Attonitus

Yes, I know the testimonium flavianum (whose authenticity is discussed), but here I don't speak of the testimonium; I say that the mythical Jesus is born, lives and dies in a concrete socio-cultural and historical environment that is very well-known thanks to Josephus works. Robert M. Price speaking of the topic says that Superboy is just as mythical as Santa Claus and Peter Pan, but doesn't exist information on where those myths have been born, lived, neither dead; it is not the same type of myths, the mythical Jesus is atypical in this sense.

Well, something less (and I don't speak of Paul), GMark 65-80 CE.

Yes, but the dates are not manipulated, in 65 CE GMark speech of Jesus (and maybe the oral tradition is previous).

Thank you,

Malachi151

I don't know Spanish well enough to make my points in Spanish, but maybe you can understand this in English, someone can translate it.

There are several factors as to why the myth has held up so long, and also the fact is that the myth has been criticized strongly for 200 years now as well.

Firstly you have the Catholic Church to consider.

The Catholic Church held almost all the political and cultural power in Europe from about 400 CE until 1600 CE, and has maintained a strong influence since that time as well.

The Catholic Church dominated all aspects of life in Europe for over 1,000 years and during this time of course they were able to enforce the belief in this myth and keep society too ignorant to criticize it.

Now there is another issue. Prior to the invention of the Printing Press no one except Catholic clergy ever saw or read the Bible. There was no way to criticize it at that point. The Printing Press was not invented until the 1400s.

There was almost no knowledge outside of the knowledge presented by the Church until the Crusades, and that knowledge didn't get back to Europe until around the 1200s.

From the 1200s it took until the 1500s for real criticism of the Church to build.

By the 1700s people were starting to criticize the myth of Jesus itself. The American, Thomas Paine was one of the first to put such a criticism into print in his book, The Age of Reason.

You should look for a Spanish version of The Age of Reason.

Attonitus

I live in Spain, but I'm not Catholic neither Christian. The Jesus Seminary is not Catholic, but they try to find the historical Jesus. Morton Smith an atheist, concludes his book on Jesus in Tübingen, the same place in that my dear Strauss wrote its great work. And I believe that enough participants in this forum are not Catholic but they sustain the existence of a historical Jesus.

Greetings,

Amaleq13

Not true. His hometown is in Illinois and proudly proclaims itself the birthplace of Superman.

http://www.metropolischamber.com/metropolis.htm

Not so different from the first story about Jesus (i.e. Mark). Jesus shows up fully grown and ready to be baptized. We get snapshots of a ministry that sometimes incorrectly describes the geography. Then he is arrested and executed. We have to wait until two guys rewrite this first story before the "atypical" details are added.

Malachi151

Ah yes. I myself think that "Jesus" may have been real.

Obviously though at least parts of the stories about him ar false.

The question then becomes, how much is real and how much is false? Do you assume that all the things that are not supernatural really happened?

I think that the Jesus story is likely based on real events and a real person or people, but to say that "Jesus was real" becomes difficult even if you discount the supernatural things because even if the story is "based on a real person" we don't know how much of it is real and how much is made up.

The Jesus in the story is definately not completely real.

rlogan

Claro. Gracias. Es mucho divertido.

Por supuesto, usted es correcto. Acerca de es extraordinario. Pero solo en tamano.

Muchos personas aqui creen que una persona historica era necesaria. Habia las iglesias separadas. Como consolidar? Por la autoridad. La autoridad de la historia falsa.

Estas fechas son escogidas por los creyentes. Muchos eruditos piensan es mas tarde. Yo no soy erudito. Un persona aqui de nobre "Spin".

El Escrita mucho acerca de esto aqui.

Sea probablemente despues 70. Yo no soy experto. Pero esto es la fecha mas temprana.

Hay un "hilo" en este ahora. Lea los comentarios por la "Vuelta".

Hay un Vinnie denominado tambien. Nacido de un perro. El sueno con los camellos. Olore como una cabra.

Bromeando por supuesto. Somos amigos aqui.

Attonitus

The Jesus Myth theory is truly minority, only five scholars defends seriously this position: G. A. Wells (?), Earl Doherty, Robert M. Price, Alvar Ellegård and maybe Hyam Maccoby.

I don't know if Jesus in the history is definitely not completely real, but I believe that the Jesus Myth theory in the scholarship is definitely irreal.

Best regards,

spin

If numbers meant something then Richard Nixon must have been a nice guy. But he was a stronzo (if you'll excuse my Italian). I neither support nor reject the mythological analysis: I don't think there's enough evidence to judge. Therefore I think there are a lot of people in the historical fairyland thinking there must have been a historical Jesus.

Most real historians avoid the subject and leave it to religious scholars as it is irrelevant to history and only meaningful, in the historians' eyes, to religionists anyway.

Let me just challenge you to stop the numbers game and demonstrate through historical methods that there was a Jesus. You know what history was like in Russia during the communist regime: if you didn't say the official things you didn't get published. This is the old fact Orwell wrote about: who controls the present controls the past. xians controlled the present for a long time. Just look at the invention of Ebion, the leader of the Ebionite sect according to Tertullian and various other church fathers. Turning unreality into history is not a strange event at all in the context.

So, the challenge again: show me that there was a Jesus. I've looked at the evidence such as the Roman writers after 100 CE, Tacitus, Suetonius and Pliny II. Useless. Josephus testimony? You know what that's worth. The gospels? When were they written? No-one knows. You just get hopes, like Vinnie's silly 70-80 CE for Mark.

Do you want to talk evidence or count opinions?


spin

chapka

There are constant, pervasive parallels. Many people still believe that Columbus discovered America because he believed the world was round when everyone else thought it was flat, and that Jackie Robinson was the first black player in major league baseball.

For a few good examples, take this quiz

These aren't as longstanding as the Jesus idea yet, but only because they're still relevant. Romulus and Remus lasted as long as the Roman empire, and the Jesus story will last as long as the Christian religion.

Sorry for the American-centric response, but they're the myths I grew up with. I'd be very curious to know what equivalent myths there are about Spanish history if you care to post some.

Oh, and guys, I think the OP was using the word "myth" in a more general than technical sense, so the "inflated historical jesus vs. no jesus at all" stuff may be OT. But I don't speak spanish, so I may be way off base.

Attonitus

Then you neither supports or reject the historical analysis?

Facts o comments?

I don't want to demonstrate with historical methods something that I have not affirmed. I simply point that in connection with Jesus if the historical method has problems, the mythical method has them even bigger, and that the mythical analysis is marginal in the scholarship. Simply facts no comments.

Well, Vinnie is optimistic