ApostateAbe

Andykiwi, there are many theories on early Christianity that are especially appealing to people of a skeptical and anti-religious bent, and a lot of people start out favoring a particular theory just because they love it. I started out that way myself. Biblical studies are a labyrinth of wishful thinking and ideology. Underseer suggested that Christianity was sparked from Buddhist missionaries from a certain king in India, which is a theory I have never heard in my life, as long as I have been involved in the debate, but it is such a theory that I know a guy like Underseer would love to believe (he makes quite an impression in the Politics forum). My suggestion to all new-comers, and I wish someone told this to me years ago, is to focus your primary attention on the secular New Testament scholarship. Those are the people who have professorships in public accredited universities in historical/religious studies and have publications in reputable peer-reviewed journals. Some of them have published books meant for a popular audience, and they are great introductory reading. I make that suggestion because those people tend to have the best handle on the subject, and their books tend to be the most reasonable. For every one of those book titles, there are around a hundred other titles advancing theories that are facepalmingly preposterous, inside and outside the Christian religion.

aa5874

Well, you are the one who claimed that you can only make guesses since there is nothing certain in Biblical Scholarship. But, then you seem to think that you make the best guesses.

If you are not certain then perhaps it is best for you to guess.

Chili

There you go, the blind leading the blind not matter how many PhD's they have.

Hint, never listen to a theologian for he is a student himself.

EarlDoherty

Nonsense.

Have you read The Jesus Puzzle or Jesus: Neither God Nor Man? If you haven't, you are spouting in ignorance. If you have, why have you not discredited that case publicly before declaring that no possible detailed and coherent explanation has been presented?

Posturing and dismissing without addressing does not constitute a counter-argument. From what I've seen of your postings on this DB, your arsenal is made up entirely of the Argument from Personal Incredulity.

Earl Doherty

ApostateAbe

Sorry, I should have said, "...but none of them have formulated even a possible detailed and coherent explanation for the beginnings of Christianity without a living human Jesus, with the possible exception of a few theories that seem to be facepalmers." My cliffnotes understanding of your theory is that you think Paul's version of Jesus was only spiritual. The reason I take it to be a facepalmer is because it matches neither the authentic letters of Paul nor the complete lack of a dispute (in the gospels or the Pauline letters) between Pauline Christians and those who believed Jesus to be rigorously human.

I am not going to buy any of your books. A marketing agent of Acharya S likes to use a trick, in which it is claimed that nobody is qualified to criticize her theories except those who have read all of her latest books, and I would like to discourage that tactic. I'll let GakuseiDon read your book, and I will read his review.

Toto

Abe - every time you post in the forum you reveal your dreadful ignorance of the debate.

You yourself are the facepalm object. I don't see how you can say this if you have read the publicly available parts of Earl's work on www.jesuspuzzle.com or anything else.

GDon is still making arguments that have been thoroughly discredited here. I do not think that we are going to get a particularly enlightening review from him, even if JP Holding decides to publish it.

EarlDoherty

And just how is someone qualified to criticize a theory if they haven't read its presentation? Oh yes, through knee-jerk dismissal and a priori rejection. The latter tactic is what I would prefer to discourage.

You'll probably find GDon's review to your liking, since he seems to employ the same approach to theories he doesn't like.

Earl Doherty

ApostateAbe

I just reviewed the text under the heading, "Piece No. 2: A Transcendent Christ and a Missing Equation," in his The Jesus Puzzle, Pieces in a Puzzle of Christian Origins, and it seems to confirm my cliffnotes version of his theory. I might be missing something that is making me look like an idiot, but it is hard to pin down.

Earl, you said that my arsenal seems to be made entirely of Argument from Personal Incredulity, so I would like to point you to my own model of Jesus and the case for it, just in case you haven't seen it yet: Jesus the apocalyptic cult leader and the checklist of cult characteristics. Feel free to give that thread a bump.

dog-on

Imo, in the first or second century BC the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek, in a volume that became known as the LXX.

This act made these writings available to a wide audience throughout the Roman Empire.

Later, some creative individuals spent a lot of time studying it, maybe looking for the truth (or whatever). Perhaps these individuals developed such fervor that they actually gave themselves dreams and visions.

They began reinterpreting the writings.

???


Profit...

storytime

Well, here's my review of which I reserve the right to change at any given time.

Paul was a missionary. His intent and purpose was to persuade the Gentiles that his Hebrew god was the only god of importance to be worshiped. But Paul had to conceive of a plan that would not affect the Jewish belief in observance of law and covenant of circumcision. So what Paul did was to inform the Gentiles that none of Jewish tradition applied to them while it remained applicable to the Jews. This much is truth as Gentiles were never given any laws of Moses at Sinai or brought under the covenant of circumcision by force. Gentiles were totally free of Jewish tradition[religion] and Paul wanted them to remain so. But why? Because Paul did not want Gentiles to think they had property rights in receiving inheritance rights of land with the Jews. Paul's gospel then set about telling of a spiritual inheritance and a god-man who died to set men free. Although he didn't declare that "freedom" meant freedom from Judaism and the curse of the law in it's death cult. Paul didn't want the Gentiles to be totally free and encouraged the Gentiles as if it were their responsibility to take care of the Jews at Jerusalem, because he said the Gentiles having received the spiritual things should be thankful in giving material things to honor the first chosen - the Jews. Paul was effectively building a fence, a protective barrier around the Jews at Jerusalem. While the Jews held to a doctrine of hate, Paul taught the Gentiles his gospel of love thy neighbor - the Jew. A strategical strategy of difficulty and time consuming effort. The Christians were to expect persecutions, tribulations and death but were to remain strong in knowing that they were now included as a branch on the tree of life - Israel and could even claim the Hebrew god as their own through the go-man Jesus.

Paul stayed in the city of Antioch for a whole year preaching his gospel to Gentiles of no law no circumcision. There in Antioch, the Gentiles of Paul's gospel were first established as Christians in name. Other disciples who were at the beginning of preaching to the Gentiles decided to split-off from Paul's gospel to go their own way in their own gospels. These who were also Christ followers and who left Paul to teach another gospel[their own version], Paul said he cursed, anathemed.

So with this we see that there were many Christs and many Lords of Christianity. Today we see the same in the many Christs and Lords in the many denominations of Christianity. And all are still separate from Judaism and inheritance rights of land in Israel.

Christian inheritance was a spiritual theme, an imagined place. Forgiveness of bad behavior was a simple matter of asking and receiving. The Gentiles were excited about this new god-man who remained Jewish, and began devoting themselves to a forced love for the Jews. For their spiritual inheritance depended on it.

That is, until Jesus would be seen coming in the clouds of heaven and the final solution to the Jewish problem for those who did not believe in him.

I may have twisted it up a bit, but hey, that's ok.