Freethought & Rationalism Archive

maryhelena · 04-24-2013, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Mary,
If you do not see the contradiction between " HISTORY REJECTS THE ASSUMPTION OF A HISTORICAL GOSPEL JESUS FIGURE" , and "that JC story has a foothold on reality. Historical reality. The gospel JC story is not all imagination", then there is no use in continuing this thread. It may as well die on the vine.
Onias

1) The premise in the title of this OP is that a consideration of Hasmonean/Jewish history would reject any suggestion that the gospel figure of JC is a historical figure.

2) That the gospel JC story has a foothold on reality, historical reality; that that story is not all imagination - does not contradict 1).

Hasmonean/Jewish history is reflected in the composite gospel JC and the gospel story. A reflection of such history does not make JC or his story historical. No more than it makes James Bond and his various stories historical because that literary figure reflects various historical figures.

Quote:

James Bond

Inspiration

Fleming based his fictional creation on a number of individuals he came across during his time in the Naval Intelligence Division during World War II, admitting that Bond "was a compound of all the secret agents and commando types I met during the war".[5] Among those types were his brother, Peter, who had been involved in behind the lines operations in Norway and Greece during the war.[6] Aside from Fleming's brother, a number of others also provided some aspects of Bond's make up, including Conrad O'Brien-ffrench, Patrick Dalzel-Job and Bill "Biffy" Dunderdale.[5]

Tastes

Fleming also endowed Bond with many of his own traits, including sharing the same golf handicap, the taste for scrambled eggs and using the same brand of toiletries.[7] Bond's tastes are also often taken from Fleming's own as was his behaviour,[8] with Bond's love of golf and gambling mirroring Fleming's own. Fleming used his experiences of his espionage career and all other aspects of his life as inspiration when writing, including using names of school friends, acquaintances, relatives and lovers throughout his books.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond

Perhaps English is not your first language. I notice you are from South Africa.
Are you a Dutch Afrikaner? Perhaps this may be why we are not understanding one another.

You have written:

Quote:

1) The premise in the title of this OP is that a consideration of Hasmonean/Jewish history would reject any suggestion that the gospel figure of JC is a historical figure.

2) That the gospel JC story has a foothold on reality, historical reality; that that story is not all imagination - does not contradict 1).

Anyway, I do not think the miracle-working 'Jesus' of the extant gospels was an historical figure, but I do think this literary 'Jesus' was derived from historical messiah-aspirants. Is that what you are intending to mean?
Onias

If you are rejecting the historical figures named in my chart as being relevant to the composite gospel JC - fair enough. However, if you are proposing that there were other historical figures reflected in that composite gospel JC - please start your own thread - and provide the needed historical evidence for the figures you propose. Open-ended statements have no value.

In other words; either engage with the material in the chart - or start a new thread with your own suggestions re the historical figures you think are reflected in that composite gospel JC.

Iskander · 04-25-2013, 05:48 AM

Is Josephus the only information provider for the Hasmonean period?

maryhelena · 04-25-2013, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

These legends were not just Jewish.

I've never confined the composite JC figure to a figure only reflecting Hasmonean/Jewish history. The point of the OP is that Hasmonean/Jewish history is also relevant to the creation of that gospel figure.

Well in that case I can't see that anyone could really disagree with your claim here. We may be looking at a dozen historical realities which were used to underpin the pseudo-history of the JC figure, the Hasmonean/Jewish history being one such strand in the composite.

:thumbs:

Quote:

However I do not agree with your assessment that the gospels were necessarily early, since the same data would have been available for centuries after the events. We know the books of Josephus were very helpful for Eusebius in the 4th century. And by the time of the 4th century there are other historical scenarios that can be added as resources for the pseudo-historical composite, the greatest one in my mind being the Persian history of Mani, the religious leader of the Manichaeans, who wrote a Gospel and epistles to his apostles and who had a flourishing and expanding church, and who was CRUCIFIED in the state capital city.

I am sorry to have introduced Mani's Sassanid Persian history into your discussion of Hasmonean/Jewish history but I have done so for a reason.

Another topic for another time.....

Quote:

I agree with you about the fact that we are dealing with a pseudo-historical gospel JC figure, who may be mapped into Hasmonean/Jewish history.

But until we discover the rest of the many more parts to the composite and put them all together, the evidence for the forgery of the JC figure will not be recognised for what it is.

The OP chart is making a case for Hasmonean/Jewish history being an element in that composite gospel JC. One can put forward lots of names - but if there is no historical evidence to support these figures - then one would be blowing in the wind....

Quote:

Let me say that I was not aware of these parallels to the Hasmonean/Jewish history until you tabulated them and presented them here, and for this knowledge I am grateful for your perseverence here.

Thanks, Pete.....

Quote:

I am reminded of a quote from Momigliano who said that Eusebius could not have created his church history without Josephus. I can dig it out if need be.

Best wishes

OK - if it's not too much trouble - I'd like to see that quote.

maryhelena · 04-25-2013, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Is Josephus the only information provider for the Hasmonean period?

Wikipedia on the Hasmonean Dynasty.

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasmonean_dynasty

Historical sources

The origin of the Hasmonean dynasty is recorded in the books 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees, covering the period from 175 to 134 BC during which time the Hasmonean dynasty became semi-independent from the Seleucid empire but had not yet expanded far outside of Judea.

The other primary source for the Hasmonean dynasty is the first book of The Wars of the Jews by the Jewish historian Josephus, (37–shortly after AD 100).[3] Josephus' account is the only primary source covering the history of the Hasmonean dynasty during the period of its expansion and independence between 110 to 63 BC.

Quote:

Plutarch: Antony.

For although he had invested several private persons in great governments and kingdoms, and bereaved many kings of theirs, as Antigonus of Judaea, whose head he caused to be struck off (the first example of that punishment being inflicted on a king),

http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/antony.html

Quote:

Cassius Dio: Roman History:

These people Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and flogged,— a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans,— and afterwards slew him.

http://www.brainfly.net/html/books/diocas49.htm

Iskander · 04-25-2013, 08:26 AM

Is Josephus the only provider of information for the Hasmonean period? Your chart says , yes and this post confirms that.

On what are you building your theory?

maryhelena · 04-25-2013, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Is Josephus the only provider for the Hasmonean period? Your chart says , yes and this post confirms that.

On what are you building your theory?

This is what I said in the OP:

[T2]Historical artifacts, such as coins, are testimony to the fact that certain individuals were historical figures. That is the bare bones of historical evidence. However, history requires a story; a narrative, to joins up the facts and present a meaningful picture. The picture could be cloudy and unclear or it could be a reasonable explanation of what happened. In the chart that follows, Josephus is the primary source for building that historical narrative. Did Josephus himself, writing after the events, have accurate material to work with? Or is Josephus creating his own narrative - and without a secondary source there is no way to be sure. All one can do is work with his material and question his story when it presents problems.
[/T2]

Actually, I have not presented a theory. What I have done is set down the historical evidence for the figures in the chart, i.e. the Hasmonean/Jewish coins. I have then set down material from Josephus and Philo. I then set down elements from the gospel JC story that is, to my thinking, reflecting elements from Hasmonean/Jewish history. There is no theory in that. It is a simple exercise of putting down one set of material, material that includes historical artifacts, coins, and the narrative, the story in you like, of what Josephus and Philo wrote regarding these historical figures.

Iskander · 04-25-2013, 08:44 AM

Yes, you have not presented a theory.

So, what do you think you have achieved so far?

maryhelena · 04-25-2013, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Yes, you have not presented a theory.

So, what do you think you have done so far?

What have I done so far? I have highlighted parallels, reflections, of Hasmonean/Jewish history within the composite gospel JC and the JC story.

Quote:

mountainman: Post #109

Well in that case I can't see that anyone could really disagree with your claim here. We may be looking at a dozen historical realities which were used to underpin the pseudo-history of the JC figure, the Hasmonean/Jewish history being one such strand in the composite.

<snip>

Let me say that I was not aware of these parallels to the Hasmonean/Jewish history until you tabulated them and presented them here, and for this knowledge I am grateful for your perseverence here.

Iskander · 04-25-2013, 08:56 AM

Yes, you have confirmed that Jesus was alive when the Gospels say he was alive.

This has been accepted as a historical fact by Christians and educated non-Christians for almost 2000 years.

maryhelena · 04-25-2013, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Yes, you have confirmed that Jesus was alive when the Gospels say he was alive.

Where did I confirm that??

Quote:

This has been accepted as a historical fact by Christians and educated non-Christians for almost 2000 years.

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

04-25-2013, 05:48 AM	#112
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	Is Josephus the only information provider for the Hasmonean period?

04-25-2013, 08:26 AM	#115
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	Is Josephus the only provider of information for the Hasmonean period? Your chart says , yes and this post confirms that. On what are you building your theory?

04-25-2013, 08:44 AM	#117
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	Yes, you have not presented a theory. So, what do you think you have achieved so far?

04-25-2013, 08:56 AM	#119
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	Yes, you have confirmed that Jesus was alive when the Gospels say he was alive. This has been accepted as a historical fact by Christians and educated non-Christians for almost 2000 years.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.