Christ Conspiracy_ The Greatest Story Ever Sold - Acharya S [33]
Regarding these "historical references," Taylor says, "But even if they are authentic, and were derived from earlier sources, they would not carry us back earlier than the period in which the gospel legend took form, and so could attest only the legend of Jesus, and not his historicity." In any case, these scarce and brief "references" to a man who supposedly shook up the world, can hardly serve as proof of his existence, and it is absurd that the purported historicity of the Christian religion is founded upon them.
There were indeed at the time of Christ's alleged advent dozens of relatively reliable historians who generally did not color their perspectives with a great deal of mythology, cultural bias and religious bigotry-where are their testimonies to such amazing events recorded in the gospels? As Mead relates, "It has always been unfailing source of astonishment to the historical investigator of Christian beginnings, that there is not a single word from the pen of any Pagan writer of the first century of our era, which can in any fashion be referred to the marvellous story recounted by the Gospel writer. The very existence of Jesus seems unknown."8 The silence of these historians is, in fact, deafening testimony against the historicizers.
Talmudic or Jewish References
One might think that there would at least be reference to the "historical" Jesus in the texts of the Jews, who were known for record-keeping. Yet, such is not the case, despite all the frantic pointing to the references to "Jesus ben Pandira," who purportedly lived during the first century BCE, or other "Jesuses" mentioned in Jewish literature. Unfortunately, these characters do not fit either the story or the purported timeline of the gospel Jesus, no matter how the facts and numbers are fudged.
The story of Jesus ben Pandira, for example, related that, a century before the Christian era, a "magician" named "Jesus" came out of Egypt and was put to death by stoning or hanging. However, ritualistic or judicial executions of this manner were common, as were the name "Jesus" and the magicians flooding out of Egypt. In addition, there is in this story no mention of Romans, among other oversights. Even if ben Pandira were real, it is definitely not his story being told in the New Testament.
Massey explains the difficulty with the ben Pandira theory:
It has generally been allowed that the existence of a Jehoshua, the son of Pandira ... acknowledged by the Talmud, proves the personal existence of Jesus the Christ as an historical character in the gospels. But a closer examination of the data shows the theory to be totally untenable.... Jehoshua ben Pandira must have been born considerably earlier than the year 102 B.C... . The Jewish writers altogether deny the identity of the Talmudic Jehoshua and the Jesus of the gospels. . . . The Jews know nothing of Jesus as the Christ of the gospels ... 9
Of the Pandira/Pandera story, Larson states, "Throughout the middle ages, the legend of Pandera and Yeshu, considered by most scholars a Jewish invention, continued to persist."10 This Jewish invention may have been created in order to capitulate to the Christian authorities, who were persecuting "unbelievers." Thus we find the tale in the Talmud, written after the Christ myth already existed.
To quote Wells:
Klausner's very full survey of the relevant material in [the Talmud[ led him to the conclusion that the earliest references to Jesus in rabbinical literature occur not earlier than about the beginning of the second century ... If there had been a