Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 12-30-2012, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

..
I don't particularly care that Robert Funk and Joseph Hoffman take absolutely opposite sides. I did quote Funk, however, as the High Priest of Jesus Seminarianism because I knew that J. D. Crossan differs and is yet thought of in error as a prime examplar of it. (He is not listed as a fellow in my 1993 The Five Gospels text.) Crossan is outhouse-type, allowing for revolutionary politics not kosher in the Jesus Seminar.

John Dominick Crossan was co-chair of the Jesus Seminar at the time. The preview of the Five Gospels (or via: amazon.co.uk) on Amazon definitely lists him as a fellow and a member of the translation panel. (He is listed second as a co-chair. His name is not in alphabetical order.)

He is not an outhouse type.

Google Books

Quote:

... In 1985 the Jesus Seminar, a distinguished group of biblical scholars led by Robert W. Funk and John Dominic Crossan (co-chairs), embarked on a new assessment of the gospels, including the recently discovered Gospel of Thomas. In pursuit of the historical Jesus, they used their collective expertise to determine the authenticity of the more than 1,500 sayings attributed to him. ...

Quote:

Is anyone else going to try to tell me that the two excerpts I picked are not exactly contrary? Tell me that they're not representative, if you like, but does anyone agree with outhouse that I'm wrong once again? Hoffman explicitly trumpets that his view is irreconcilable with peaceful intent. So does everyone agree with me on who has the reading comprehension problem?

I would agree with you that outhouse has a comprehension problem.

aa5874 · 12-30-2012, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

...The NT only focuses on the last week of Joshuas life because that is all they knew of the legend. had he not been martyred at passover, he would have been unknown. Only because these Hellenized God-Fearers found this appealing did this legend become famous in time.

The NT Jesus stories do NOT focus on one week. The 1st 10 chapters of gMark covers the period from Baptism to the Triumphal entry.

And in gJohn the story of Jesus, God the Creator, covers at least THREE Passovers.

Duvduv · 12-30-2012, 05:01 PM

I wonder why the power elite of the empire specifically became enamored of a variant of monotheism rather than an updated version of their existing beliefs. Why did they think it would be eventually more successful and popular than a reboot or upgrade of what they were used to, even if it was believed it would help unify the segments of the empire?

mountainman · 12-30-2012, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenorikuma

Sounds like he is actually describing the historical Brian.

My research indicates that the gnostic heretics who lampooned the so-called historical jesus actually describe the historical Brian. Although alas we all know that the canon followers became victorious, with a little help from a succession of Roman Emperors and their armies, we also know that there were non canonical stories in circulation that the canon followers burnt, destroyed, prohibited and anathematized. The chief bit of evidence is the list of prohibited books mentioned by Eusebius and then later in the 5th century and which was to evolve into the papal "Index Librorum Prohibitorum".

If "Life of Brian" was written 100 years earlier it would have made it onto this list of prohibited books.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HOF

The geographical coordinates of Jesus and Judas coincide in important and suggestive ways

Theology colleges issue certificates in mass delusion.

outhouse · 12-30-2012, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I would agree with you that outhouse has a comprehension problem.

Of course you would

They both followed a historical Jesus

They both place Jesus as a trouble maker

They both place him as in opposition to Roman rule and the corruption of the temple priesthood.

In whole they are closer then their differences that Adam mentions with Q which they do have their differences.

Stay focused, big picture here.

spin · 12-30-2012, 06:44 PM

The historical Jesus per RJH

As Joey was pouring through tomes
And religious details he combs,
His hawk eye befell
An old Scot Joseph Bell,
Then knew Jesus must be Sherlock Holmes

EarlDoherty · 12-30-2012, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

The historical Jesus per RJH

As Joey was pouring through tomes
And religious details he combs,
His hawk eye befell
An old Scot Joseph Bell,
Then knew Jesus must be Sherlock Holmes

Clever. But if you're thinking of publishing this one, "pouring" should be "poring". It's surprising how many make this mistake.

Earl Doherty

mountainman · 12-30-2012, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

The Joseph Bell Gambit.

The Statistical Jesus.

However the Fictional Jesus of the New Testament is susceptible to a Sherlock Holmes style investigation.

WHAT, WHO, WHEN, WHERE, WHY, HOW.
Motive, means and opportunity.

We are dealing with a forgery mill.

The evidence has a statistical bell curve and remains peaked around the 4th century.

maryhelena · 12-31-2012, 12:12 AM

Quote:

The Gospels Assure Us (Relatively) That the Hoffmann Jesus Is True

R. (Rabbi?) Joseph Hoffmann’s “semi-sincere New Year’s resolution for 2013 is to be nicer to the mythicists”. I’m touched. He explains the reason for his semi-sincere change of heart. It is not the ghetto-dwelling buggers‘ fault for carrying diseased ideas. The fault lies with his fellow scholars who have fed them “stammering indecision, deconstruction, conspiracy-theories, and half-baked analogies of a hundred years of uncongealed scholarship.” I think that’s Hoffmann’s way of complimenting the mythicists for making the effort to engage with New Testament scholarship.

<snip>

So with incompetent peers to the right of him and disease carrying mosquitoes to the left of him, Hoffmann (who like Jesus probably thinks he is the deliverer) rides down into the valley to sort it all out. But in a nicer way than before (semi-sincerely).

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/12/...jesus-is-true/

PS. What happened to the book by Casey? Does Hoffmann not think Casey is up to the task of slaying the mythicist dragon....??

Toto · 12-31-2012, 12:36 AM

A slight digression by Pete and aa5874 has been split off here

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

12-30-2012, 05:01 PM	#23
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	I wonder why the power elite of the empire specifically became enamored of a variant of monotheism rather than an updated version of their existing beliefs. Why did they think it would be eventually more successful and popular than a reboot or upgrade of what they were used to, even if it was believed it would help unify the segments of the empire?

12-30-2012, 06:44 PM	#26
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	The historical Jesus per RJH As Joey was pouring through tomes And religious details he combs, His hawk eye befell An old Scot Joseph Bell, Then knew Jesus must be Sherlock Holmes

12-31-2012, 12:36 AM	#30
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	A slight digression by Pete and aa5874 has been split off here

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.