| Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
From Bill Restemeyer and the Internet Infidels for The Freethought Web. |
|
Did Jesus Christ Really Live? |
by Marshall J. Gauvin |
Page 7
| He was called "Jesus
of Nazareth"! Now comes the question -- Was there a city of Nazareth in that age?
After his birth, Christ vanishes out of existence until he has reached the age of thirty years with the exception of Luke. But is the srory in Luke about Jesus unrealistic?
|
His home
was Nazareth. He was called "Jesus of Nazareth"; and there he is said to have
lived until the closing years of his life. Now comes the question -- Was there a city of
Nazareth in that age? The Encyclopaedia Biblica, a work written by theologians, the
greatest biblical reference work in the English language, says: "We cannot perhaps
venture to assert positively that there was a city of Nazareth in Jesus' time." No
certainty that there was a city of Nazareth! Not only are the supposed facts of the life
of Christ imaginary, but the city of his birth and youth and manhood existed, so far as we
know, only on the map of mythology. What amazing evidence to prove the reality of a Divine
man! Absolute ignorance as to his ancestry; nothing whatever known of the time of his
birth, and even the existence of the city where he is said to have been born, a matter of
grave question! After his birth, Christ, as it were, vanishes out of existence, and with the exception of a single incident recorded in Luke, we hear absolutely nothing of him until he has reached the age of thirty years. The account of his being found discussing with the doctors in the Temple at Jerusalem when he was but twelve years old, is told by Luke alone. The other Gospels are utterly ignorant of this discussion; and, this single incident excepted, the four Gospels maintain an unbroken silence with regard to thirty years of the life of their hero. What is the meaning of this silence? If the writers of the Gospels knew the facts of the life of Christ, why is it that they tell us absolutely nothing of thirty years of that life? What historical character can be named whose life for thirty years is an absolute blank to the world? If Christ was the incarnation of God, if he was the greatest teacher the world has known, if he came to cave mankind from everlasting pain -- was there nothing worth remembering in the first thirty years of his existence among men? The fact is that the Evangelists knew nothing of the life of Jesus, before his ministry; and they refrained from inventing a childhood, youth and early manhood for him because it was not necessary to their purpose. Luke, however, deviated from the rule of silence long enough to write the Temple incident. The story of the discussion with the doctors in the Temple is proved to be mythical by all the circumstances that surround it. The statement that his mother and father left Jerusalem, believing that he was with them; that they went a day's journey before discovering that he was not in their company; and that after searching for three days, they found him in the Temple asking and answering questions of the learned Doctors, involves a series of tremendous improbabilities. Add to this the fact that the incident stands alone in Luke, surrounded by a period of silence covering thirty years; add further that none of the other writers have said a word of the child Jesus discussing with the scholars of their nation; and add again the unlikelihood that a child would appear before serious-minded men in the role of an intellectual champion and the fabulous character of the story becomes perfectly clear.
|