FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

View Poll Results: What do you think the probability of a historical Jesus is?
100% - I have complete faith that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person. 8 6.15%
80-100% 10 7.69%
60-80% 15 11.54%
40-60% 22 16.92%
20-40% 17 13.08%
0-20% 37 28.46%
o% - I have complete faith that Jesus of Nazareth was not a real person, 21 16.15%
Voters: 130. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-25-2008, 09:02 AM   #81
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
You just claimed that the context is a mystery, so what do you know about the context?
What I said was that the composition of the Gospels as we have them is a mystery. Their context and content, however, provide ample evidence of their original source material. It is an anomaly in literature that we know so little about the composition of these documents, and yet are able to understand so much about their source material.
No Robots is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 09:12 AM   #82
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Ultimately, my argument for historicity is very simple: in order to explain the profound effect of Christianity, there must be an equally profound cause, and the only adequate explanation for Christianity is that it was initiated by a genius; and clearly the composers of the Gospels and its sources were not that genius, but all their work is directed toward describing him and transmitting his words.
No Robots is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 09:29 AM   #83
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
Default

Quote:
and the only adequate explanation for Christianity is that it was initiated by a genius

Or, a very good con man.

BTW, Osiris hung around for more than three millennia. Are you suggesting that he also had a "profound cause" or is it just that your god is "special."
Minimalist is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 09:53 AM   #84
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minimalist View Post
Quote:
and the only adequate explanation for Christianity is that it was initiated by a genius
Or, a very good con man.
Well, if we test this against the documents, we see that some of his wonder-working touched upon charlatanism, but this was something he had to do to gain any kind of hearing, and he was obviously uncomfortable with it.

Quote:
BTW, Osiris hung around for more than three millennia.
But there is no comparing the impact of Osiris with that of Christ.

Quote:
Are you suggesting that he also had a "profound cause" or is it just that your god is "special."
Why do you call him my god? I do not say he is a god. I hold to what Thomas Jefferson wrote:
I am a Christian, in the only sense he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence; & believing he never claimed any other.
No Robots is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 10:09 AM   #85
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 11,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Ultimately, my argument for historicity is very simple: in order to explain the profound effect of Christianity, there must be an equally profound cause....
...something like the descruction of the Temple perhaps?
spamandham is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 10:14 AM   #86
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spamandham View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Ultimately, my argument for historicity is very simple: in order to explain the profound effect of Christianity, there must be an equally profound cause....

...something like the descruction of the Temple perhaps?
Well, we know that the destruction of the Temple originated a couple of things:
  1. the Diaspora
  2. Rabbinism

But there is no evident connection between the destruction of the Temple and the world-transforming power of the Gospels.
No Robots is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 10:30 AM   #87
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Well, we know that the destruction of the Temple originated a couple of things:
  1. the Diaspora
  2. Rabbinism

But there is no evident connection between the destruction of the Temple and the world-transforming power of the Gospels.
Uhh... the destruction of the 2nd temple led to Rabbinic Judaism and eliminated every other form of Judaism... Saducees, Essenes, and Jewish Christians. The temple's destruction (and probably the rise and fall of the Bar Kochba revolt) is what "officially" separated gentile Christianity from Jewish Christianity.

The "world transforming" power of the gospels didin't occur until Constantine, when Christianity became the official religion of "the world" (ie the Roman Empire).
show_no_mercy is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 10:32 AM   #88
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
Uhh... the destruction of the 2nd temple led to Rabbinic Judaism
Isn't that what I said?

Quote:
and eliminated every other form of Judaism... Saducees, Essenes, and Jewish Christians. The temple's destruction (and probably the rise and fall of the Bar Kochba revolt) is what "officially" separated gentile Christianity from Jewish Christianity.
Yep, but that still does not connect the destruction of the Temple to the world-transforming power of the Gospels.
No Robots is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 10:35 AM   #89
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
The "world transforming" power of the gospels didin't occur until Constantine, when Christianity became the official religion of "the world" (ie the Roman Empire).
But it had sufficient power before Constantine to have become useful to Constantine.
No Robots is offline  
Old 11-25-2008, 10:36 AM   #90
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Posts: 84
Default

aa said:
Quote:
How could a leader be worshipped by Jews as the son of a God in the 1st century, an unprecedented phenomena, never known to have happened before, a man crucified for blasphemy is worshipped as a God, yet up to 92 CE, Josephus is not aware of such a charismatic leader.
and his widespread and radically disruptive followers as described in the "historical" account of the Book of Acts. Why did Josephus seem oblivious to this important sect? :huh:

-evan
eheffa is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:29 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.