Sheshbazzar

The whale tale is what gave birth to the fish tale.


The OT gave birth to the NT, but all of it together is a whopper of a fish tale that reeks like so much dead fish.

outhouse

this is a fun link

take it with a grain of salt, but its good reading, hes correct on most of it, other parts you see him reaching.

http://noahs-ark-flood.com/

outhouse

as you know, I started in the myther camp.



and it clicked one day when a few friend were explaining why would the scribes would write in a poor poverty stricken teacher who lived a life below a peasant and dieing a miserable death, and then make a deity out of this dude. Unless they were stuck with what they had to work with.

still not having my mind made up, I started focusing on anthropology because I didnt trust any scholar.

Thats where it pushed me over in the historical side. realizing how primitive and barbaric these jews were treated, and how poor most really were, and following their mythology to a core, why would two cultures not one, deify a broke slob.

and it comes down not to theology as much as the root of most evil. MONEY.


I see plenty of traces of a zealot influence in the man they deified


so we factually have a legend, where the romans deify and worship what amounts to a slave, one of their oppressed victims. And then trying to elevate through mythology this person to that more powerful then other living romans emporers called "son of god"

You can see the mythology snowballing and evolving. you take Q and Thomas that are sayings, and probably predated Gmark, and probably portrayed jesus as a man so Q a jewish piece, was redacted for cherry picked content to match the romans needs and culture.

and from Judaism, we see a shooting star, a person with brief and bright Fame, and then failure by the time the temple falls.




The jewish culture was so upset over the jewish governement, and judaism already fragmented into many groups, and half of those stealing from the poor people, its no wonder when someone comes a long that they would be martyered for standing up against the corruption and getting himself murdered for the common hardworking oppressed jew.


We have a martyred jew that caught brief fame in a time when judaism was going in all directions under this one god Yahweh that was so popular. You had different sects of jews worshipping him and you had a large roman population to that worshipped Yahweh, all under his new greek labels.


So a new movement in judaism is not only 100% plausible, it was going to happen and factuially did. so then ask yourself

why would jews and romans stand behind a poor oppressed poverty stricken jew from Galilee who had unique unheard theology in beautiful sayings, unless they believed it to be true??

Toto

I don't know that. Which authors did you read?

So your argument is based on a failure of your imagination? Your failure to appreciate the varieties of human storytelling?

Nothing about the gospel theology was unique. It was a product of Hellenistic Judaism. Jesus' sayings can be traced to Cynic sayings.

Marxists like to emphasize Jesus as the revolutionary worker / peasant. But the gospels have him consorting with rich people, constructing parables told from the point of view of a business manager or landowner. The gospels have him receiving gifts of valuable material from visiting kings, followed by crowds of people, and hailed as a king in Jerusalem. This is not the story of an oppressed peasant.

outhouse

all of them, every single one, and those in between, all trying to build my case against HJ


Ive never had a issue there at all. Rather strong actually.


not all of Q or T, I doubt they were even eyewitnesses


sources for that.

anyone with credibility follows that. Meyers, Reed, Borg, Crossan, Ehrman and more all which are not marxist


Of course it does, the roman writers places jesus in their shoes Because they had to. they were writing mythology through theology and a poor broke slob only goes so far


correct, its taking a poor peasant and competing him with roman emporers.

Toto

Give me the names of some authors and books, and some indication that you know what they said.



You don't think Crossan is a Marxist? Lots of people disagree.

first google hit

"he fiery Irish Marxist John Dominic Crossan"

So you reject all of the parts of the gospel that don't fit your idea, but still think that they prove a historical Jesus existed?

outhouse

this is exactly why mythers fail

your posting a blog. do you believe everything on the internet?


most of the people claiming what you are, are right wing religious fanatics, that disount anrcheologist and anthropologist on the subject, claiming he is blasphemous

I almost expect better out of you.


theres no rejecting anything.

its knowing exactly why it was written in the first place, not rejection.



without the historical context of first century Galilee and the roman empire and their mythology, you seem to be coming at this in the dark

Toto

I do know a lot about the Marxist approach to history and I know that Crossan is basically a Marxist (or more likely a lower case marxist.)


No need to be patronizing. Just supply some analysis, which you have not done so far.

You could start by listing the archaeology that supports you. Hint - nothing. Then whatever anthropology would support. ??

Yes it is rejection. You think it was made up.

Can you possibly give me a clear statement of your position without insulting me?

You can explain the entire gospel Jesus story as part of the mythology of the time. There's no need for a historical Jesus to set it off.

outhouse

that is so silly.



No one discounts the mythology used in theology, less their literalist

outhouse

but that is exactly where all the evidence points to. A historical man.



there is no real mythology of the time that come anywhere close to what is left within the jesus legend.

Its why mythers are failing, they have no common theme that works without creating more questions then answers. Carrier is about to tick off all the mythers coming out with his hypothesis that will shoot down all the others soundly.