a volume I d expect to hand to a historicist or devout Christian and expect them to dedicate the time necessary to evaluate the material, especially if they re casual readers That s where David Fitzgerald s, Nailed comes in Nailed is a rapid fire, simple to understand, why we must now conclude there was no historical Jesus tour de force I read it in only a few hours It makes most of the same points as Carrier s work and cites Carrier quite a lot But it also cites many other professionals in New Testament studies as well Nailed dwells on the ten biggest reasons why Jesus never existed These ten make up a compelling case for non historicity It s a short and quick read and I d recommend anyone interested in New Testament studies take a look