Category Archives: mythicism

Help with Wikipedia editing

Posted on by
Posted in mythicism, Nazareth | Leave a reply
Reply

Would somebody who has read chapter 12 (“The 1962 Forgery of the Caesarea Inscription”) of my book NazarethGate, and who has some expertise editing Wikipedia, please amend the Wiki Nazareth page that presently reads: “A Hebrew inscription found in Caesarea dating to the late 3rd or early 4th century mentions Nazareth as the home of the priestly Hapizzez/Hafizaz family after the Bar Kokhba revolt (AD 132–135).” In fact: the inscription was discovered by the noted forger Dr. Jerry Vardaman (of microletter infamy). He was arrested by the Israeli authorities within hours of his “discovery” of the Nazareth inscription in Caesarea Maritima in 1962. (He was later arrested again on an excavation in Jordan.) There are many additional reasons why the … Continue reading →

“Jesus the Nazarene”—Book Review and Excursus (conclusion)

Posted on by
Posted in Book reviews, Christian origins, mythicism | Leave a reply
Reply

A. Jordan, Jesus the Nazarene: The Talmud and the Founder of Christianity         Wipf & Stock, Eugene Oregon. 2023: 173 pp. This is the final installment of a book report on A. Jordan’s Jesus the Nazarene, which is the first of its kind: a Jewish endorsement of the mythicist theory. The author argues that a single prophet living in the early first century BCE founded the Christian religion, that he is known in Jewish sources as Yeshu ha-Notsri, and so on. (A list of ten points was given here.) Some positives of the book: (1) Jordan takes seriously what the Talmud has to say about the Hasmonean-era Jesus/Yeshu. Very few New Testament scholars do so. (2) In the course of Jesus … Continue reading →

Blog returning to sleep mode…

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, contemporary commentary, mythicism, Salm | 3 Replies
3

In March 2022 I began the latest series of posts, “A New Account of Christian Origins.” Numbering sixteen entries, the series has covered a lot of territory—from my views regarding the emergence of the Catholic religion in the middle of the second century CE, to the non-existence of Paul, of Marcion, and of the earliest Church Fathers (Clement of Rome, Papias, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna). While freely admitting that I may not be correct regarding all of these propositions, I am fairly confident that the most important will stand the test of time. At the very least, the onus is shifting onto the tradition to demonstrate to an increasing number of skeptics that the major figures in … Continue reading →

A review…

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, John the Baptist, mythicism, Salm, Yeshu ha-Notsri | Tagged

A New Account of Christian Origins / pt. 20 Below is my summary of the birth and development of Christianity in the first three centuries. Of course, just about everything regarding the points below differs from the ‘received tradition’:   • I begin ca. 100 BCE rather than at the turn of the era; • I propose a different prophet than Jesus of Nazareth (namely, Yeshu ha-Notsri); • for me neither Paul nor Marcion existed—nor did the earliest Church Fathers until Justin Martyr; • the ‘Pauline epistles’ came after the canonical gospels, not before; • the canonical gospels themselves are products of the second half of the second century. The tenets above are fleshed out in slightly greater detail in the 22 points below, each … Continue reading →

John the Baptist in Josephus—Pt. 1

Posted on by
Posted in John the Baptist, Josephus, mythicism | Leave a reply
Reply

A New Account of Christian Origins / pt. 1 A certain “Peter” recently commented on a post on this website where I make the claim that, at an early stage in Christian history, John = Jesus (lit. “Savior”). In his comment Peter poses several questions, including whether I maintain “that the Josephus story of John the Baptist is inauthentic, considering among other factors the time frame with Herod Antipas, contra the article by Peter Kirby?” The passage in question is Ant. 18.116-119 (Whiston’s chapter 18.5.2). For now I leave aside whether or not the commenter is himself Peter Kirby. The article referenced is a very long one by Kirby entitled “The Authenticity of John the Baptist in Josephus,” uploaded May 21, 2015. … Continue reading →

The Hermann Detering Legacy/4—Curriculum Vitae 2010–14

Posted on by
Posted in bibliographies/biographies, mythicism, The second century | Tagged | 2 Replies
2

2011. Publication of Detering’s book FALSE WITNESSES (Falsche Zeugen: Ausserchristliche Jesuszeugnisse auf dem Prüfstand; 243 pp., Alibri). In this important book, HD argues in detail that the earliest (first century) mentions of Jesus in the literature (by Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, etc) are later Catholic interpolations. Comment: The bogus earliest textual ‘witnesses’ to Jesus of Nazareth are one of the pillars of the Jesus mythicist argument. Due to its significance in any primary database regarding the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth, this terrain has been covered often and exhaustively (also by R. M. Price, F. Zindler, and R. Carrier). However, Detering’s German book probably represents the fullest and most convincing treatment of the issue to date.      Detering defends his book’s conclusions … Continue reading →

The Hermann Detering Legacy/3—Curriculum Vitae 2005–2010

Posted on by
Posted in Jesus-skepticism, mythicism, The second century | Tagged , | 1 Reply
1

2005-06. “Die Gegner des Paulus—Judaistenthese 2. Jahrhundert” (“The Opponents of Paul—Judaists 2nd Century Thesis). This is a significant book-length treatment (270 pp → German PDF). Detering writes: “The thesis that I here expound is new. I attempt to show that the author of the Pauline epistles addresses Judaizers of the second century rather than those of the first century. The inauthenticity of the Pauline epistles necessarily follows” (p.1). In turn, Detering’s arguments lead to the overall conclusion that the New Testament derives not from the first century, but from the second. (HD’s later comment from his website here.) 2006. Article on the biologist Ernst Haeckel and the freethinking pastor and Jesus mythicist Albert Kalthoff, in A. Lenz (ed.), DARWIN, HAECKEL, UND … Continue reading →

The Hermann Detering Legacy—Introduction

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, mythicism | Tagged | Leave a reply
Reply

I have decided to devote part of this website to a repository of Dr. Detering’s work, particularly his articles that have been translated into English. Not all of that material is to be found on his German website, and the success and extent of this undertaking will depend in some measure on the help of readers who are able to furnish material or clues to other of his writings. Incidentally, this project will not be a speedy accomplishment but, rather, the result of work carried out ‘as time permits.’ Dr. Detering was arguably the world’s foremost ‘Jesus mythicist,’ one who holds that Jesus of Nazareth is pure fiction, a figure created by the early Church—a ‘myth.’ Detering came to this … Continue reading →

This blog is now entering ‘sleep’ mode…

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, Gospel of Barnabas, Jesus-skepticism, mythicism, Salm | Tagged ,

Well, it probably comes as no surprise—after all, my most recent post to Mythicist Papers was over one month ago. That post terminated a long, detailed commentary on Dr. Hermann Detering’s recent ground-breaking work linking Buddhism and early Christianity. It is understandable that both Detering’s work and my own have received no acknowledgment from traditionalist Christian circles. However, the present lack of any significant ‘Jesus mythicist’ community places engagement with these incisive views out of reach. Such engagement would have permitted the discussion to go forward. The original—and continuing—purposes of this website/blog are to provide reliable information and objective consideration of Christian origins. Those purposes are as valid today as they were yesterday, and they will continue to be valid … Continue reading →

The Price-Ehrman debate—Pt. 6

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, contemporary commentary, mythicism | Tagged , | 2 Replies
2

Links:     YouTube     Post-debate discussion (audio)     Vridar In this series of posts I’ve tried to show that the Price-Ehrman debate suffered largely because the two principals play by vastly different ground rules. It’s hard to have a meaningful (much less an exciting) exchange of ideas if the assumptions, acknowledged experts, and evidence are so dissimilar. This reminds me of the global warming debate, or of the long-standing evolution-creationism debacle. In all these cases what seems obvious to the scientist is contested—inevitably because a very powerful anti-scientific agenda is in play. As James Crossley noted in the post-debate conversation,[minute 49] “Paul” is a case in point. For Ehrman and mainstream scholarship, the Apostle was real, a convert to Christianity only a few years after the … Continue reading →