Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ApostateAbe · 07-20-2010, 12:33 AM

What follows is a summary of my case for the historical Jesus. Each individual point may have a specialized rebuttal. For example, maybe Paul’s oft-discussed “James, brother of the Lord,” is only a metaphorical brother, despite what the gospels and Josephus may claim. Even though it may seem to be little more than an ad hoc explanation to me, such an explanation would be enough if it were to standing next to a larger case against a historical Jesus. We can only get a good handle on the best explanation when we compare and contrast the whole of each case.

Jesus was a traveling Jewish cult leader who believed that the world order would very soon come to a calamitous end as a new “kingdom of God” is established. He grew up in Nazareth, became a follower of John the Baptist, formed his own ministry, was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and his followers inherited the new religious movement, giving rise to branching mythical traditions that became gospels and epistles.

The evidences are largely the contents of the earliest Christian documents, many of which became the New Testament canon. Those would be the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Thomas. and the writing of Paul. There are no writings from Jesus nor writings of direct eyewitnesses to Jesus.

But, Paul does provide eyewitness testimony of Jesus’ disciples and his brother. He wrote of meeting “James, the brother of the Lord” in passing (Galatians 1:19), as part of his narrative of when he went to Jerusalem to meet the leaders of the church. The gospels of Matthew and Mark list James as a brother of Jesus (Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3), and the reputation of James as a brother of Jesus lasted through the time when Josephus wrote of the myth of his death in 92 CE, identifying James as a brother of Jesus “called Christ.”

Paul wrote of Cephas (Peter), James and John as “reputed pillars” (Galatians 2:9), who are the same three disciples who were core disciples of Jesus according to the gospels (Mark 5:37 and Matthew 17:1). It was a part of Paul’s bitter dispute with Cephas over the matter of whether or not Gentiles should be accepted as members of the church equal to Jews (Galatians 2). Paul wrote in the spirit of that dispute, “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?” (Galatians 3:1)

The synoptic gospels contain sayings of Jesus that are strongly expected of an apocalyptic human--possible but not probable for an apocalyptic mythical character. Mark 9:1, Mark 13:30 and corresponding passages in Matthew and Luke each quote Jesus as telling his disciples of an upcoming deadline for the doomsday events:

(Mark 9:1) “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”

(Mark 13:30) “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

The existence of John the Baptist is attested, with no connection to Jesus, by Josephus, writing of John the Baptist as a first-century cult leader killed by Herod. At the beginnings of the four gospel narratives are accounts of John the Baptist baptizing (or introducing) Jesus.

The gospels described Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, and they likewise described John the Baptist. In the gospels of Matthew and Luke (sourcing the gospel of Q):

(Matthew 3:1-2) In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.’

(Matthew 3:7-10) But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, ‘You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruit worthy of repentance. Do not presume to say to yourselves, “We have Abraham as our ancestor”; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.’

Paul, the most important successor to Jesus, wrote his letters with abundant apocalypticism:

(1 Corinthians 15:19-30) If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have died. For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For ‘God has put all things in subjection under his feet.’ But when it says, ‘All things are put in subjection’, it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all.

Otherwise, what will those people do who receive baptism on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

And why are we putting ourselves in danger every hour?

So, before Jesus, we had John the Baptist the apocalypticist. After Jesus, we had the Apostle Paul the apocalypticist. Sandwiched in between, we have Jesus the apocalypticist. Jesus is most certainly mythical in the technical sense of the word, but we most certainly do not expect such an apocalyptic prophet, surrounded by historical people within a historical setting and having the same effect of a real human being who founded a religion, to be merely mythical.

The apocalyptic deadline that Jesus was quoted as setting in the synoptic gospels (60-80 CE) most certainly failed by the time of the gospel of John (90-100 CE), the Second Epistle of Peter (100-150 CE) and the Gospel of Thomas (~150 CE). Apologetic excuses for the failed deadlines are contained in these writings.

(John 21:22-23) Jesus said to him, ‘If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Follow me!’ So the rumour spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, ‘If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?’

(2 Peter 3:3-8) First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts and saying, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!’ They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water, through which the world of that time was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the present heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgement and destruction of the godless.

But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.

(Gospel of Thomas 113) His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?”

“It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don’t see it.”

The significance of this apocalyptic deadline is that it is a pattern of history, each time involving an actual human predictor, seemingly motivated by power, wealth or an honest belief in the imminent apocalypse. See this website for very many examples: A Brief History of the Apocalypse.

In addition to John the Baptist, Jesus is likewise attested by Josephus, twice, once as the brother of James, and another time writing of him as not the Christ, knowledge of a pre-interpolation Testimonium Flavianum that comes to us via the 3rd-century writer Origen.

(Origen, On The Gospel Of Matthew, 1:15) Flavius Josephus, who wrote the “Antiquities of the Jews” in twenty books, when wishing to exhibit the cause why the people suffered so great misfortunes that even the temple was razed to the ground, said, that these things happened to them in accordance with the wrath of God in consequence of the things which they had dared to do against James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ. And the wonderful thing is, that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ, he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great; and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James.

Josephus of course never saw Jesus, but he knew the beliefs of the Christian religion, and he apparently had no question of whether or not Jesus existed, nor did anyone else in antiquity. Josephus explained Christianity as being founded by an actual human Jesus who was “not the Christ.”

There are many questions concerning the historicity of Jesus, but the case for whether or not there was a Jesus who roughly fit the profile of the synoptic gospels is a slam dunk. A best explanation considers all of the evidence. It is the explanation that maximizes explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility and consistency, and it minimizes ad hoc suppositions. If you think you have a better explanation, then lay it out. Explain how your theory explains the evidence better.

Thank you.

Steven Carr · 07-20-2010, 12:35 AM

ABE
For example, maybe Paul’s oft-discussed “James, brother of the Lord,” is only a metaphorical brother, despite what the gospels and Josephus may claim

CARR
Where does Luke/Acts ,a semi-official history of the church, claim that Jesus had a brother called James?

Steven Carr · 07-20-2010, 12:36 AM

ABE
So, before Jesus, we had John the Baptist the apocalypticist.

CARR
Really? How do you explain the total lack of evidence for that claim?

Steven Carr · 07-20-2010, 12:39 AM

ABE
At the beginnings of the four gospel narratives are accounts of John the Baptist baptizing...

CARR
Why does the Gospel of John never call anybody 'the Baptist'?

Was the anonymous author independent of the Synoptic Gospels, in which case you cannot import the assumption that the author had heard of anybody called 'the Baptist',in which case you have no corroboration that John 'the Baptist' knew Jesus.

But if the anonymous author of John was rewriting the baptism scene in Mark (morelikely), then all you have is one anonymous , uncorroborated claim that John the Baptist knew Jesus, and people copying that anonymous rumour.

maryhelena · 07-20-2010, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

What follows is a summary of my case for the historical Jesus. Each individual point may have a specialized rebuttal. For example, maybe Paul’s oft-discussed “James, brother of the Lord,” is only a metaphorical brother, despite what the gospels and Josephus may claim. Even though it may seem to be little more than an ad hoc explanation to me, such an explanation would be enough if it were to standing next to a larger case against a historical Jesus. We can only get a good handle on the best explanation when we compare and contrast the whole of each case.

Jesus was a traveling Jewish cult leader who believed that the world order would very soon come to a calamitous end as a new “kingdom of God” is established. He grew up in Nazareth, became a follower of John the Baptist, formed his own ministry, was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and his followers inherited the new religious movement, giving rise to branching mythical traditions that became gospels and epistles.

The evidences are largely the contents of the earliest Christian documents, many of which became the New Testament canon. Those would be the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Thomas. and the writing of Paul. There are no writings from Jesus nor writings of direct eyewitnesses to Jesus.

But, Paul does provide eyewitness testimony of Jesus’ disciples and his brother. He wrote of meeting “James, the brother of the Lord” in passing (Galatians 1:19), as part of his narrative of when he went to Jerusalem to meet the leaders of the church. The gospels of Matthew and Mark list James as a brother of Jesus (Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3), and the reputation of James as a brother of Jesus lasted through the time when Josephus wrote of the myth of his death in 92 CE, identifying James as a brother of Jesus “called Christ.”

Paul wrote of Cephas (Peter), James and John as “reputed pillars” (Galatians 2:9), who are the same three disciples who were core disciples of Jesus according to the gospels (Mark 5:37 and Matthew 17:1). It was a part of Paul’s bitter dispute with Cephas over the matter of whether or not Gentiles should be accepted as members of the church equal to Jews (Galatians 2). Paul wrote in the spirit of that dispute, “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?” (Galatians 3:1)

The synoptic gospels contain sayings of Jesus that are strongly expected of an apocalyptic human--possible but not probable for an apocalyptic mythical character. Mark 9:1, Mark 13:30 and corresponding passages in Matthew and Luke each quote Jesus as telling his disciples of an upcoming deadline for the doomsday events:

(Mark 9:1) “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”

(Mark 13:30) “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

The existence of John the Baptist is attested, with no connection to Jesus, by Josephus, writing of John the Baptist as a first-century cult leader killed by Herod. At the beginnings of the four gospel narratives are accounts of John the Baptist baptizing (or introducing) Jesus.

The gospels described Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, and they likewise described John the Baptist. In the gospels of Matthew and Luke (sourcing the gospel of Q):

(Matthew 3:1-2) In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.’

(Matthew 3:7-10) But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, ‘You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruit worthy of repentance. Do not presume to say to yourselves, “We have Abraham as our ancestor”; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.’

Paul, the most important successor to Jesus, wrote his letters with abundant apocalypticism:

(1 Corinthians 15:19-30) If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have died. For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For ‘God has put all things in subjection under his feet.’ But when it says, ‘All things are put in subjection’, it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all.

Otherwise, what will those people do who receive baptism on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

And why are we putting ourselves in danger every hour?

So, before Jesus, we had John the Baptist the apocalypticist. After Jesus, we had the Apostle Paul the apocalypticist. Sandwiched in between, we have Jesus the apocalypticist. Jesus is most certainly mythical in the technical sense of the word, but we most certainly do not expect such an apocalyptic prophet, surrounded by historical people within a historical setting and having the same effect of a real human being who founded a religion, to be merely mythical.

The apocalyptic deadline that Jesus was quoted as setting in the synoptic gospels (60-80 CE) most certainly failed by the time of the gospel of John (90-100 CE), the Second Epistle of Peter (100-150 CE) and the Gospel of Thomas (~150 CE). Apologetic excuses for the failed deadlines are contained in these writings.

(John 21:22-23) Jesus said to him, ‘If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Follow me!’ So the rumour spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, ‘If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?’

(2 Peter 3:3-8) First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts and saying, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!’ They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water, through which the world of that time was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the present heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgement and destruction of the godless.

But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.

(Gospel of Thomas 113) His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?”

“It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don’t see it.”

The significance of this apocalyptic deadline is that it is a pattern of history, each time involving an actual human predictor, seemingly motivated by power, wealth or an honest belief in the imminent apocalypse. See this website for very many examples: A Brief History of the Apocalypse.

In addition to John the Baptist, Jesus is likewise attested by Josephus, twice, once as the brother of James, and another time writing of him as not the Christ, knowledge of a pre-interpolation Testimonium Flavianum that comes to us via the 3rd-century writer Origen.

(Origen, On The Gospel Of Matthew, 1:15) Flavius Josephus, who wrote the “Antiquities of the Jews” in twenty books, when wishing to exhibit the cause why the people suffered so great misfortunes that even the temple was razed to the ground, said, that these things happened to them in accordance with the wrath of God in consequence of the things which they had dared to do against James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ. And the wonderful thing is, that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ, he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great; and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James.

Josephus of course never saw Jesus, but he knew the beliefs of the Christian religion, and he apparently had no question of whether or not Jesus existed, nor did anyone else in antiquity. Josephus explained Christianity as being founded by an actual human Jesus who was “not the Christ.”

There are many questions concerning the historicity of Jesus, but the case for whether or not there was a Jesus who roughly fit the profile of the synoptic gospels is a slam dunk. A best explanation considers all of the evidence. It is the explanation that maximizes explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility and consistency, and it minimizes ad hoc suppositions. If you think you have a better explanation, then lay it out. Explain how your theory explains the evidence better.

Thank you.

:banghead:

Steven Carr · 07-20-2010, 12:43 AM

ABE
A best explanation considers all of the evidence.

CARR
Is that why you only produced some of the evidence?

Why does Paul claim that God appointed apostles, when allegedly Jesus appointed apostles?

Was Paul using 'God' metaphorically, and he meant 'Jesus'?

Isn't that one of those metaphoric ,ad hoc explanations that you condemn?

ApostateAbe · 07-20-2010, 01:18 AM

Steven Carr, I hope you are done. If not, then let me know when you will be.

In the first paragraph, I said, "We can only get a good handle on the best explanation when we compare and contrast the whole of each case."

Do you care to look at the whole of a case? I am thinking, to you, it is all about disputing each point, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, in rapid-fire succession.

I was there when posted my thread, and it was barely one minute afterward, when you fired your first rebuttal.

Two minutes after that, you fired your second rebuttal, still with a vestige of a prior debate ("Luke/Acts"), which you quickly edited out in the next minute.

Huon · 07-20-2010, 07:12 AM

What about Resurrection, Ascension, Pentecost ?
Miracles ?
Jesus is not simply an apocalyptic preacher...

aa5874 · 07-20-2010, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

.....There are many questions concerning the historicity of Jesus, but the case for whether or not there was a Jesus who roughly fit the profile of the synoptic gospels is a slam dunk. A best explanation considers all of the evidence. It is the explanation that maximizes explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility and consistency, and it minimizes ad hoc suppositions. If you think you have a better explanation, then lay it out. Explain how your theory explains the evidence better.

Thank you.

You have presented NO SLAM DUNK evidence at all.

You have given ADD HOC explanations to back-up what you have IMAGINED or SPECULATED.

People already KNOW what is written about Jesus in the NT Canon.

Once you are arguing that Jesus of the NT Canon did exist then you MUST provide SLAM DUNK EVIDENCE from corroborative SOURCES of ANTIQUITY.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Jesus was a traveling Jewish cult leader who believed that the world order would very soon come to a calamitous end as a new “kingdom of God” is established. He grew up in Nazareth, became a follower of John the Baptist, formed his own ministry, was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and his followers inherited the new religious movement, giving rise to branching mythical traditions that became gospels and epistles....

It is a slam dunk case where you simply do NOT understand how to apply "ABE".

You must KNOW that your SUGGESTIONS are NOT considered EVIDENCE from antiquity but are actually mere SPECULATIONS.

If you apply ABE then you must PRESENT the OBSERVED DATA or STATEMENT.

1. In the Jesus stories in the Canon, Jesus was the offspring of the Holy Ghost and a Virgin, without a human father, the Creator of heaven and earth, equal to God, who walked on water, transfigured, resurrected and ascended to heaven. And that the resurrection of Jesus had the ability to REMOVE the SINS of ALL mankind.

2. There is EVIDENCE from antiquity that people BELIEVED the Jesus stories were TRUE.

The SLAM-DUNK EXPLANATION based on ABE is that Jesus of the NT Canon was just an invented story lifted from information found in Hebrew Scripture, the writings of Josephus and Roman/Greek mythology that was BELIEVED to be true.

JoeWallack · 07-20-2010, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

There are many questions concerning the historicity of Jesus, but the case for whether or not there was a Jesus who roughly fit the profile of the synoptic gospels is a slam dunk. A best explanation considers all of the evidence. It is the explanation that maximizes explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility and consistency, and it minimizes ad hoc suppositions. If you think you have a better explanation, then lay it out. Explain how your theory explains the evidence better.

JW:
You still don't understand that proving that the evidence for HJ is better than the evidence for MJ does not prove HJ. This must be what "Mark's" Jesus felt like towards his disciples.

Joseph

Historical Methodology for HJ/MJ Arguments

07-20-2010, 12:33 AM	#1
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Abe’s Summary of the Slam-Dunk Evidence for the Historical Jesus What follows is a summary of my case for the historical Jesus. Each individual point may have a specialized rebuttal. For example, maybe Paul’s oft-discussed “James, brother of the Lord,” is only a metaphorical brother, despite what the gospels and Josephus may claim. Even though it may seem to be little more than an ad hoc explanation to me, such an explanation would be enough if it were to standing next to a larger case against a historical Jesus. We can only get a good handle on the best explanation when we compare and contrast the whole of each case. Jesus was a traveling Jewish cult leader who believed that the world order would very soon come to a calamitous end as a new “kingdom of God” is established. He grew up in Nazareth, became a follower of John the Baptist, formed his own ministry, was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and his followers inherited the new religious movement, giving rise to branching mythical traditions that became gospels and epistles. The evidences are largely the contents of the earliest Christian documents, many of which became the New Testament canon. Those would be the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Thomas. and the writing of Paul. There are no writings from Jesus nor writings of direct eyewitnesses to Jesus. But, Paul does provide eyewitness testimony of Jesus’ disciples and his brother. He wrote of meeting “James, the brother of the Lord” in passing (Galatians 1:19), as part of his narrative of when he went to Jerusalem to meet the leaders of the church. The gospels of Matthew and Mark list James as a brother of Jesus (Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3), and the reputation of James as a brother of Jesus lasted through the time when Josephus wrote of the myth of his death in 92 CE, identifying James as a brother of Jesus “called Christ.” Paul wrote of Cephas (Peter), James and John as “reputed pillars” (Galatians 2:9), who are the same three disciples who were core disciples of Jesus according to the gospels (Mark 5:37 and Matthew 17:1). It was a part of Paul’s bitter dispute with Cephas over the matter of whether or not Gentiles should be accepted as members of the church equal to Jews (Galatians 2). Paul wrote in the spirit of that dispute, “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?” (Galatians 3:1) The synoptic gospels contain sayings of Jesus that are strongly expected of an apocalyptic human--possible but not probable for an apocalyptic mythical character. Mark 9:1, Mark 13:30 and corresponding passages in Matthew and Luke each quote Jesus as telling his disciples of an upcoming deadline for the doomsday events: (Mark 9:1) “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.” (Mark 13:30) “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. The existence of John the Baptist is attested, with no connection to Jesus, by Josephus, writing of John the Baptist as a first-century cult leader killed by Herod. At the beginnings of the four gospel narratives are accounts of John the Baptist baptizing (or introducing) Jesus. The gospels described Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, and they likewise described John the Baptist. In the gospels of Matthew and Luke (sourcing the gospel of Q): (Matthew 3:1-2) In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.’ (Matthew 3:7-10) But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, ‘You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruit worthy of repentance. Do not presume to say to yourselves, “We have Abraham as our ancestor”; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. Even now the axe is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.’ Paul, the most important successor to Jesus, wrote his letters with abundant apocalypticism: (1 Corinthians 15:19-30) If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied. But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have died. For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For ‘God has put all things in subjection under his feet.’ But when it says, ‘All things are put in subjection’, it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all. Otherwise, what will those people do who receive baptism on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf? And why are we putting ourselves in danger every hour? So, before Jesus, we had John the Baptist the apocalypticist. After Jesus, we had the Apostle Paul the apocalypticist. Sandwiched in between, we have Jesus the apocalypticist. Jesus is most certainly mythical in the technical sense of the word, but we most certainly do not expect such an apocalyptic prophet, surrounded by historical people within a historical setting and having the same effect of a real human being who founded a religion, to be merely mythical. The apocalyptic deadline that Jesus was quoted as setting in the synoptic gospels (60-80 CE) most certainly failed by the time of the gospel of John (90-100 CE), the Second Epistle of Peter (100-150 CE) and the Gospel of Thomas (~150 CE). Apologetic excuses for the failed deadlines are contained in these writings. (John 21:22-23) Jesus said to him, ‘If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Follow me!’ So the rumour spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, ‘If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?’ (2 Peter 3:3-8) First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts and saying, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!’ They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water, through which the world of that time was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the present heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgement and destruction of the godless. But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day. (Gospel of Thomas 113) His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?” “It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don’t see it.” The significance of this apocalyptic deadline is that it is a pattern of history, each time involving an actual human predictor, seemingly motivated by power, wealth or an honest belief in the imminent apocalypse. See this website for very many examples: A Brief History of the Apocalypse. In addition to John the Baptist, Jesus is likewise attested by Josephus, twice, once as the brother of James, and another time writing of him as not the Christ, knowledge of a pre-interpolation Testimonium Flavianum that comes to us via the 3rd-century writer Origen. (Origen, On The Gospel Of Matthew, 1:15) Flavius Josephus, who wrote the “Antiquities of the Jews” in twenty books, when wishing to exhibit the cause why the people suffered so great misfortunes that even the temple was razed to the ground, said, that these things happened to them in accordance with the wrath of God in consequence of the things which they had dared to do against James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ. And the wonderful thing is, that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ, he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great; and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James. Josephus of course never saw Jesus, but he knew the beliefs of the Christian religion, and he apparently had no question of whether or not Jesus existed, nor did anyone else in antiquity. Josephus explained Christianity as being founded by an actual human Jesus who was “not the Christ.” There are many questions concerning the historicity of Jesus, but the case for whether or not there was a Jesus who roughly fit the profile of the synoptic gospels is a slam dunk. A best explanation considers all of the evidence. It is the explanation that maximizes explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility and consistency, and it minimizes ad hoc suppositions. If you think you have a better explanation, then lay it out. Explain how your theory explains the evidence better. Thank you.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-20-2010, 12:35 AM	#2
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	ABE For example, maybe Paul’s oft-discussed “James, brother of the Lord,” is only a metaphorical brother, despite what the gospels and Josephus may claim CARR Where does Luke/Acts ,a semi-official history of the church, claim that Jesus had a brother called James?

07-20-2010, 12:36 AM	#3
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	ABE So, before Jesus, we had John the Baptist the apocalypticist. CARR Really? How do you explain the total lack of evidence for that claim?

07-20-2010, 12:39 AM	#4
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	ABE At the beginnings of the four gospel narratives are accounts of John the Baptist baptizing... CARR Why does the Gospel of John never call anybody 'the Baptist'? Was the anonymous author independent of the Synoptic Gospels, in which case you cannot import the assumption that the author had heard of anybody called 'the Baptist',in which case you have no corroboration that John 'the Baptist' knew Jesus. But if the anonymous author of John was rewriting the baptism scene in Mark (morelikely), then all you have is one anonymous , uncorroborated claim that John the Baptist knew Jesus, and people copying that anonymous rumour.

07-20-2010, 12:43 AM	#6
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	ABE A best explanation considers all of the evidence. CARR Is that why you only produced some of the evidence? Why does Paul claim that God appointed apostles, when allegedly Jesus appointed apostles? Was Paul using 'God' metaphorically, and he meant 'Jesus'? Isn't that one of those metaphoric ,ad hoc explanations that you condemn?

07-20-2010, 01:18 AM	#7
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Steven Carr, I hope you are done. If not, then let me know when you will be. In the first paragraph, I said, "We can only get a good handle on the best explanation when we compare and contrast the whole of each case." Do you care to look at the whole of a case? I am thinking, to you, it is all about disputing each point, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam, in rapid-fire succession. I was there when posted my thread, and it was barely one minute afterward, when you fired your first rebuttal. Two minutes after that, you fired your second rebuttal, still with a vestige of a prior debate ("Luke/Acts"), which you quickly edited out in the next minute.

07-20-2010, 07:12 AM	#8
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	What about Resurrection, Ascension, Pentecost ? Miracles ? Jesus is not simply an apocalyptic preacher...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.