TedM

I don't think any body did but Steven Carr suggested that Jesus was placed there in Hebrews. Here was the original comment by Steven:

http://www.freeratio.org/showpost.ph...&postcount=259

archibald

On the contrary, I have read your material, and I have read rebuttals of it, and I have read some of your re-rebuttals. It was a while ago, and to be honest it all seemed pretty much of a quagmire with no real resolution.

My question was not that. It was asking what support you had from academics and historians and philosophers with expertize on such matters.

aa5874

The Myth character called Jesus Christ was CRUCIFIED under Pilate in the NT Canon.

The Jews were BLAMED for the Crucifixion of Jesus by Pilate based on Church writers who used the Pauline writings.

What is the purpose of making claims about the Jesus story that is completely unsubstantiated?

No heretic, skeptic or non-apologetic extant source of antiquity even mentioned that Jesus was crucified in "the Air Beneath the Moon".

Once, you understand that the Pauline Jesus was NOT a man and that "Paul" did NOT get his gospel from man as STATED in Galatians 1 then it is completely unnecessary to promote events that have NO support at all in the entire NT and ALL Extant sources of antiquity.

Galatians 1
The written statements in the Pauline writings are CLEAR.

The Pauline Jesus was NOT a man, but a non-historical resurrected MYTH.

Kapyong

Gday there Don :-)

Well, I split your point into 2 :
1. Gods having human natures is common and obvious
2. SPECIFIC claims like Jesus' are NOT common and obvious

There are no other examples which are exactly like Jesus - so what?


Oh no - I wasn't setting up any dichotomy. I just wanted to point out your challenge example was far too specific. Not being able to meet it means little - like the opposite challenge I cited.


K.

Kapyong

Gday,

No evidence as 'far as you know' ?
Pardon?

Haven't you read Doherty?
Haven't you read my numerous exemples on the previous page of THIS THREAD ?

Now you sound like MCalavera - refusing to even consider the evidence, then pretending there is none.


K.

archibald

Gakuseidon,

In Doherty's rebuttal of Muller, he quotes Carrier as saying,

Again, Plutarch's "true" account of Osiris is an example: he becomes mortal flesh and dies in the aer "many times"

http://www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net...uesMuller1.htm (near the bottom of the page)

Is it the case that Plutarch arrives at what might be described as a 'true' or preferred account in which this is the case, because it seems to suggest a version of the myth in which Osiris incarnates in the aer.

I ask because I have just read through the myth here:

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/...Osiris*/A.html

.........but didn't spot where Plutarch did that. Having said that, I might easily have missed it, because at times I allowed myself to skim over parts which did not seem to contain material relevant to my particular curiosity in this instance.

Edit: If anyone else can answer this, that would be great also. :]

Toto

To look at this from another angle, if the ancients thought that their gods walked on earth, we don't take this as evidence that their gods were "historical" in modern terms, or that there were historical people behind the myths. So if the gospel writers thought that Jesus walked on earth, does this have any implications for the historicity of Jesus? Somehow I don't think it means that Jesus was actually historical.

archibald

Calm your clams, Kappers. :] In all honesty, I had not noticed any evidence of early Christians believing in a non-earthly Jesus. Where was it?

Edit: or more to the point, who were they?

archibald

Sorry to butt in, but yes, that's obviously true.

Not sure where it takes us, but it's true, as far as I can see.








Edit: But anyway, isn't Gakuseidon's point that there are no analogies for someone being (or should I say described as or believed to have been) descended from a human and yet being only spiritual?

Toto

There were Docetists and other gnostics. There is disagreement over whether they believed in a "historical" Jesus. They seem to have believed in a Jesus who might have landed on earth from another sphere and was not subject to the laws of physics.