Prophecy Center
What is the Message?

What possibility is it that Jesus fulfilled prophecy if the gospels were written after he allegedly lived?

The gospel stories aren't first person account of Jesus' life. The writers of the gospels could have easily taken the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible and picked and choose which scriptures they wanted to apply to their `new` idea to shape it into a form of authenticity.

Secondly they could have modified the Greek Bible to make the future tense prophecy apply to Jesus. So how is it possible to claim Jesus fulfilled anything in the Bible?
@luv, Thanks for agreeing that Jesus never existed.

Public Comments

1. I'd say there is >99.999999999999999% chance that they were written after his life.*

*Assuming a Jesus of Nazareth existed.

2. The total absence of evidence for the existence of Jesus is overwhelming: no historical record (from Roman historical records or Rabbinic records), no mention by any contemporary Christology writers (Paul, Ignatius, Philo) of the first century AD. Paul referred to a Christ "according to (and not a "life and blood" Jesus) scriptures" - Old Testament scriptures (because the 4 canonized gospels were not in existence until after Paul's death in 67 AD). Paul never mentioned about Jesus' work or Jesus sayings.
Nazareth as place (for Jesus of Nazareth) did not exist in first century AD. Of the 63 towns listed in Judea by the Talmud, Nazareth is not in the list.
No records of any sayings or teaching of any of the 12 disciples and an absence of any of them 'going on missions to spread teaching of Jesus'.
Gospels were written after 70 AD. No Christology writers of first century mentioned or quoted anything about any gospels, and it was first quoted by Ireneaus towards end of 2nd century AD. Though some modern Christian scholars would argue that the gospels were written in 70 AD, but most sceptics still maintain that the gospels first existed in the 2nd century AD, from absence of reference or quotation by those Christology writers.
First gospel written was Mark and Luke & Matthew drew materials heavily from Mark. Accordingly, Mark wrote what he heard from Peter (hence was originally known as Petrine Gospel). This fact could be substantiated from the writings of Eusebius who quoted Papias who wrote that "Mark was interpreter of Peter" and Papias claimed to "hear things that came from unwritten, oral tradition". Therefore, if we analyse from the paragraph above, whatever hearsay was 3rd or 4th hand hearsay. And whoever Peter was, nobody knew.

3. A really smart guy named Peter wrote something that I think you should read.

3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

http://kingjbible.com/2_peter/3.htm

Why ignore the most attested historical figure of all?

4. This isn't even close.

If you theorize that the Gospels were a forgery and a fake, then you have to contrive explanations for the rapid spread of Christianity, the absence of alternative documentation that disproves the Christ story, the willingness of the eyewitnesses to die for the claim that they saw certain things happen, the development of an idea of a dying and rising savior in a culture which specifically rejected such ideas etc., etc., etc.

Occam's Razor applies here. It's much easier to trust the Gospel accounts (of which there have been more that 5,000 copies and fragments of copies found dating from very early in the life of the church) than it is to conjure up explanations for those many things that have the same explanatory power as the official story -- and you'll have to do all of that without any supporting evidence to aid you.

I've said here before that I'm beginning some research into comparing critical thinking skills and people's willingness to believe in conspiracy theories. The "Jesus myth" is one of those, along with "The moon landing were faked," and "Ancient astronauts visited earth" (among others.)

5. The only good thing that theists can do is know about their own religion. You can't even do that.


Fail.