Felix refutes the existence of evidence for
Jesus' death
Minucius Felix, a Christian defender of the faith in about 150 AD wrote
Octavius. It’s records a debate in which a Christian called Octavius was engaged
in, against a pagan called Caecilius, which the Octavius stated that the charge
of praying to a crucified criminal made against Christians was a calumny (The
Second Century Apologists, http://human.st/jesuspuzzle/century2.htm). This
amounts to a denial that Jesus died on the cross and disposes of the most
important evidence for his existence: his crucifixion. Octavius even says that
the pagans are fools for adoring their vulnerable dying Gods. He denied the
crucifixion for if Jesus was physically nailed to the cross and died the same
would be true of him and so Octavius would not have used this argument. But it
is certain that in doing so he was rejecting the physical crucifixion but could
or would have talked as if he believed in a crucified and dead saviour who rose.
Gnostic Christianity, the original Christian faith, would have taught that the
crucifixion and death and resurrection of Jesus was a metaphor that nobody could
understand the meaning of without having a mystical experience that transcended
the senses and reason. Octavius was influenced by it.
If Jesus was mythically crucified and mythically a criminal worshipping him
would not be a problem for the story is only a way to convey mystical truth. It
is being accused of adoring a real Jesus who was really physically crucified
that is the problem. Christians say it was a calumny that Jesus was a criminal
and that was what he meant. No for Jesus did break the law so he was a criminal
though that does not make him a bad man. He sneered too at people praying to
gods who had been slain. Christians say he would have believed Jesus was
divine so his case was different but no hint that Jesus was divine is given. His
whole point is that beings that die cannot be divine. Octavius manages to
convert his pagan philosopher opponent to Christianity which means he converted
to a form that did not depend on a flesh and blood Jesus at all. The educated
philosopher then knew that Jesus was a myth and his concern was the mystical
Jesus in Heaven.
Felix said it was a disgrace Christians had to defend themselves against people
who said they adored a crucified criminal and his cross (page 40, Jesus and the
Goddess). He regarded it then as an inexcusable error. He was unable to answer
an opponent who asked him if anybody ever really physically came back from the
dead. He retaliated by accusing his opponent of slander instead of trying to
answer the question – this was evasion. He was saying, “Though I am an apologist
of the Christian faith and a scholar I know of no evidence for the death of
Jesus and I don’t want to talk about it.” For Felix to say that means only that
there was no evidence.