Freethought & Rationalism Archive

jules? · 07-02-2008, 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstafleu

The reason Jesus turned human was a matter of being at the right place at the right time. Over time, the god of the Jews (Yahweh) had become increasingly distant from life, the universe and everything. It had gotten so bad that you couldn't even say his name--he had become "wholly other", "qaddosh." (This was part of a development many thousands of years long, but I don't have enough space in this posting to illuminate that). Such a god is pretty useless, so what was needed was a reunification of god and man. This is what Jesus accomplished, hence he had to be both god and man. You can therefore see a development where first (Paul e.g.) Jesus is pretty much "up there" (mostly a divine being) and not much "down here." This then changes in the gospels, and that version became canonized.

Of course this ploy of making god useful again was bound to fail, and did fail rather spectacularly, but that is another of these stories for which I don't have the space.

Gerard Stafleu

If you have the inclination do tell more. at the moment I lean towards the explaination given by Toto of the need for succession. It's simple and it works, a case in point is a so-called high brow history of the Popes on the radio [radio4] with the historian remarking on the importance of Paul, myth does become history. God becoming human and then becoming a god again makes sense as well but more thoughts would be nice.

jjramsey · 07-02-2008, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

This methodology is similar to that used by those who believe in the "God of the gaps". Just like anything that can't be explained by the science of the day MUST be due to God, anything in the NT that isn't sheer fantasy or contrary to the archaeology of the day MUST be the "historical core".

Except that this isn't the methodology necessarily used by the HJers. It certainly has little to do with HJers' reasoning from the references to James in the NT and in Josephus, for example.

aa5874 · 07-02-2008, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

This methodology is similar to that used by those who believe in the "God of the gaps". Just like anything that can't be explained by the science of the day MUST be due to God, anything in the NT that isn't sheer fantasy or contrary to the archaeology of the day MUST be the "historical core".

Except that this isn't the methodology necessarily used by the HJers. It certainly has little to do with HJers' reasoning from the references to James in the NT and in Josephus, for example.

But that is exactly what you have just done. You have used a plausible non-fantastic line from the NT and Josephus and then make a claim of history.

The claim is simple. Jesus was a figure of history because he had a brother named James.

But this ridiculous claim can also be made for Achilles. Achilles had a human father who was a real human KING named Peleus.

mens_sana · 07-02-2008, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But that is exactly what you have just done. You have used a plausible non-fantastic line from the NT and Josephus and then make a claim of history.

Aren't "plausible non-fantastic lines" from Josephus usually thought to be history?

jjramsey · 07-02-2008, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But that is exactly what you have just done. You have used a plausible non-fantastic line from the NT and Josephus and then make a claim of history.

What I've done is to point to evidence indicating that a supposedly mythical being had a blood relation that interacted with the outside world. If James were only mentioned in Christian narratives, that would be one thing, since one can build up a fictional narrative whose characters have brothers, sisters, or whatnot. Such people, however, aren't so likely to end up mentioned in passing by Josephus as if they were real, especially if Josephus isn't so fond of the narrative.

aa5874 · 07-02-2008, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But that is exactly what you have just done. You have used a plausible non-fantastic line from the NT and Josephus and then make a claim of history.

What I've done is to point to evidence indicating that a supposedly mythical being had a blood relation that interacted with the outside world. If James were only mentioned in Christian narratives, that would be one thing, since one can build up a fictional narrative whose characters have brothers, sisters, or whatnot. Such people, however, aren't so likely to end up mentioned in passing by Josephus as if they were real, especially if Josephus isn't so fond of the narrative.

So, you actually believe Jesus Christ who was seen alive after being dead for three days really had a brother named James?

This is incredible.

In the NT, Jesus is described as the offspring of the Holy Ghost, witnessed by his mother Mary, and in Galations, some Paul claimed he met James the brother of the offspring of the Holy Ghost. Now, all of a sudden Jesus becomes human.

According to Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3,a forgery or error, Jesus Christ rose from the dead and in AJ 20.9.1, the same Jesus Christ has a brother, so he now becomes human.

These are fairy tales and fictitious anecdotes.

karlmarx · 07-02-2008, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

These are fairy tales and fictitious anecdotes.

Of course, none of this proves that the literary Jesus (or Achilles, for that matter) wasn't based on a historical character. For all the arguments put forth in favour of the MJ hypothesis, it is still entirely possible that the Jesus story was based on a historical character, it's just that the NT, being fiction, is not going to help decide this.

For all we know, Achilles was based on a real person too.

As an aside, someone mentioned Hermione Granger. It's well known that Hermione Granger is based on J K Rowling herself - the author has admitted to this. Perhaps J K Rowling is the historical Hermione Granger.

rizdek · 07-03-2008, 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bopot

Yeah, I was wondering if it had been partially copy/pasted from elsewhere, but I couldn't think why anyone would do that.

I recognize this is completely "off post," but I do that a lot, i.e. develop a post in a word processor and then copy/paste it into the post box on a website. It helps to avoid the inadvertent "post" before one is ready. Also, I find it easier to edit and revise lengthy posts at my leisure without worrying about a tempermental internet connections breaking and resulting in a loss of what I was typing. Plus, someone might want to save their post for future reference without accessing the website. There are probably other reasons why someone would paste from a word processor.

bopot · 07-03-2008, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rizdek

Quote:

Originally Posted by bopot

Yeah, I was wondering if it had been partially copy/pasted from elsewhere, but I couldn't think why anyone would do that.

I recognize this is completely "off post," but I do that a lot, i.e. develop a post in a word processor and then copy/paste it into the post box on a website. It helps to avoid the inadvertent "post" before one is ready. Also, I find it easier to edit and revise lengthy posts at my leisure without worrying about a tempermental internet connections breaking and resulting in a loss of what I was typing. Plus, someone might want to save their post for future reference without accessing the website. There are probably other reasons why someone would paste from a word processor.

Roger that. :thumbs:

mens_sana · 07-03-2008, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

What I've done is to point to evidence indicating that a supposedly mythical being had a blood relation that interacted with the outside world. If James were only mentioned in Christian narratives, that would be one thing, since one can build up a fictional narrative whose characters have brothers, sisters, or whatnot. Such people, however, aren't so likely to end up mentioned in passing by Josephus as if they were real, especially if Josephus isn't so fond of the narrative.

So, you actually believe Jesus Christ who was seen alive after being dead for three days really had a brother named James?

This is incredible.

In the NT, Jesus is described as the offspring of the Holy Ghost, witnessed by his mother Mary, and in Galations, some Paul claimed he met James the brother of the offspring of the Holy Ghost. Now, all of a sudden Jesus becomes human.

According to Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3,a forgery or error, Jesus Christ rose from the dead and in AJ 20.9.1, the same Jesus Christ has a brother, so he now becomes human.

These are fairy tales and fictitious anecdotes.

The above is exactly what I mean by giving aid and comfort to the Fundamentalists. Show me where jjramsey said word one about Jesus Christ! HJers are able to distinguish between the physical, human Jesus and the post-resurrection Jesus Christ. Fundamentalists cannot make this distinction — and you also seem unable to do so. ¡ :frown: ! (That means you have never been able to let go your Fundie sea anchor.)

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.