Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 12-05-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

Aren't there indications in the gospels that this is exactly the case. I believe if you went to a random pharisee (sp?) rabbi in those days he would probably say that he considered Jesus to be a fraud.

Alf

IIRC there are indications in the gospels that Jesus' enemies assumed he got his powers from Satan, and there are much later stories in the Talmud that indicate that the Jews saw Jesus as having learned black magic in Egypt.

But the idea that magicians were frauds or tricksters is a modern concept.

But, all these are claimed to have been written in antiquity, Leviticus 20.27, "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or a wizard, shall surely be put to death...."

Malachi 3.5, ".....I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterer, and against false swearers....saith the Lord"

And in Revelation 22.15, "For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."

Apparently the Jews in antiquity abhorred magicians and sorcerers and may have executed them, unlike the Egyptians.

Solitary Man · 12-05-2007, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

Aren't there indications in the gospels that this is exactly th ecase. I believe if you went to a random pharisee (sp?) rabbi in those days he would probably say that he considered Jesus to be a fraud.

Alf

And in fiction, the authors control the dialogue and the characters. Even 2000 years later, we know that the raising of Lazarus from the dead, as written by the author, is a fraudulent account.

Is it fraudulent if it wasn't meant to be taken as literal history?

Toto · 12-05-2007, 04:53 PM

They were to be put to death because they used magic powers.

If their powers had been ineffective, they wouldn't have been worth the effort.

aa5874 · 12-05-2007, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

They were to be put to death because they used magic powers.

If their powers had been ineffective, they wouldn't have been worth the effort.

Magic is all trick, there is no real power behind magic. The Jews of antiquity, executed tricksters, apparently they were in the same class as murderers.

aa5874 · 12-05-2007, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

And in fiction, the authors control the dialogue and the characters. Even 2000 years later, we know that the raising of Lazarus from the dead, as written by the author, is a fraudulent account.

Is it fraudulent if it wasn't meant to be taken as literal history?

Name an early Church father that clearly affirmed that Jesus was not a God and could not raise any-one from the dead. The early Church fathers of the Christian Church did unanimously declare that Jesus was a God and no known history book has ever contradicted their claim.

Eusebius 'Church History, book 1.2," Since in Christ there is a two-fold nature, and the one- in so far as he is thought of as God........"

Solitary Man · 12-05-2007, 08:37 PM

Don't derail your own discussion. Is it fraud if the author who wrote about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead didn't think intend for that story to be taken literally?

dog-on · 12-06-2007, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Don't derail your own discussion. Is it fraud if the author who wrote about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead didn't think intend for that story to be taken literally?

or that the author of Mark didn't intend for the story to be taken literally... Not at all!

xaxxat · 12-06-2007, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Don't derail your own discussion. Is it fraud if the author who wrote about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead didn't think intend for that story to be taken literally?

Why bother writing it then? What was the author's intention?

JoeWallack · 12-06-2007, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waltms

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

JW:
I'd like to start moving towards identifying your Sources for this supposed Minimum Historicity. Regarding the above, presumably Jesus knew that he was tricking people? Did Jesus' Entourage also know he was tricking people or were they likewise fooled? Is your Source here people who were tricked?

Why are you assuming anyone was being tricked? The psychology of religious experience is a bit more complex than simply being a charlatan or his fool. The sources are primarily the canonical Gospels and Paul. For parallel models of miracle-workers in antiquity, Josephus, the OT, and various classical sources are useful.

JW:
We're moving away from HJ/MJ discussion here so I'll veer towards my point, You've explained that you think at a Minimum Jesus was a miracle-worker. You've objected to the word "trick" but seem to accept that it meant people thought Jesus did some things that he really didn't do. [Understatement] This is not an attractive quality for HJ evidence [/Understatement]:

1) We have the scourge of Historicity here, the Impossible.

2) We have supposed witnesses who didn't know exactly what they were witnessing.

3) We have a Subject with the ability of 2). Could he likewise convince people that he died or resurrected even though he didn't?

4) We have the issue of his Disciples being 2)? Doesn't really work, does it? Yet at best they would be your supposed witnesses.

And what do your best Sources say on the Subject?:

Paul: No evidence of any miracle-working.

"Mark": Jesus did miracle-work but he didn't enjoy it. "Mark" is anti historical witness so what his Source?

Q: Emphasis on wisdom sayings.

Joseph

Solitary Man · 12-06-2007, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xaxxat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Don't derail your own discussion. Is it fraud if the author who wrote about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead didn't think intend for that story to be taken literally?

Why bother writing it then? What was the author's intention?

Who knows? We can only speculate. Perhaps it was to make a point. Do you think Tacitus actually meant his audience to take the speeches he invented and placed in the mouths of foreign generals as literally true?

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

12-05-2007, 04:53 PM	#73
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	They were to be put to death because they used magic powers. If their powers had been ineffective, they wouldn't have been worth the effort.

12-05-2007, 08:37 PM	#76
Solitary Man Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: ירושלים Posts: 1,701	Don't derail your own discussion. Is it fraud if the author who wrote about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead didn't think intend for that story to be taken literally?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.