Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Onias · 04-17-2013, 07:39 PM

But have you read it? That was my question.

outhouse · 04-17-2013, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

But have you read it? That was my question.

Nope.

I have read the general idea, and been to his website.

I'm having trouble reading what I would call quality works, without spending time off the beaten path.

Toto · 04-17-2013, 09:52 PM

On Caesar's Messiah : I saw the movie, didn't want to spend the time or money on the book. Atwill is very smart, but he's spun a theory that goes way beyond the evidence.

Robert Price reviews it : here. Search this forum for Atwill and you will find more.

maryhelena · 04-17-2013, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Mary, Mountainman, and Outhouse,
Have you read Caesar's Messiah by Joe Atwill?
Onias

No.

Onias · 04-18-2013, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

On Caesar's Messiah : I saw the movie, didn't want to spend the time or money on the book. Atwill is very smart, but he's spun a theory that goes way beyond the evidence.

Robert Price reviews it : here. Search this forum for Atwill and you will find more.

To Toto, Mary and Outhouse,
I have read and studied his book twice, and I also purchased his recent film and watched it repeatedly. I do not think he has the entire solution. . . his claims are extravagant, but I think he has accounted for a significant chunk of the story. . . and I agree with him that the theme of the extant gospels is to ridicule and lampoon the efforts of the messiah claimants who followed the rebellious traditions of the original Maccabean rebels (who were successful in their own revolt from the Greeks). I have made my larger position known over the last several years at the Jesus Mysteries forum at Yahoo where I had been a moderator a few years ago.
Onias

Onias · 04-18-2013, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Mary,
Do you think the gospels were written for any particular purpose?
Why do you think Jesus was portrayed as a pacifist as well as a rebel?
And who wrote the gospels?
Onias

Hi, Onias

That's a tall order!!

1) The same purpose behind any of the Bible stories. A prophetic take on Jewish history. That is not of course, to give any credence to prophecy. After all, prophecy is simply a method whereby an understanding, an interpretation, of history is given a story form. Salvation history. The Jewish God had a hand in the affairs of the Jewish people.

2) That question is answered in the chart. Antigonus was a 'man of war'. Followed, later, by Philip the Tetrarch, a 'man of peace'. These two historical figures are the backbone, so to speak, of the literary, composite, figure of the gospel JC.

3) There really is only one gospel story; the story of JC. That we have four versions of this story indicate storyline development. A development I have tried to demonstrate in another chart:

Developments in the story about an executed/crucified Jewish messiah figure.

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=322907

Who wrote the gospels? I think the question is more to do with who created the central figure of the gospel story. A story about a Jewish messiah figure who was executed. Traces of this figure are found in the Toledot Yeshu and in Slavonic Josephus. If I had to pick a writer able to create such a figure - I would pick Philo. That takes one to Alexandria and prior to 50 c.e. (a date given for the death of Philo). Philo lived during the time-frame of Pilate. Yes, the developments in that gospel story indicate a later hand, or hands, updating the storyline.

Let me ask EVERYBODY a more direct and basic question about the extant gospels.

Qui bono? Who benefits? Whose agenda benefits by the depiction of Jesus as failed messiah, Roman toady, love-god and pacifist?
Onias

aa5874 · 04-18-2013, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Let me ask EVERYBODY a more direct and basic question about the extant gospels.

Qui bono? Who benefits? Whose agenda benefits by the depiction of Jesus as failed messiah, Roman toady, love-god and pacifist?
Onias

Jesus of the NT was not considered a failed Messiah.

The earliest Jesus story states that Jesus resurrected.

The author implied that Jesus BOASTED that he would be killed and then resurrect.

The author of the earliest Jesus implied that Jesus had power over death unlike all the FAILED Messiah--even Vespasian the prophesied Messianic ruler did NOT appear to the Romans after he died.

A failed Messiah is worthless as a God.

Jesus in the Gospels was God.

JESUS in the Gospels controlled his own time of death and the time he remained dead just as he predicted.

Mark 9:31 KJV

Quote:

For he taught his disciples, and said unto them , The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed , he shall rise the third day.

gMark's Jesus was NOT a failed Messiah.

gMark's story was the story that was used by the Jesus cult writers.

Mark 16:6 KJV

Quote:

And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted : Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified : he is risen ; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.

The author of the long gMark used virtually 100 % of the short gMark story and added 12 verses.

The author of gMatthew used gMark and added 12 chapters of "details" to the short gMark's version.

The author of gLuke added historical details to the gMark story.

The Jesus story in the Canon was not about a Failed Messiah but of the Son of God who predicted his own resurrection.

Onias · 04-18-2013, 09:35 PM

aa5874,

You say: "Jesus of the NT was not considered a failed Messiah." By whom? Certainly not by Jewish prophecy, as Jesus failed to liberate Judaea from the Romans.

Sure, the gospels say Jesus was resurrected, but he did not return to fulfill messianic prophecies. Instead he split, He beamed up to heaven and never returned (according to the story).

Within the context of the Christian MYTHICAL messiah, Jesus was not a failed messiah, but within the context of an historical messiah, he certainly was a failure.

Surely you do not believe in a mythical messiah, do you?

Are we not searching for the basis of an historical Jesus here?

outhouse · 04-18-2013, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Are we not searching for the basis of an historical Jesus here?

Not in this forum

There are very few here even interested in a Historical man the books were written about.

Most are looking for any miserable excuse to invent a 100% mythical creation, without ever once trying to explain how each gospel fits in their own little hobby horse correctly. I may not agree with Maryhelena, but my hats off she is trying more so then a half hearted attempt.

Some attack dates in vain.

Some attack the man.

Some attack Paul

Some attack the mythology

But none try for a replacement theory that even remotely works within cultural anthropology or the evidence were left with in the synoptic gospels.

Events at Passovers before the temple fell, were remembered and we have legends of events that happened in the past. A martyred man at Passover was remembered and deified in a period of time when Hellenistic Judaism wanted free from Judaism. It did just that, it went its own way and not only survived, it turned into the largest religion on the planet.

Nothing explains the dates, and the rapid spread of oral tradition throughout the Empire, like a martyred man at Passover.

A failed man in Judaism, was a hero for Hellenistic Proselytes of Judaism.

History absolutely backs a Historical Jesus, and its why scholars are almost unanimous in favor of a Historical Jesus.

maryhelena · 04-18-2013, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Mary,
Do you think the gospels were written for any particular purpose?
Why do you think Jesus was portrayed as a pacifist as well as a rebel?
And who wrote the gospels?
Onias

Hi, Onias

That's a tall order!!

1) The same purpose behind any of the Bible stories. A prophetic take on Jewish history. That is not of course, to give any credence to prophecy. After all, prophecy is simply a method whereby an understanding, an interpretation, of history is given a story form. Salvation history. The Jewish God had a hand in the affairs of the Jewish people.

2) That question is answered in the chart. Antigonus was a 'man of war'. Followed, later, by Philip the Tetrarch, a 'man of peace'. These two historical figures are the backbone, so to speak, of the literary, composite, figure of the gospel JC.

3) There really is only one gospel story; the story of JC. That we have four versions of this story indicate storyline development. A development I have tried to demonstrate in another chart:

Developments in the story about an executed/crucified Jewish messiah figure.

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=322907

Who wrote the gospels? I think the question is more to do with who created the central figure of the gospel story. A story about a Jewish messiah figure who was executed. Traces of this figure are found in the Toledot Yeshu and in Slavonic Josephus. If I had to pick a writer able to create such a figure - I would pick Philo. That takes one to Alexandria and prior to 50 c.e. (a date given for the death of Philo). Philo lived during the time-frame of Pilate. Yes, the developments in that gospel story indicate a later hand, or hands, updating the storyline.

Let me ask EVERYBODY a more direct and basic question about the extant gospels.

Qui bono? Who benefits? Whose agenda benefits by the depiction of Jesus as failed messiah, Roman toady, love-god and pacifist?
Onias

Who benefits? Whose agenda? I would imagine the answer to your questions would depend upon who you think created the figure of the gospel JC and the stories that developed around this figure. Arguments over benefits or agenda need first to establish authorship. Otherwise answers to your questions are purely arbitrary. And of course, once a literary work is in the public domain all sorts of people can gain all sorts of benefits from it - and can use that work for their own agendas.

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

04-17-2013, 07:39 PM	#41
Onias Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Primary residence in New York State Posts: 231	But have you read it? That was my question.

04-17-2013, 09:52 PM	#43
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	On Caesar's Messiah : I saw the movie, didn't want to spend the time or money on the book. Atwill is very smart, but he's spun a theory that goes way beyond the evidence. Robert Price reviews it : here. Search this forum for Atwill and you will find more.

04-18-2013, 09:35 PM	#48
Onias Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Primary residence in New York State Posts: 231	aa5874, You say: "Jesus of the NT was not considered a failed Messiah." By whom? Certainly not by Jewish prophecy, as Jesus failed to liberate Judaea from the Romans. Sure, the gospels say Jesus was resurrected, but he did not return to fulfill messianic prophecies. Instead he split, He beamed up to heaven and never returned (according to the story). Within the context of the Christian MYTHICAL messiah, Jesus was not a failed messiah, but within the context of an historical messiah, he certainly was a failure. Surely you do not believe in a mythical messiah, do you? Are we not searching for the basis of an historical Jesus here?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.