Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Diogenes the Cynic · 03-27-2012, 04:31 PM

I think we need to define a list of criteria which would represent the minimum requirements for a real historical person to reasonably qualify as "the historical Jesus." I believe that it would very helpful if we can agree on what we're even arguing about so often.

I'm going to post a poll of options just to get started. Check all the options that you feel are necessary for somebody to qualify as Jesus.

Poll on the way.

Remember, you're not voting for what you personally believe about Jesus, you're voting for what you think would be a fair definition of Jesus.

outhouse · 03-27-2012, 04:51 PM

im staying with

#4 yes a mortal man teacher/healer

#14 yes put on a cross

#16 yes from Galilee

#18 had a few followers

ApostateAbe · 03-27-2012, 04:57 PM

Here is my minimum criteria:

He was named "Yeshua."
He lived at about the same time as the start of the Christian religion.
His character apparently inspired the myth of Jesus in the Christian religion.

I think that is all it takes.

mountainman · 03-27-2012, 05:32 PM

I dont see pious forgery on the list.

If you are trying to define an HJ in the field of history you need to take a poll of the EVIDENCE items which are associated with the positive and negative positions. If you do not canvass both positions, including the positive and negative evidence against each position, you are not being an investigator of historical truth (or its absence).

There have been earier discussions about a spectrum of possible historical jesus positions.
See this thread ... Developing table as beginner's guide to Jesus positions

Spin has me on ignore so my only option was to edit the table as I saw fit in the absence of his communication.
One of the results of this process was the following, where a spectrum can be outlined using the concept of historicity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

I have a problem with "A core preacher existed".
Why not "a core eschatological prophet existed" (EP Sanders) and
why not "a core marginal Jew existed" (JP Meier) and
why not "a core magician existed" and
why not "a core miracle healer existed"
"core revolutionary Jew",
core this
core that
until all the portraits of a HJ are exhausted?
I suggest you use something akin to "at the core is someone real." .

But obviously there may be absolutely nothing at the core either.
The great leveller of all these infinite "core" options is historicity.
Historicity would not care what types of "cores" are hypothecized.

A "historicity estimate as a percentage" satisfies all types of theories.
Maximal HJers can argue in the paddock between 90 and 100%.
Minimal HJers can argue in the paddock between 40 and 89%.
Accreted HJers can argue between zero or 10 and 40%.
You may need more than the current 3 different HJ positions

Some MJers may prefer to argue a small historicity value? (IDK).
Other MJers and FJers (i.e. fictional jesus) have zero (no historicity)

EG:

[T2]{r:bg=lightgray}{c:bg=slategray;ah=center;b-b=2,solid,black}Type of Jesus
[Historicity %]
|
{c:ah=center;b-b=2,solid,black}Status of Jesus
|
{c:ah=center;b-b=2,solid,black}Characteristics
|
{c:ah=center;b-b=2,solid,black}Worth of the gospels
|
{c:w=45;ah=center;b-b=2,solid,black}Use of Myth
|
{c:ah=center;b-b=2,solid,black}Published Proponents
||
{c:bg=#80C0C0;av=top}Maximal
[90-100%]
|
{c:bg=#00C000;av=top}Existed in real world
|
{c:av=top}The gospels are seen as reliable documentary evidence and record the known events in the life of the man who started the religion.
|
{c:bg=#0070B0;av=top}Basically historical material
|
{c:bg=#ffe4b0;av=top}Minimal
|
Joseph Klausner, Birger Gerhardsson, Luke Timothy Johnson, N. T. Wright, James Tabor
||
{c:bg=#80C0C0;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Historical
[40-90%]
|
{c:bg=#00C000;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Existed in real world
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}The record is problematical, but literary records--gospels, church fathers and even pagan sources--contain vestiges of real world knowledge of a preacher, who was crucified.
|
{c:bg=#0090D0;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Historical data obscured by transmission problems
|
{c:bg=#f6d480;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Some, causing source problems
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Marcus Borg, J.D. Crossan, Burton Mack, E. P. Sanders, Paula Fredriksen, Helmut Koester, Stevan L. Davies, Raymond E. Brown, Mark Goodacre, J.P. Meier, Bart D. Ehrman, & Jesus seminar
||
{c:bg=#80C0C0;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}"Accreted"
[10-40%]
|
{c:bg=#A0FFA0;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}A core figure behind the gospel Jesus existed
|
{c:b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Jesus was the product of various sources including knowledge of a real person, as can be found in "Q". This position does not see the crucifixion as historical.
|
{c:bg=#60B0FF;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Little of historical value
|
{c:bg=#F0C060;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Yes
|
{c:b-b=3,double,black;av=top}G.A. Wells, Robert H. Gundry
||
{c:bg=DarkOrchid;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Spiritual realm
[Zero %]
|
{c:bg=#FF2050;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Existed in spiritual realm, not the mundane world
|
{c:b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Purely theological in origin, Jesus died in our stead not in this mundane world, but in a spiritual realm. Later this spiritual being became reconceived as having acted in this world and reified.
|
{c:bg=#E060C0;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Embody a complex myth & reflect honest belief distorted by reification
|
{c:bg=Orange;b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Full
|
{c:b-b=3,double,black;av=top}Earl Doherty (*)
||
{c:bg=#B05070;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Mythological composite
[Zero %]
|
{c:bg=#F00000;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Authorial invention
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Jesus was the product of mainly pagan mythological elements, be they solar myth (Acharya S) or dying & resurrection myths of Osiris/Dionysis (Freke & Gandy).
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Nothing but cobbled myths
|
{c:bg=Orange;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Full
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Acharya S, Freke & Gandy
||
{c:bg=#B05070;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Fictional
[Zero %]
|
{c:bg=#F00000;b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Authorial invention
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Jesus was the product of purely literary activity. In the Atwill version, it was the policy of the emperor Titus with the aid of Josephus who tried to gain control over the unruly Jews.
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}A tool for deceiving & manipulating people
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}[-]
|
{c:b-b=2,dashed,black;av=top}Hermann Detering (*), Joe Atwill (*)
||
{c:bg=#B05070;b-b=2,solid,black;av=top}Transformed
[Zero %]
|
{c:bg=#F00000;b-b=2,solid,black;av=top}Did not exist
|
{c:b-b=2,solid,black;av=top}Jesus was the product of corrupted retelling of events relating to Julius Caesar. Under Vespasian the story was developed into a new religion.
|
{c:b-b=2,solid,black;av=top}Underlying history garbled beyond recognition
|
{c:b-b=2,solid,black;av=top}No
|
{c:b-b=2,solid,black;av=top}Francesco Carotta
||
{c:bg=RoyalBlue;av=top}Traditional
[Zero %]
|
{c:bg=#D0D0B0;av=top}Unknown (tradition doesn't permit clarification)
|
{c:av=top}Tradition doesn't distinguish between real and non-real. It merely takes accepted elements ("accepted" -> believed to be real) and passes them on with associated transmission distortions.
|
{c:bg=#D0D0B0;av=top}A complex of traditions with complex transmission, making veracity unverifiable
|
{c:bg=#D0D0B0;av=top}[-]
|
{c:av=top}[-]
||
{c:bg=RoyalBlue;av=top}Jesus agnostic
[0 to 100%]
|
{c:bg=#D0D0B0;av=top}Unknown
|
{c:av=top}Due to the nature of available information there is insufficient evidence to decide on the existence of Jesus.
|
{c:bg=#D0D0B0;av=top}No current way of evaluating for veracity
|
{c:bg=#D0D0B0;av=top}[-]
|
{c:av=top}Robert M. Price[/T2]Notes:
1. Degrees of affinity between the various Jesuses (as indicated by the divisions between them): Single: close; Dashed: further; Double: little; Solid: none
2. Quotes around the types of Jesus indicate labels needing improvement.

[hr=1]100[/hr]

tanya · 03-27-2012, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Check off everything you would need to see to say a guy was a "Historical Jesus."

None of those parameters you have listed, offer a solution to our conflict, here, Diogenes.

Is there one or more parameters one could evoke, to change Hercules from myth to historical personage? If we collectively vote on whether Hercules was two meters in height, or less than two meters in height, will that collective declaration change his stature from ordinary human, to a fictional character of mythic proportion?

No. Hercules was invented as the son of god. It is not because he visited, or did not visit, Paestum, Italy, that Hercules is regarded as myth. He is mythical, because he possessed supernatural traits, abilities, and characteristics. That he also possessed HUMAN traits, is irrelevant. Do we care if his hair was brown or black? No, it is irrelevant. If his eyes were blue, would we be convinced that Hercules was an historical person, and not a myth (or vice versa)? No. Eye color is irrelevant to a consideration of Hercules' historicity.

It is not because Jesus had 12 disciples, more or less, that he was historical. He was, by definition, mythical, not historical, the moment Mark wrote, in his first verse, that Jesus, like Hercules, was the son of God.

Maybe Hercules did visit Paestum, so what? Will that "fact" change our opinion of Hercules' nature, as fictional myth? Whether Jesus hailed from Capernaum, or Galilee, or wherever, is utterly irrelevant. He is a myth. Read the first verse of Mark. All else is futile.

:huh:

aa5874 · 03-27-2012, 06:42 PM

Again, how can people be on a Quest for the MISSING without having first a detailed description???

Incredibly, those who are looking for an historical Jesus have done the unthinkable they have REJECTED the description of those who claimed to have KNOWN Jesus and are now looking for their IMAGINED Jesus.

It is already agreed that the Jesus of the NT was a Jesus of Faith and there are no other details for another Jesus that matches that of the NT.

Sheshbazzar · 03-27-2012, 07:16 PM

+1 to both of the above.

la70119 · 03-27-2012, 10:49 PM

The historical Jesus would have to be the Jesus of Faith actually existing. Otherwise, he's just another Yeshuah whose identity the Christians stole for their fictitious God-man.

yalla · 03-27-2012, 10:50 PM

+1 to all 3 above, at time of typing ie posts 5,6 and 7 [edited to add 'and 8'].

Its a worthy attempt Diogenes, we need to be much clearer that we are when we use the terms HJ and MJ and you have set out to clarify and specify.
But Tanya's opening sentence shows the problem.

I would say that any fella named Jesus wandering around the Palestinean area in roughly that time span would be an HJ [and there were in fact, as Josephus tells us, several such fellas] but that does not relate to the HJ of the Gospels and the Christian faith.

I'm not sure how to word the poll question.
Perhaps:
"What are the minimal requirements that would satisfy a person being the HJ of the Christian faith?"
And I can see problems with that

yalla · 03-27-2012, 11:11 PM

See, I just realized that I fell into a trap that I thought I knew was in the vicinity.
Namely, I presumed that an HJ needed to be a fella, or in Diogenes word, a 'guy'.
A HJ need not have been a guy however minimal in HJ qualities.
He, or 'it', could have been an idea, a concept, a theme or motif, a metaphor.
That perspective is what comes under discussion when we talk about the dying/rising god or the messiah topics, even Bart apparently considers such in his book.
Not necessarily a person but an ideological or religious or political concept.

View Poll Results: Check off everything you would need to see to say a guy was a "Historical Jesus."
God	1	2.63%
Resurrection	3	7.89%
Healed miraculously and drove out real demons	3	7.89%
Was a conventional (non-supernatural) faith healer and exorcist, but did not do miracles	13	34.21%
Performed nature miracles such as walking on water	3	7.89%
Was born of a virgin	2	5.26%
Said all or most of what is attributed to him in the Gospels	4	10.53%
Said at least some of what is attributed to him in the Gospels	21	55.26%
Believed himself to be God	2	5.26%
Believed himself to be the Messiah	5	13.16%
Was believed by his followers to be God	1	2.63%
Was believed by his followers to be the Messiah	16	42.11%
Was involved in some kind of attack on the Temple	9	23.68%
Was crucified	27	71.05%
Was from Nazareth	8	21.05%
Was from Galilee	12	31.58%
Had 12 disciples	3	7.89%
Had some disciples, not necessarily 12	25	65.79%
Raised the dead	2	5.26%
Was believed by his disciples to still be alive somehow after the crucifixion.	17	44.74%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 38. You may not vote on this poll

03-27-2012, 04:57 PM	#3
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Here is my minimum criteria: He was named "Yeshua." He lived at about the same time as the start of the Christian religion. His character apparently inspired the myth of Jesus in the Christian religion. I think that is all it takes.

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

03-27-2012, 04:31 PM	#1
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	We need to define "Historical Jesus" (with a poll) I think we need to define a list of criteria which would represent the minimum requirements for a real historical person to reasonably qualify as "the historical Jesus." I believe that it would very helpful if we can agree on what we're even arguing about so often. I'm going to post a poll of options just to get started. Check all the options that you feel are necessary for somebody to qualify as Jesus. Poll on the way. Remember, you're not voting for what you personally believe about Jesus, you're voting for what you think would be a fair definition of Jesus.

03-27-2012, 04:51 PM	#2
outhouse Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Auburn ca Posts: 4,269	im staying with #4 yes a mortal man teacher/healer #14 yes put on a cross #16 yes from Galilee #18 had a few followers

03-27-2012, 06:42 PM	#6
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	Again, how can people be on a Quest for the MISSING without having first a detailed description??? Incredibly, those who are looking for an historical Jesus have done the unthinkable they have REJECTED the description of those who claimed to have KNOWN Jesus and are now looking for their IMAGINED Jesus. It is already agreed that the Jesus of the NT was a Jesus of Faith and there are no other details for another Jesus that matches that of the NT.

03-27-2012, 07:16 PM	#7
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	+1 to both of the above.

03-27-2012, 10:49 PM	#8
la70119 Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: The only Carribean port not in the Tropics. Posts: 359	The historical Jesus would have to be the Jesus of Faith actually existing. Otherwise, he's just another Yeshuah whose identity the Christians stole for their fictitious God-man.

03-27-2012, 10:50 PM	#9
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	+1 to all 3 above, at time of typing ie posts 5,6 and 7 [edited to add 'and 8']. Its a worthy attempt Diogenes, we need to be much clearer that we are when we use the terms HJ and MJ and you have set out to clarify and specify. But Tanya's opening sentence shows the problem. I would say that any fella named Jesus wandering around the Palestinean area in roughly that time span would be an HJ [and there were in fact, as Josephus tells us, several such fellas] but that does not relate to the HJ of the Gospels and the Christian faith. I'm not sure how to word the poll question. Perhaps: "What are the minimal requirements that would satisfy a person being the HJ of the Christian faith?" And I can see problems with that

03-27-2012, 11:11 PM	#10
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	See, I just realized that I fell into a trap that I thought I knew was in the vicinity. Namely, I presumed that an HJ needed to be a fella, or in Diogenes word, a 'guy'. A HJ need not have been a guy however minimal in HJ qualities. He, or 'it', could have been an idea, a concept, a theme or motif, a metaphor. That perspective is what comes under discussion when we talk about the dying/rising god or the messiah topics, even Bart apparently considers such in his book. Not necessarily a person but an ideological or religious or political concept.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.