Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Solitary Man · 03-25-2008, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

Correction : not the only mythological figure who MIGHT have existed.

Correction: Not the only mythological figure who most likely existed.

Quote:

Virtually anything we might know comes from the Gospels - and these appear to have been written in accordance to what had been prophesied in the OT, or written as parallels to stories in the OT.

Which came first, Jesus or the writings? How do you know? What methodology do you employ to ensure that the gospels were not written after the facts with a slant towards prophecy rather than outright fabrication? Do you have evidence from other works?

Quote:

Strip away the layers of legend and mythology - the mythical ancestry and birth, the time-worn "miracles", the earthquakes and darkened skies, etc, etc, and what are you left with that you could possibly pin on this allegedly historical figure?

Lived under Pilate, was crucified around Passover, preached apolocypticism and was anti-Roman.

Quote:

If Paul himself, writing before the Gospels, seems to know next-to-nothing about this historical Jesus, what hope do WE have?

Q also is dated to the 50's CE.

Quote:

Jesus may have been a lesbian stand-up comedian for all we know - IF she existed at all.

Except back then there weren't any lesbian stand-up comedians. That's a modern anachronism.

Huon · 03-26-2008, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Q also is dated to the 50's CE.

What consensus about even the existence of Q ?

Civil1z@tion · 03-26-2008, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

Quote:

Originally Posted by Civil1z@tion

Anyways, the point is that Jesus is not the only mythological figure who actually existed.

Correction : not the only mythological figure who MIGHT have existed.

As I noted in my post, another figure who almost certainly lived, Sigurth, has about as much evidence supporting his existence. However, given the evidence we do have, his existence is the theory which best explains it. Same thing with Jesus. (And you know Josephus kind of wrote about him though I have heard that at least one of Josephus's quotes about Jesus was a medieval forgery and didn't fit with his normal view on the cult leaders arising in Judea at the time, he didn't like them).

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

Quote:

Originally Posted by Civil1z@tion

Jesus was a crank apocalyptic preacher, one of many in Roman Judea, who happened to have followers who were really good at PR.

How do you know this?

Its the simplest explanation for the evidence we have. How do scholars know Sigurth was a Frankish prince? Its the best explanation for the evidence we have. Since apocalyptic cult leaders were a dime a dozen in 1st Century Judea its not surprising to find one named Jesus (a pretty common name in that time). Killing these guys was also pretty common. So disregarding the miracles (which are of course no more believable than pagan miracles which Christians dismiss), there is nothing implausible about Jesus's tale. There is no reason to think that the gospel writers were making Jesus up. If Jesus was supposed to be the only wandering apocalyptic preacher then the gospel story would be more suspect.

Clivedurdle · 03-26-2008, 08:36 AM

I must strongly recommend Myths and Heroes by Woods that I refer to above, because it goes through several of these did they didn't they examples.

A similar treatment badly needs doing for Jesus. Maybe the BBC, a collaboration of Terry Jones, Michael Woods and Tom Holland?

It is not a matter of fabrication but of Chinese whispers.

People want a messiah, shit happens, someone sees the light, someone writes a story, it is all back projected as really happening. An Emperor tightens stuff up after a few hundred years.

Minimalist · 03-26-2008, 08:36 AM

Consider this passage from Josephus on "Jesus, son of Ananus." Note the questions of Albinus as well as his actions and the alleged "replies" of the accused. Maybe Roman governors had a field manual which gave them the questions to ask? Or maybe this tale was later incorporated into the myth and the words and actions given to "Pilate." From Wars of the Jews, Book VI, 5:3

Quote:

But, what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a husbandman, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very great peace and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one to make tabernacles to God in the temple, (23) began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" This was his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However, certain of the most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any thing for himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but still went on with the same words which he cried before. Hereupon our rulers, supposing, as the case proved to be, that this was a sort of divine fury in the man, brought him to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till his bones were laid bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears, but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke of the whip his answer was, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator) asked him, Who he was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no manner of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty, till Albinus took him to be a madman, and dismissed him.

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/t...phus/war6.html

Clivedurdle · 03-26-2008, 08:41 AM

And can we please dump this radical preacher stuff.

The person described in the gospels hated the real radical group - the Pharisees. Even more reason to doubt what records we have before us - they do look like anti pharisaic tracts.

He wanted a return to the word of the Torah - that is conservative in my book, or is radical used in the sense that Bin Laden is allegedly radical?

No Robots · 03-26-2008, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

And can we please dump this radical preacher stuff.

The person described in the gospels hated the real radical group - the Pharisees. Even more reason to doubt what records we have before us - they do look like anti pharisaic tracts.

He wanted a return to the word of the Torah - that is conservative in my book, or is radical used in the sense that Bin Laden is allegedly radical?

This is absurd, Clive. His war with the Pharisees was the war of the spirit against the letter.

And the Pharisees said to him: Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?
And he said to them: Have you never read what David did when he had need, and was hungry himself, and they that were with him?
How he went into the house of God, under Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the loaves of proposition, which was not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave to them who were with him?
And he said to them: The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

--Mk 2:24-28

Civil1z@tion · 03-26-2008, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

And can we please dump this radical preacher stuff.

The person described in the gospels hated the real radical group - the Pharisees. Even more reason to doubt what records we have before us - they do look like anti pharisaic tracts.

He wanted a return to the word of the Torah - that is conservative in my book, or is radical used in the sense that Bin Laden is allegedly radical?

I said apocalyptic not radical. Besides, you can be a radical conservative (known as a reactionary) just like you can be a radical liberal.

aa5874 · 03-26-2008, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

Correction : not the only mythological figure who MIGHT have existed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Correction: Not the only mythological figure who most likely existed.

Correction: Not the only mythological figure who is BELIEVED to have existed.

There is no known external non-apologetic source to validate or support the claim that Jesus of Nazareth most likely existed, it is the opposite, Jesus is not known outside of Christianity to have existed, by any non-apologetic writer of antiquity.

Jesus' existence is most likely near to zero.

Solitary Man · 03-26-2008, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by karlmarx

Correction : not the only mythological figure who MIGHT have existed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Correction: Not the only mythological figure who most likely existed.

Correction: Not the only mythological figure who is BELIEVED to have existed.

There is no known external non-apologetic source to validate or support the claim that Jesus of Nazareth most likely existed, it is the opposite, Jesus is not known outside of Christianity to have existed, by any non-apologetic writer of antiquity.

Jesus' existence is most likely near to zero.

There is no non-apologetic source to validate your existence either. You must not exist.

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

03-26-2008, 08:36 AM	#44
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	I must strongly recommend Myths and Heroes by Woods that I refer to above, because it goes through several of these did they didn't they examples. A similar treatment badly needs doing for Jesus. Maybe the BBC, a collaboration of Terry Jones, Michael Woods and Tom Holland? It is not a matter of fabrication but of Chinese whispers. People want a messiah, shit happens, someone sees the light, someone writes a story, it is all back projected as really happening. An Emperor tightens stuff up after a few hundred years.

03-26-2008, 08:41 AM	#46
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	And can we please dump this radical preacher stuff. The person described in the gospels hated the real radical group - the Pharisees. Even more reason to doubt what records we have before us - they do look like anti pharisaic tracts. He wanted a return to the word of the Torah - that is conservative in my book, or is radical used in the sense that Bin Laden is allegedly radical?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.