Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GakuseiDon · 12-17-2003, 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jacob Aliet
He doesn't mention places, Calvary, Pilate, Jerusalem, empty tomb. He doesn't even use the name Jesus.
Historical people have names, mothers and come from somewhere.

The following are two online Translations of Apology. The word Jesus and Mary don't appear in them. This is not consistent with your quotes above.

Maybe you can tell us which translation you are using?

Tertulian The Apology (TRANSLATED BY THE REV. S. THELWALL, LATE SCHOLAR OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, CANTAB) Tertulian The Apology

"He doesn't mention places, Calvary, Pilate, Jerusalem, empty tomb"? Well, let's have a look.

Tertullian certainly mentions Pilate. From your first link:

Quote:

But the Jews were so exasperated by His teaching, by which their rulers and chiefs were convicted of the truth, chiefly because so many turned aside to Him, that at last they brought Him before Pontius Pilate, at that time Roman governor of Syria; and, by the violence of their outcries against Him, extorted a sentence giving Him up to them to be crucified. He Himself had predicted this; which, however, would have signified little had not the prophets of old done it as well. And yet, nailed upon the cross, He exhibited many notable signs, by which His death was distinguished from all others.

This seems to be a reference to Mary, though no name is used:

Quote:

But the Son of God has no mother in any sense which involves impurity; she, whom men suppose to be His mother in the ordinary way, had never entered into the marriage bond.

Reference to Jerusalem:

Quote:

But the said Cornelius Tacitus (the very opposite of tacit in telling lies) informs us in the work already mentioned, that when Cneius Pompeius captured Jerusalem, he entered the temple to see the arcana of the Jewish religion, but found no image there.

Reference to the empty tomb:

Quote:

But at once they will say, Who is this Christ with his fables? is he an ordinary man? is he a sorcerer? was his body stolen by his disciples from its tomb? is he now in the realms below? or is he not rather up in the heavens, thence about to come again, making the whole world shake, filling the earth with dread alarms

What are these if not a reference to the HJ?

So then, what should we make of the fact that the words "Jesus" and "Calvary" aren't mentioned, especially where a HJ context seems to be firmly established?

Well, here is a hint for the non-use of Jesus:

Quote:

When we are called therefore to sacrifice, we resolutely refuse, relying on the knowledge we possess, by which we are well assured of the real objects to whom these services are offered, under profaning of images and the deification of human names.

Does anyone have any ideas? How about the non-use of "Calvary"?

GakuseiDon · 12-17-2003, 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman
Even if I agreed that we should expect Paul to obsess about Holy Sites in his letters--which seems to be sheer speculation as well as a fourth century anachronism--the fact that he did not creates the same problem for the JM as it does the HJ. Even if all that happened on earth were Jesus' revelatory appearances to the disciples and to Paul, would not those sites have been just as subject to veneration? Of course. God announces his salvation work to a few select people yet no one in the first century seems to care where or how that happened? All Paul gives us is a list. Where did it happen? What were they doing at the time? The God of the universe gives you a revelation but you give us none of the details? Apparently so per the JM. Afterall, Paul does not even tell us much about his own momentous encounter with the revelation of God. All he tells us is that it was somewhere around Damascus. Nothing more.

So this "silence" is just as much a problem for the JM types as the HJ types--if it be any problem at all.

You know, I'm going to repeat this in the hope that at least ONE mythicist attempts to address this point:

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman
Even if I agreed that we should expect Paul to obsess about Holy Sites in his letters--which seems to be sheer speculation as well as a fourth century anachronism--the fact that he did not creates the same problem for the JM as it does the HJ. Even if all that happened on earth were Jesus' revelatory appearances to the disciples and to Paul, would not those sites have been just as subject to veneration? Of course. God announces his salvation work to a few select people yet no one in the first century seems to care where or how that happened? All Paul gives us is a list. Where did it happen? What were they doing at the time? The God of the universe gives you a revelation but you give us none of the details? Apparently so per the JM. Afterall, Paul does not even tell us much about his own momentous encounter with the revelation of God. All he tells us is that it was somewhere around Damascus. Nothing more.

So this "silence" is just as much a problem for the JM types as the HJ types--if it be any problem at all.

WHY doesn't Paul give dates and specific places for the visions? Does anyone else give dates and specific places for the visions?

(Rlogan, I know you think Paul made it all up, so no need to answer. This question is for those who think that Paul believes in a MJ that reveals Himself through revelation)

Steven Carr · 12-17-2003, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman
Marcion didn't think Jesus came in the flesh either. But he believed Jesus came.

Marcion seemed to believe Jesus was a spirit (while we all know Jesus only became a life-giving spirit after the resurrection)

Quote:

But just to be clear, are you arguing that 1 and 2 John attests to a belief in a historical, human Jesus?

Seems so to me.

rlogan · 12-17-2003, 06:52 AM

My goodness, it was a quote war. I have to review a bunch of those. There seems to be a pretty important divergence on what is in them.

I have an open mind on those. Let the cards fall where they may.

Well thanks GD for the excusal on answering. You got that exactly right.

Layman - why are you refusing to accept the citation I gave for exampe on Jewish veneration of sites for Righteous ones? There's more than fifty of them from Jesus' time. Vinnie accepts this, although we may disagree on exactly the frequency. GD too.

You're out in the cold buddy - come in where your friends are. Have some egg nog.

Layman · 12-17-2003, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steven Carr
Marcion seemed to believe Jesus was a spirit (while we all know Jesus only became a life-giving spirit after the resurrection)

I agree with you of course that 1 and 2 John affirm a belief in a human Jesus. And it seems they are dealing with an early form of Marcionism here, not Mythicism. What is being denied is not that Jesus existed on earth, but that he did so fully human. Thus, this is not an example of HJ types opposint JM types.

I'll have to check a few commentaries though. The Johannine epistles have not really been the focus of my studies.

Layman · 12-17-2003, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto
What evidence?

I assume you are referring to Paul's statement that he persecuted Christians and the fictional work known as Acts. This hardly constitutes evidence of a "well-attested" fact.

Paul is primary evidence that a Jewish leader was persecuting rather severly the Christian Church. He attests to his own role as such a persecutor and to his being subject to such persecution at the hands of Jewish leaders.

Your assement of Acts has never been supported by anything other than conclusory statements.

Josephus himself provides further evidence of such opposition by his reference to the martyrdom of James in Jerusalem. The picture he paints is one of hostility on the part of Jewish leaders which was restrained only by the Roman presence. One the opportunity arose, they had James killed and other leaders pesecuted.

Ignoring this evidence is just wishful thinking on your part, Toto.

Steven Carr · 12-17-2003, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman
I agree with you of course that 1 and 2 John affirm a belief in a human Jesus. And it seems they are dealing with an early form of Marcionism here, not Mythicism. What is being denied is not that Jesus existed on earth, but that he did so fully human. Thus, this is not an example of HJ types opposint JM types.

hard to tell from 1 and 2 John what is being denied.

Amaleq13 · 12-17-2003, 07:29 AM

Layman wrote:

Quote:

Of course not. As I have shown, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews attests to pre-70 CE belief in the historical Jesus.

Jacob Aliet replied:

Quote:

One author? is that it?

Actually, not even that.

Layman's examination of Hebrews establishes that the author believed the sacrificed/raised Christ had literally been incarnated at some point in history when crucifixions happened. This is only if we first disregard Doherty's theory about the crucifixion taking place in the "heavenly spheres". See for yourself in the his thread on Hebrews.

Layman · 12-17-2003, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jacob Aliet
He doesn't mention places, Calvary, Pilate, Jerusalem, empty tomb. He doesn't even use the name Jesus.
Historical people have names, mothers and come from somewhere.

Never uses the name Jesus, eh? You are intent on digging yourself in deeper here.

Now when I hear of a new god, who, in the old world and in the old time and under the old god was unknown and unheard of; whom, (accounted as no one through such long centuries back, and ancient in men's very ignorance of him), a certain "Jesus Christ,"

Against Marcion, Book 1, Chapter 8.

In the fifteenth year of Tiberius, Christ Jesus vouchsafed to come down from heaven, as the spirit of saving health.

Against Marcion, Book 1, Chapter 19.

So also in Zechariah, [bChrist Jesus,[/b] the true High Priest of the Father, in the person of Joshua, nay, in the very mystery of His name, is portrayed in a twofold dress with reference to both His advents. At first He is clad in sordid garments, that is to say, in the lowliness of suffering and mortal flesh: then the devil resisted Him, as the instigator of the traitor Judas, not to mention his tempting Him after His baptism: afterwards He was stripped of His first filthy raiment, and adorned with the priestly robe and mitre, and a pure diadem; in other words, with the glory and honour of His second advent. If I may offer, moreover, an interpretation of the two goats which were presented on "the great day of atonement," do they not also figure the two natures of Christ?

Against Marcion, Book III, Chapter 8.

And thus He will either have to be acknowledged as belonging to Him, in accordance with whom He taught; or else will have to be adjudged a deceiver since He taught in accordance with One whom He had come to oppose. In the same passage, "the spirit of an unclean devil" exclaims: "What have we to do with Thee, Thou Jesus? Art Thou come to destroy us? I know Thee who Thou art, the Holy One of God."

Against Marcion, Book V, Chapter 7.

GD has already smashed the rest of the fantasy you have woven.

And what about Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, and Origen? I showed their belief in HJ quite clearly as well.

spin · 12-17-2003, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GakuseiDon
You know, I'm going to repeat this in the hope that at least ONE mythicist attempts to address this point:

Layman is simply being silly. There is no reason to assume there must be holy sites. As I 've already pointed out the Jewish religion, from which xianity is an offshoot, gave no importance to holy sites with the one exception of the temple -- but everyone accepts temples/churches of their religion are holy sites.

Quote:

WHY doesn't Paul give dates and specific places for the visions? Does anyone else give dates and specific places for the visions?

Ezekiel. But there is "holy site" mentality.

(Rlogan, I know you think Paul made it all up, so no need to answer. This question is for those who think that Paul believes in a MJ that reveals Himself through revelation) [/B][/QUOTE]

?

spin

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

12-17-2003, 06:52 AM	#54
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	My goodness, it was a quote war. I have to review a bunch of those. There seems to be a pretty important divergence on what is in them. I have an open mind on those. Let the cards fall where they may. Well thanks GD for the excusal on answering. You got that exactly right. Layman - why are you refusing to accept the citation I gave for exampe on Jewish veneration of sites for Righteous ones? There's more than fifty of them from Jesus' time. Vinnie accepts this, although we may disagree on exactly the frequency. GD too. You're out in the cold buddy - come in where your friends are. Have some egg nog.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.