‘Jesus Christ never existed at all,’ historian claims

[Jazzy]

San Francisco-based David Fitzgerald claims that there are no mentions of Jesus – at all – in 125 different historical accounts of the period.

He says it makes no sense, as Jesus is supposed to have been a famous figure who wrought incredible miracles – but no contemporary writers had heard of him.

Fitzgerald, an atheist activist, says, ‘’There is a paradox that Jesus did all these amazing things and taught all these amazing things yet no one heard of him outside his immediate cult for nearly 100 years.

‘Or it means he didn't do all these things at all.

‘Two billion people believe all these miracles happened yet there is no evidence they did.’

Fitzgerald believes that the writers of the gospels worked decades after Jesus’s death, and made up the idea of Jesus by combining information about several Jewish sect leaders from the period.

His upcoming book claims that Jesus Christ as we know him is a literary invention – and that there was no single ‘Jesus’ at all.

Fitzgerald writes, ‘I must conclude that Christ is a mythical character. “Jesus of Nazareth” was nothing more than urban (or desert) legend, likely an agglomeration of several evangelic and deluded rabbis who might have existed.’

Comments?

 

[DrLeftover]

I can find that many sources that say that David Fitzgerald never existed.

So what?

You cannot "prove a negative."

 

[mrldii]

I have no problem with the *fact* that Jesus may never have existed and/or that Jesus - and the whole Bible, at that - is simply a great piece of literature.

Having said that, based on the information provided in the OP, Mr. Fitzgerald may be attributing modern-day methods of spreading The Good Word to a time long before electricity, the telephone, the printing press, and/or the internet was/were invented

and coming up with a completely erroneous conclusion to substantiate his fantastical *research*.

 

[Wonko]

I have always thought that the bible was more of a ideal of how mankind should treat each other rather than an historical book of what actually happened so this David Fitzgerald claims do not surprise me in the slightest.

 

[DrLeftover]

Fitzgerald has been around a few years, and every so often he spouts off something like this to promote one of his books or to get on talk shows, where he promotes himself, his books, and his crackpot ideas in about equal measure.

I believe the last time around he was saying something about the Apostles being gay... which, of course, he is all in favor of as well.

 

[Webster]

Fitzgerald has been around a few years, and every so often he spouts off something like this to promote one of his books or to get on talk shows, where he promotes himself, his books, and his crackpot ideas in about equal measure.

In other words, David Fitzgerald is an idiot.

 

[alakazam]

Seriously? Making threads like these around Easter?

David Fitzgerald is wrong. There are quite a few historical sources that mentioned Jesus during those times: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_historicity_of_Jesus

 

[DrLeftover]

In other words, David Fitzgerald is an idiot.

That's not what I said.

He IS however, a 'For Profit' atheist, gay activist, and a few other things.

He IS in the academic environment which is infamous for its "publish or perish" tenure review procedure.

And, there are those that will cite him and give him more exposure than he probably deserves otherwise.

 

[DrLeftover]

I didn't mean to kill the thread.

After all, we haven't even discussed how Mr. Fitzgerald could call himself an "Historian" when he obviously has never read Josephus.

 

[cali]

I believe He's real because I met Him in a dream when I was a child!