Artemus

Then if you are trying to convince people that the real person descended of David had already lived and died, it would seem to be imperative that you have details of the life to relay. The fact that the details of the life did not appear until considerably later argues strongly to me pretty strongly that they were simply created by necessity rather than representing a historical record.

squiz

Sorry for being overly picky (and probably not relevant), but the quote in Matthew is "Blessed are the poor in spirit".

Luke does say ye/you however, at least in the translations I read. (Whoops, I am admitting my lack of Greek skills here. )

spin

Neither has anything between "blessed" and "the poor". Both say, makarioi oi ptwxoi, so I guess the original point holds...?


spin

Solitary Man

Is this merely your opinion? It doesn't seem to be rooted in history. "Argument from what I think should be".

Artemus

I said "argues to me", so of course it is my opinion. Enlighten me if it isn't rooted in history.

Amaleq13

Since there is no indication that Paul had such a goal it makes little sense to criticize him for not trying to accomplish it. :huh:

Artemus

I'm not criticizing Paul. I have no idea what he was trying to accomplish, and isn't directly relevant to what I was saying. All I'm saying is that the fact that gospel writers provide apparent details of the life of Jesus decades after they allegedly occurred is not a particularly compelling argument for historicity when the expectation mentioned by Solitary Man is considered. The gospel writers were trying to convince people that the expected descendant of David had already lived and died. They therefore had a strong incentive to provide details of the life one way or the other. My experience is that when religious beliefs are concerned an incentive is more than enough for rumors to become "fact" with no basis in reality (with embellishments rather common). The fact that details kept getting added as the later gospels were written heightens my suspicion. While they may be based at some level on a historical figure at some time from the past, that certainly hasn't been demonstrated conclusively by any argument I've seen. Again, if there is any conclusive evidence, someone please enlighten me.

Solitary Man

In other words, prove you wrong? Hrm, fundy logic...

gurugeorge

LOL. I'm sure that would be news to Thomas L. Thompson, author if The Messiah Myth. (or via: amazon.co.uk)

You've got to be kidding here. How in hell is a pious wish for a military redeemer to come and put the Jews on top not a myth? It's a myth that has saturated Jewish thought for centuries fercryinoutloud.

Put it this way: do you think there will ever, ever be a Messiah?

Solitary Man

Do you know what a myth is?