Freethought & Rationalism Archive

hatsoff · 01-16-2006, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sven

I did not ask for which texts you mean, but for references which show that these texts are from the 1st century.

Papias/Eusebius, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and a host of scholars who have studied the texts in depth.

And, no, this is not *proof* of 1st-century authorship, but it is strong evidence.

Zeichman · 01-16-2006, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Here is my position:

I don't think that ANY bit of the Jesus story is based on reality, its ALL myth. There was no one at all that the Jesus story was based on to any meaningful degree. In some degree, yes every story is based on someone, even the the character of Darth Vader, but I think that Jesus was as real as Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

The story of Jesus wasn't based on any person, it was based on preceeding myths.

There was no crucifixion event in the first place, much less any resurrection. Its all just a story.

Why do I think this?

Several reasons:
....

And I addressed several of those in the thread you made and am still awaiting a response.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...27#post3066027

TySixtus · 01-16-2006, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatsoff

And, no, this is not *proof* of 1st-century authorship, but it is strong evidence.

First century authorship is not proof of anything. I know that's not what you guys were talking about, but I think some people are putting the cart before the horse.

If I was an eye witness to a resurrection nowadays, and I wrote a book about it, would I be a credible source? After all, I'd be an eye witness, right?

In other words, I think people ask the wrong question. They want to debate the theist in the realm of scripture which is neccessary, I suppose, sometimes. But some people who should know better seem to be attacking the legitimacy of the authors, when they should be attacking the legitimacy of the claim it self.

In my humble opinion, that is.

Ty

Tigers! · 01-16-2006, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Here is my position:

I don't think that ANY bit of the Jesus story is based on reality, its ALL myth. There was no one at all that the Jesus story was based on to any meaningful degree. In some degree, yes every story is based on someone, even the the character of Darth Vader, but I think that Jesus was as real as Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

The story of Jesus wasn't based on any person, it was based on preceeding myths.

There was no crucifixion event in the first place, much less any resurrection. Its all just a story.

Why do I think this?

Several reasons:

> There is no first hand account of Jesus, nor any record matching "his" trial and crucifixion in the records of the Romans or the Jews.

> There are many preexisting myths about saviors of humanity who were unjustly killed and then resurrected 3 days later.

> There are many different versions of the story of Jesus supposed death, including a story that he was stoned to death and then hung in a tree, that he was hung from a pole, and lastely that he was crucified on a cross. The Bible states both that he was "hung from a tree" and that he was crucified. Apologists claim that "hung from a tree" means crucified. I am not convinced of that at all, especially since the Talmud?Torah? SAYS that he was hung from a TREE.

> The image of "crucified Jesus" does not appear until the 7th century.

> There is record of worshiping the cross before the story of Jesus even existed, and there are several early Christian accounts explaning worship of the cross that never mention Jesus, showing that worship of the cross had nothing to do with a story about crucifixion.

If Jesus was in fact crucified then the early Christians surely would have listed this among the reasons why they worshiped the cross.

> There is no known burial or body. If Jesus was a real human, then when he died there would have been a body. If he was indeed crucified as claimed, then his body would have been buried somewhere. I find it hard to believe that none of his followers, if he really existed, would have known where he was buried or cared where he was buried.

All of this adds up to the view that no historical crucifixion of "Jesus" ever took place at all, much less a resurrection.

Do we have any 1st hand Roman accounts of the trial and execution of anyone during the reign of Pilate? If not, then the absence of Jesus is not unexpected, unless you think that Pilate had no-one executed. I am not suprised at the dearth of Jewish records, they had 2 major revolts (c. 70AD & c. 125AD) where the Romans went in and caused massive destruction including records.

If you mean a pictorial representation so what? The gospels say he was crucified, that creates an image.

What early Christian accounts? Worship of a cross would be blaphemeous. Christians don't worship the cross, they worship Christ.

They did know that where he was buried, that's why they returned. If he did indeed raise from the death then naturally there is no dead body or corpse.

Tigers! · 01-16-2006, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TySixtus

First century authorship is not proof of anything. I know that's not what you guys were talking about, but I think some people are putting the cart before the horse.

Ty

So the accounts of Pompeii (written in the 1st century) aren't proof of what happened there?

If you truly believe that then history is really a waste of time.

TySixtus · 01-16-2006, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigers!

So the accounts of Pompeii (written in the 1st century) aren't proof of what happened there?

I'll say it again, in big letters.

A body rising from death.

I don't care if 10 people wrote it down. Bodies don't rise from the dead.

Quote:

If you truly believe that then history is really a waste of time.

Once again, I'm also skeptical of Zeus impregnating women. Several authors wrote about his magical sex-capades. By disregarding these, am I now obliged to disregard factual history?

Hey everyone, believe Zeus screwed around in bovine form, or all history is inaccurate. How's this for a false dichotomy?

Ty

TomboyMom · 01-16-2006, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatsoff

Sure there is. We have dozens of texts from the first century.

What are they?
Are there any contemporaneous texts? Any written within say ten years after Jesus died?

TomboyMom · 01-16-2006, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatsoff

The New Testament and NT apocrypha.

Could you be more specific? (I really don't know much about this subject.) I understand that the very first reference to Jesus is Paul, who wrote around 70 A.D., and who talks about the resurrection, but nothing about Jesus divine birth etc., and then another gap, of ? I don't know # of years, and then the first gospel with a version of the whole story. Is that right?

Toto · 01-16-2006, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

Could you be more specific? (I really don't know much about this subject.) I understand that the very first reference to Jesus is Paul, who wrote around 70 A.D., and who talks about the resurrection, but nothing about Jesus divine birth etc., and then another gap, of ? I don't know # of years, and then the first gospel with a version of the whole story. Is that right?

Paul is usually dated more to 50-62 CE, although there are letters written under his name that are later. (see www.earlychristianwritings.com for the standard dating and reasons.) Paul is considered to be the earliest writing in the NT, although the basis for the dating is a bit shakey. Paul mentions the crucifixion and resurrection, although there is debate as to whether he meant a physical or a spiritual resurrection.

The next writing is the gospel of Mark, which can be confidently dated to somewhere between 68 and 150 CE. Christians and historicists who want to shorten the time between the writing and the events to make the authenticity of gMark more likely, use a date of around 70 CE. The other gospels are based on Mark.

Malachi151 · 01-16-2006, 05:34 PM

Quote:

If you mean a pictorial representation so what? The gospels say he was crucified, that creates an image.

Yeah, and how old are the oldest copies of NT gospels eh?

Do you know that the earliest known copies of the gospels say that Jesus was hung on a pole?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.