spamandham

I'm not sure hoax is really the right word to use either. I'm ok with the word "myth", as it has several definitions which range from traditional story all the way to abject fiction. I think the problem is that people typically focus on the primary definition.

"non-historical" would work, but is kind of clumsy and suffers from it's own nuances. For example (making crap up), suppose that the official mythology of Julius Caesar was equated with the Jewish messiah by some group of new age Jews, and this evolved rapidly into the Jesus stories. Is Julius Caesar then the historical Jesus, or is Jesus a myth, or a hoax? I don't think any of these words accurately depict such a scenario.

aa5874

So do you have a problem with saying that Achilles was a MYTH, that Romulus and Remus were MYTHS and the Marcion's PHANTOM Son of God was a MYTH?

Very few have problems with saying that there is such a thing as Greek/Roman mythology of which Jesus is one of the MYTH Gods like the Son of Jupiter.

Jesus is no different to Greek/Roman myths.

Over 1800 years ago Justin Martyr told the Roman Emperor and the Senate that Jesus was nothing different than the myth they believed.

"First Apology" XXI

Do you understand what is meant by the "historical" Marcion? Well, if you do, then surely you MUST have understood what is meant by the "historical" Jesus.

Virtually ALL description of Marcion of Pontus from antiquity DESCRIBE him as a MERE MAN so it can be ACCEPTED that Marcion was a figure of history who lived sometime around the period of Justin Martyr c150 CE.

However, the Extant NT Canon and Church writers described Jesus as the OFFSPRING of the Holy Ghost, without human father, who was God and the Creator of heaven earth who walked on water, transfigured, RESURRECTED and ASCENDED to heaven.

Surely, Jesus was described similarly to MYTH entities of Greek/Roman. It can therefore be ACCEPTED that Jesus was myth.

It is most fascinating that even scholars do not even understand what is meant when it is said "Jesus was myth" BUT would argue vehemently that Marcion was NOT a myth only the PHANTOM.

Kapyong

Gday,

Assuming you meant 'appropriate' -

Hoax is completely the wrong word because it implies deliberate intent to deceive.

But the MJ theory generally is NOT about a hoax or any attempt to deceive.

I think we should avoid the word "myth" entirely as it has so many overloaded meanings - these days it esentially means "lie" or "false".

But that is not what the MJ theory is about (that is, generally speaking - there are a few crackpots who do argue a conspiracy.)

I argue that Paul wrote about a spiritual entity - a being who did NOT exist on earth, but who acted in heavenly planes above earth.

Paul did not intend to decieve anyone, nor did he write about anyone who was physical. Paul's Jesus was "mythical" - belonging to the spiritual word, but still REAL to Paul.

Mark wrote a story based on Paul, the Tanakh, and other literature of the day - he never lied, there was no hoax, he just wrote a story - without meaning it to be history.

Others copied and expanded and changed the story.

No-one lied, no-one committed a hoax, no-one was involved in a conspiracy.

They just were not writing about a historical man.

But LATER, people came to believe they were.

It was a mistake, a mis-understanding, a belief, faith - but not a lie, or hoax, or conspiracy.


K.

stephan huller

I don't want to get into an argument here. We are all 'family' in a sense here. But I just can't buy into the idea that the gospel was entirely unhistorical. The Alexandrian dating of the resurrection to (the equivalent of) March 25 for instance. IMO there was 'something' that served as the basis to this 'myth' just like there was 'something' at the heart of the Exodus narrative. The Exodus narrative is useful. The resemblance of the historical foundation of the myth might only have been slight to what Ezra eventually established as the now familiar narrative- i.e. slaves leaving Egypt and ending up in Palestine. Still I find it difficult to believe that people could be so deluded as to be into something that had no foundation in reality.

Another way to look at it. All groups somehow assume that they are 'better' than rival groups of people. But would you have Germans boasting that they were the most spontaneous people in the world, or British people who thought they had the best cuisine in the world, or Greeks who thought that they were the most organized and efficient economy in the world. The point is that even in nationalistic delusion there is some grounding (slight) grounding in reality. The same must have been true for the Jesus story.

I don't know what that grounding is or was. But it couldn't have been invented entirely in a vacuum IMO.

spamandham

...well, that is the spring equinox. We can either accept that a historical crucifixion actually happened on the equinox, or we can presume that the equinox was chosen because it's an important day and no-one really knew when the crucifixion had happened. The latter seems more likely to me, but is also compatible with both HJ and non-HJ.

aa5874

But you are arguing a conspiracy theory or a theory based on your IMAGINATION. "The Pauline writers and Church writer did NOT ever claim "Paul" preached about Jesus who acted in a heavenly plane. The Pauline Jesus was the same Jesus as described in the Scriptures.

Ga 4:4 - 1 Cor. 15.3-4 How can you even know the actual intentions of unknown writers?

You have ZERO evidence that the author of gMark used the Pauline writings. Not even the Church knew or did NOT want people to know what "Paul" wrote.

And, to start with the author of gMark, contrary to your HEAVENLY imagination theory, did NOT claim Jesus acted in a heavenly plane at all.

You have destroyed your "heavenly plane" imagination theory by claiming the author of gMark used the Pauline writings.

In gMark, Jesus was from Nazareth and ACTED on an EARTHLY plane in Galilee.

In gMark 1.9, Jesus was baptized by John the baptist in the RIVER Jordan. John BAPTIZED people on an EARTHLY plane. See Antiquities of the Jews 18.5.2.

In gMark 6.2 Jesus preached in the synagogue on the Sabbath day.

In gMark 6.48 Jesus walked on the sea of Galilee. The sea of Galilee is on an earthly plane.

In gMark 11, Jesus cursed a FIG tree on his way to Jerusalem AFTER leaving Bethany. Bethany and Jerusalem are on an earthly plane.

In gMark 8.31, Jesus taught his disciples that he would be REJECTED by the scribes, chief priests and elders, KILLED and that he would RESURRECT on the third day.

In gMark 14, Jesus was condemned to be guilty of death for blasphemy after meeting with the Sanhedrin.

In gMark 15, Jesus was on trial before Pilate who was governor of Judea from about 26-36 CE.

In gMark 15, the body of Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arithmataea in a HEWN out rock.

In Mark 16, the women visitied the tomb hoping to find the body of Jesus.

It is evident that the author of gMark got ZERO details about his Jesus from the Pauline writings. And it is EVIDENT that gMark's Jesus OPERATED on an EARTHLY plane.


The NT Jesus was a God/Man, God Incarnate, a MYTH character, who was born of a Virgin, without a human father. There is no need for any conspiracy theories about "heavenly planes".

Kapyong

Gday,

See-
that's why no-one takes your nonsense seriously.

I just argued clearly and specifically that it was NOT a "conspiracy".

Then you answered that I argue a conspiracy ?!

You can't even grasp what people write in plain English.


I never said he did.
Perhaps if you could comprehend what people write, you might actually get some answers?

As it is, you get ignored because your posts are ignorant crap.


K.

stephan huller

It might be more accurate to say that this is when the Jewish religious New Year is celebrated (Rosh haShonah is the start of the secular year) and Passover.

The coincidence that the crossing should have occurred at this time is curious - but would anyone really claim that it didn't happen?

Kapyong

Gday,

Such as, say, Bacchus?
No-one would believe in him, right?

Or Isis and Osiris?
No-one would ever believe they were historical, right?

Dionysus?
No-one person could ever be so invested as to believe he was real, right?

Heaven's gate?
No-one would EVER believe in a spaceship hiding behind a comet, right?

Scientology?
No-one would be so deluded as to believe that, right?

Theosophy?
No-one could possibly believe in the Masters and manifestation of notes right?

Angels?
No-one could be so invested in this as to actually BELIEVE in them, right?


Because we all know that people NEVER get invested in beliefs that are not based in reality, right?


K.

stephan huller

But did the ancients really believe that Osiris and Bacchus were real people and that the stupid things that were said about them were real events? I don't know but because I have children I have recently re-evaluated my own childhood 'mythical' interests - comic books, cartoons etc.

I am not sure that Moses, Jesus and Mohammed are 'myths' in the same way as Osiris, Bacchus and Dionysus. I just don't see it.

And remember I am partial to the Marcionite understanding of Jesus which says that he was wholly divine. I think Jesus might have been understood as an angel or 'the angel' of the divine presence who appeared in a historical event at a certain time and place in Palestine.

There is something different about the 'Jesus myth' or the 'Moses myth' when compared against the stories in Hesiod. That has to be acknowledged even if the Judeo-Christian myths aren't accepted as wholly true. They occupy a kind of twilight between historical truth and myth - kind of like the attitude about Jesus's mortal and divine nature in later orthodoxy.

To put it crudely - the pagan myths are like jacking off to a porn film - there was no 'real' sexual intercourse, it was wholly imaginary. The Judeo-Christian myths are like you had sex with your wife but you were thinking about the porn star. Not speaking from experience of course. The point is illustrative of the wholly fictitious nature of one experience and the mingling of truth and fantasy in another. Hope that helps.