Freethought & Rationalism Archive

fatpie42 · 02-15-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatpie42

What difference do Marcion's ideas in the middle of the 2nd century have to do with the origin of the Jesus myth?

Are you impling that only a person who lived at the same time of the supposed Jesus can write about the creature.

Marcion's claim about Jesus that he was imaginary is an indication that Jesus was mythical or such admission helps to compound the case that Jesus was a myth.

I'm just saying that someone dismissing Jesus' historicity 100 years after his supposed death doesn't mean that that person was right.

LogicandReason · 02-15-2009, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

. . . It is as simple as can be that the creature called Jesus was a MYTH.

So who were the persons responsible for inventing this myth and when was the approximate date of this fabrication?

I think that is a loaded question in that myths and legends tend to build from generation to generation. The eschatology seems to derive from the mid 2nd century BCE during the Jewish civil war (Seleucid Invasion) with the writing of Daniel, Enoch and other apocalyptic writings. I think Essenes, Baptist or their offspring developed the basic 'Christology' (such as Paul repeats in 1 Cor 15:3-4) in a sectarian step beyond either group. This is not a deception or conspiracy theory...it is superstitious, illiterate, and ignorant people trying to create answers in a very capricious world.

LogicandReason · 02-15-2009, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatpie42

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Are you impling that only a person who lived at the same time of the supposed Jesus can write about the creature.

Marcion's claim about Jesus that he was imaginary is an indication that Jesus was mythical or such admission helps to compound the case that Jesus was a myth.

I'm just saying that someone dismissing Jesus' historicity 100 years after his supposed death doesn't mean that that person was right.

But when a soteriology basically makes 'belief' in the savior the requirement for salvation...then we have to infer that most did not believe the story.

aa5874 · 02-15-2009, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatpie42

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Are you impling that only a person who lived at the same time of the supposed Jesus can write about the creature.

Marcion's claim about Jesus that he was imaginary is an indication that Jesus was mythical or such admission helps to compound the case that Jesus was a myth.

I'm just saying that someone dismissing Jesus' historicity 100 years after his supposed death doesn't mean that that person was right.

So, are you claiming that Marcion must be wrong?

Marcion could have read the writings of Josephus, just like people today, and realised that there was no mention at all of Jesus as stated in the "memoirs of the Apostles" or whatever writings there was about Jesus.

Marcion could have read Philo, Tacitus, Suetonius or even travelled to Judaea himself to investigate the stories about Jesus and found out that there was not one person who had ever heard the name Jesus as the offspring of the Holy Ghost who had a mother named Mary and 12 disciples.

Marcion's claim that Jesus was imaginary showed that it was not necessary for Jesus to be historical to be believed to have existed.

And further, Marcion showed that belief in Jesus, to believe Jesus could forgive sins, did not require Jesus to be human or to be crucified, all that is necessary is to say Jesus was a God.

LogicandReason · 02-15-2009, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatpie42

Well there is a story of Dionysos that involves him being ripped apart and then returning to life and, like with anything involving Dionysos, that would be linked with wine. I'm probably not the best person to consider whether it is right to tie it in with the last supper, but it is certainly being considered by some:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysu...h_Christianity

Wouldn't the myths of Dionysos and the beliefs about a potential messiah be common knowledge to pretty much everyone? Doesn't that then mean that the Jesus myth could have been developed by pretty much anyone?

If a profile of the originator or the originators can be built from information like that, then that is a step in the right direction. It can be tested with critical analysis and investigation and it can be confirmed or falsified. I think it would be interesting to look at original writings and directly compare Dionysus with Jesus. If the similarities are significant, then there could be a connection. Or the similiarities could be merely coincidental.

Or may suggest similar thinking produced two separate, yet similar myths.

fatpie42 · 02-15-2009, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, are you claiming that Marcion must be wrong?

Quite clearly not. I am claiming that we have no reason to suppose that Marcion was right.

Transient · 02-15-2009, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatpie42

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, are you claiming that Marcion must be wrong?

Quite clearly not. I am claiming that we have no reason to suppose that Marcion was right.

and no reason to suppose that Marcion was wrong.

aa5874 · 02-15-2009, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatpie42

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, are you claiming that Marcion must be wrong?

Quite clearly not. I am claiming that we have no reason to suppose that Marcion was right.

People don't need reason to suppose.

ApostateAbe · 02-15-2009, 08:32 PM

aa5874's claim that the Marcionite Jesus was "imaginary" is a bit of an exaggeration. Marcion believed that the physical body of Jesus was really an illusion and his true existence was incorporeal. It avoided the problematic doctrine of Jesus being God and man at the same time.

Transient · 02-15-2009, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

aa5874's claim that the Marcionite Jesus was "imaginary" is a bit of an exaggeration. Marcion believed that the physical body of Jesus was really an illusion and his true existence was incorporeal. It avoided the problematic doctrine of Jesus being God and man at the same time.

Well look if he thought that this "Jesus" existed in the incorporeal realm then he didn't believe he existed on earth - so as far as existence on earth goes he was a myth then.

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

02-15-2009, 08:32 PM	#69
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	aa5874's claim that the Marcionite Jesus was "imaginary" is a bit of an exaggeration. Marcion believed that the physical body of Jesus was really an illusion and his true existence was incorporeal. It avoided the problematic doctrine of Jesus being God and man at the same time.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.