Presenting Jesus as fact; why it isn’t a problem

“You say you want to explore the myths, yet present Christ as a fact. This is a bit disingenuous because although Jesus possibly existed, there is zero proof he did from a context where every individual was documented. It’s why Mary and Joseph were in Bethlehem. The concept of the Christus is dogmatic, thus by definition a myth.” `Chris

There was a time when I was a militant atheist. It wasn’t just that I lacked faith in God, but I knew God didn’t exist. Faith and religion were based on ignorance. And I was rather vocal about this.

One of the positions I had taken was that Jesus never existed. He was a myth created by the Church as a tool of manipulation. I had fully bought into the Jesus myth. One of the reasons I found my way back to the faith was because I eventually saw just how wrong I was. As I continued to dive more into the idea that Jesus never existed, the more that narrative unfolded. The more I realized that the arguments used to purport the Jesus-myth were based on misunderstanding.

One of those misunderstandings was that the Romans were excellent record keepers. It’s one of those historical “facts” everyone knows. Yet, when it came to Jesus, virtually no one outside of his followers mentioned him. There were no records for vast portions of his life, and much of the outside world seemed to have ignored him.

Certainly, if Jesus existed, he should have been mentioned. If every individual were documented, as Chris says above, certainly we could find the name of Jesus and his parents in the census list that brought the family to Bethlehem, according to the Gospel of Luke.

For me, this was always a convincing argument. It appears to make sense, and as a militant atheist, it was clear evidence that Christianity was a farce. But it’s an idea that doesn’t hold up to much scrutiny. With just the tiniest bit of pushback, it all falls down.

The truth is, when it comes to Ancient Rome, we don’t have as many records as many think. Regardless of how well they kept records, preservation is a whole different process. But when it comes to Jesus, the problem is more than just the loss of records. It’s that the Levant was a black hole that no one really cared about.

When I first came to that realization, I was astounded. Today, so much attention is given to that area. It has become an important religious center, from which ideas that changed the world emerged. It is from where Christianity began, and regardless of how one feels about the faith, it has had a profound impact on history. That no one in Jesus’ time cared about the Levant seems incredible.

Yet, almost no records exist about the Levant during that time. Historians, by and large, ignored it; the ruling elite paid little attention to it. Events were occurring in the Levant that would change the world, but for the Romans and the rest of the world, none of it mattered. The Levant was a backwoods country of little value.

Even when the Jewish world was torn asunder with the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, not a peep was made. An event that fundamentally changed Judaism was hardly mentioned by anyone.

The one figure who does record any of this history is Josephus. Josephus was a Jew who fought in the First Jewish Revolt, surrendered, and then became a Roman historian. When it comes to the Levant, he is virtually our only light. He’s the only historian to take the time to document this time period in the Levant. If Jesus existed, he’s the one person historians would expect to mention him, and Josephus does.

When it comes to the Levant, Jesus is the most well-documented person we have. It’s the reason why no historian questions the fact that he existed. Believing that Jesus walked this Earth isn’t something that needs to be taken on faith, as it isn’t just a possibility that he existed; it’s a historical certainty.

And what must be realized is that confirming that Jesus existed does not mean anything other than that. One can dismiss the supernatural when it comes to Jesus, as we do with many other historical figures. One can reject the miraculous, while still being certain that Jesus was a historical figure. One can even find the value in the teachings of Jesus while remaining an atheist. Simply, one does not have to accept Jesus as Christ while accepting that Jesus existed.

We can take this a step further, though, and better understand meanings that are often lost. We can completely ignore dogma, as it isn’t the same as myth. Nor is myth something to just discard. Too often, people misunderstand what a myth is.

Because even if we accept that the supernatural, miraculous aspects of Christ are mythology, it doesn’t mean they don’t contain truth. Mythology, after all, is a tool to portray a truth. The mythology, whether historical or not, carries a truth.

Are the virgin birth stories mythology? One can take that view but still see the importance they convey; that they signify that Jesus was special. That he was destined to do great things. Many scholars read it as just that, comparing it to other miraculous birth stories of historical individuals.

Myth doesn’t need to be a dirty word. And one doesn’t have to be Christian to accept that Jesus existed, or to find value in his life.