Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 09-07-2008, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zaphod

What lines exist are scanty, and they ain't choice, if I can believe what I perceive to be the consensus at this site - that the mentionings of Jesus in TF, Tacitus, Pliny, Suetinus etc are not reliable.

Scanty and nonreliable seems to sum up the historical evidence of the HJ.

And it very important that I emphasized that the word Jesus is NOT found at all in Tacitus, Suetonius or the Pliny letters.

Christ is a title, anyone could have believed they were Christ. Simon was believed to be Christ or the Messiah at around 135 CE.

And even the authors of the Synoptics made it clear by putting words in the mouth of Jesus saying, "Many shall come in my name saying I am Christ, and shall decieve many. [See Mark 13.6]

The word CHRIST cannot be assumed to mean Jesus, it may be deception.

spin · 09-07-2008, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Sumner

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Oh... and Hebrew sources. Mishna or early layers of the talmud.

I find this intriguing. Where, specifically, do you see an occasion to have mentioned Jesus in the Mishnah? Even better (and more appropriate to your claim), not simply an occasion for it to have happened, but a point at which we should both expect the speaker to be aware of Jesus, and we should reasonably expect him to have made such a mention?

The comment was about where it would have been possible to find historical references to Jesus. Why such texts didn't have any references is open to conjecture. Nevertheless, we still have no historical reference to Jesus. The argument from silence has some weight.

spin

Roger Pearse · 09-08-2008, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

The fact is that the "Jesus-never-lived" meme has been around for a long time and has never garnered any support outside of a small fringe. Voltaire had it right when he said that the notion showed more cleverness than erudition.

Nice. Do you have a reference for the Voltaire quote? (The notion was invented shortly before his time, I believe)

All the best,

Roger Pearse

No Robots · 09-08-2008, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Nice. Do you have a reference for the Voltaire quote?

J'ai vu quelques disciples de Bolingbroke, plus ingénieux qu'instruits,
qui niaient l'existence d'un Jésus.--Voltaire, "Dieu et les hommes". In Oeuvres Complètes, p. 425.

Roger Pearse · 09-08-2008, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Nice. Do you have a reference for the Voltaire quote?

J'ai vu quelques disciples de Bolingbroke, plus ingénieux qu'instruits,
qui niaient l'existence d'un Jésus.--Voltaire, "Dieu et les hommes". In Oeuvres Complètes, p. 425.

Very grateful - that "disciples of Bolingbroke" is something I've long wanted to see.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

No Robots · 09-08-2008, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Very grateful - that "disciples of Bolingbroke" is something I've long wanted to see.

Props to Peter Kirby for bringing this to my attention several years ago in a post.

Toto · 09-08-2008, 08:45 AM

So Voltaire did not say that the idea that Jesus never lived showed more cleverness than erudition, but that certain disciples of Bolingbroke had more cleverness than erudition.

This appears to be the Bolingbroke in question:

Henry_St_John,_1st_Viscount_Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke was a notoriously irreligious character, but does not seem to have been a mythicist. It is not clear to me what this quip by Voltaire would refer to.

No Robots · 09-08-2008, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

So Voltaire did not say that the idea that Jesus never lived showed more cleverness than erudition, but that certain disciples of Bolingbroke had more cleverness than erudition.

He's saying that these disciples of Bolingbroke show more cleverness than erudition in arguing that Jesus never existed. If you go to the link that I provided, search 'Bolingbroke' and then click on page 425, you will be able to go to the passage in question and see that Voltaire goes on to criticize the specific arguments made by these early mythicists. The arguments used by mythicists today may be somewhat different, but, imho, Voltaire's negative judgement of the central thesis is still valid.

Roger Pearse · 09-08-2008, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

So Voltaire did not say that the idea that Jesus never lived showed more cleverness than erudition, but that certain disciples of Bolingbroke had more cleverness than erudition.

This appears to be the Bolingbroke in question:

Henry_St_John,_1st_Viscount_Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke was a notoriously irreligious character, but does not seem to have been a mythicist. It is not clear to me what this quip by Voltaire would refer to.

In Boswell's life of Johnson, Johnson is heard attacking Bolingbroke for leaving a small sum of money to a nobody to publish his thoughts in favour of infidelity once Bolingbroke was safely dead. The disciples of Bolingbroke are the early atheists.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Lógos Sokratikós · 09-08-2008, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Don't just voice what is popular, but not tested.

My own position—that Christ is but a man, that Judaism is fundamentally atheism and that there is no such thing as the supernatural—can hardly be called popular. And I am in fact testing that position right now.

I am leaning towards an interpretation of modern liberal Judaism as being closer to Baruch Spinoza than to William Lane Craig. But don't you think that this wasn't the case when the Tanakh was written?

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

09-08-2008, 08:45 AM	#107
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	So Voltaire did not say that the idea that Jesus never lived showed more cleverness than erudition, but that certain disciples of Bolingbroke had more cleverness than erudition. This appears to be the Bolingbroke in question: Henry_St_John,_1st_Viscount_Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke was a notoriously irreligious character, but does not seem to have been a mythicist. It is not clear to me what this quip by Voltaire would refer to.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.