Toto

That might be another indication that Nazareth is a myth.

outhouse

Nazareth, if it existed, which even Carrier has stated it probably did, would have been very small.

A small village wouldn't house male workers?


There is no connection to tekton, that could go for or against a mythical Nazareth. Even if we went with a carpenter which is wrong, he could have been employed in Sepphoris. That also works for hand worker doing odd jobs.

outhouse

With methodology like that I question why you even would debate anything.



Heaven forbid historians who are well trained and spend their lives in this field, would ever be trained enough to separate mythology from the plausibility of historical details.


Biblical Jesus is not the topic here, Historical Jesus however is.



I didn't know charisma was the only requirement for a social leader.

So someone going into a village and having to yell, "listen" "listen to me" to even get a few people to pay attention to him, is a social leader?

Someone healing, looking for a few food scraps and the chance to teach around a dinner table is a social leader?


We are talking about a man who taught around a dinner table, not civic centers or amphitheaters.

There were many teachers and healers, none of which were social leaders.


You want a social leader, we can look at Bar Kochba

Chili

Nazareth is that big little city of God inside the mind of Jews, that so only a Jew will recognize and will render historians and archeologists paid losers before they start.

Chili

I think he was charismatic for a year to find out what he was all about, and then needed two and a half years more to clean up his own act.

Toto

Haven't you kept up with the historical Jesus research? The latest quest has been a failure. There is no historical consensus worth beans on which part of the gospels are history and which not.

Where do you get this detail - of Jesus as a healer being paid in scraps of food ? Your imagination or someone else's?

Perhaps this is a problem of definitions.

Bar Kochba was a military leader, not a social leader. If someone can go into a village and say listen to me - and people do - he has some sort of social power. I would call him a social leader.

outhouse

yes I have. And you should know better, there is a consensus on certain details of his life.

Just not every aspect of his life.

Almost all historians are in consensus he existed.


Out of hundreds, there is not a handful that doubts his existence.






The scripture states, he charged no money for his healing and instructed his apostles not to charge.

He also tells them to give up all their possessions, including their beggar bowls. This is key for socioeconomics as Jesus close people were beggars.


He would however accept a dinner invitation, and we all know they preached around the table.

outhouse

Bar Kochba was both.


But when a stranger walks into town, like a salesman. A unknown teacher and healer, and offers up what he can, hoping to find a house to sleep in and someone to share a meal with.

Is now a social leader? sorry I don't see it.

Toto

The question is a consensus on which parts of the gospels contain history vs. mythology.


The Holy Scripture that you rely on also says that Judas was the treasurer of the group. Where did the money come from? Love offerings? Rich patrons? What makes that part of Scripture historical?

aa5874

There is NO consensus that Jesus of Nazareth existed.

You are confusing the "Belief" of the Majority with "Consensus".

The Consensus among Historians, that is whether Agnostic, HJ or MJ, is that the NT is NOT a credible source and that accounts of Jesus in the Canon are products of fiction, forgeries and manipulation.