PhilosopherJay

Hi All,

I'm slowly getting through Bart Ehrman's masterpiece, "Did Jesus Exist?"
In his chapter on sources independent of the Gospels, he has a number of quotes which he says represents independent verification of of the Historical Jesus because these quotes describe an historical Jesus but are independent of the Gospels.

In fact, Ehrman is unable to deliver a single quote that clearly references an historical Jesus. For example on page 114, he quotes 1:Peter:

Clearly this does not refer to an historical Jesus. We do not describe historical people as "did not commit sin" or "nor was deceit found in his." This is the suffering servant character from Hebrew texts.

This insight helps us to propose a "Simple Mythological Jesus Hypothesis" that fits all the facts.

1. We have a cult (the "Fourth Philosophy" as Josephus deemed it) emphasizing the suffering servant-Messiah Hebrew text in the First century.
2. At some point, possibly starting in the First century, we have apostle-adventure texts. John (Jacob) the baptizer, Peter (The Rock) and Paul (the Shrimp/Runt) being the most popular. These are magical adventures of those preaching the suffering Servant-Messiah myth.
3. Between circa 140-210 C.E., we get the gospel tales where the suffering servant becomes historicized as the founder of these diverse apostles.

This explains why we find so many references to a messiah figure before the gospels, but all of these references are mystical and none of these references point to an historical figure.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Duvduv

Jay, I haven't read his book, but am I correct that he takes "for granted" some Jesusist activity in the FIRST century and unproven gospels and epistles written in the SECOND century?

By taking for granted I mean he does not subject the writings of ancient heresiologists to the same rigorous analysis and scrutiny as he does the texts of the NT.

outhouse

that is poor work you have done in understanding the context.

Christ suffered ,,, deity myths do not suffer

who did not commit sin,,, deity myths dont have a chance at laws that only apply to mortals

might follow in his steps,,, deity myths dont walk the earth

in his mouth,,, mortal attribute

while suffering ,,, mortal attribute

for by his wounds ,,, mortal attribute

outhouse

what insight??? that later romans who wrote in hellenistic mythology deified a poverty stricked oppressed jew ??



if you mean fit all the facts, as in "leaving more unanswered questions that are merely trying to force square pegs into a round hole"

then I would agree

outhouse

this doesnt make a bit of sense

jews in mythology of the OT thought a real flesh and blood mortal born of the davidic line would come to save them from oppression


and its no wonder jesus failed as a jewish messaih after the fall of the temple.


jesus made famous with his death, and was given all these david attributes in hope he would help these poor oppressed people from starvation and disease inflicted at the romans hands, but when reality hit with the fall of the temple, he lost judaism as a whole. Lucky their were romans worshipping judaism that found pauls message attractive. OR jesus history would have remained mortal history and only remembered as a vague mortal trouble maker, instead of being deified through hellenistic mythology

Toto

Read some Greek mythology, or other mythology. Gods and demigods suffer all the time.

Same objection to the rest

Toto

aa5874's digression on the historicity of Paul has been split off here

sotto voce

We do if they do not commit sin. It's too conveniently circular to say that humans cannot fail to sin. Sin would not be sin if it was inevitable. The whole of the Tanakh/OT is predicated on a future sinless one. That what all that long Levitical code is about. It's ultimately what makes sense of Abram moving from Ur.

Isaiah did not mention bearing sins on a tree. This is from two prophecies, so required some catalyst to make the connexion. But 1 Peter goes further: it gives the promised messiah a historically valid man's name, 'Jesus'. Referring to the Hebrew Prophets, it confirms that 'they spoke of the things that have now been declared to you' 1 Pe 1:12. This, like every NT letter, is all about fulfilled prophecy, fulfilled in history. They cannot make sense otherwise.

outhouse

weak

I have stated they used hellenistic mythology

aa5874

Actually in Josephus there is nothing about a suffering-Messiah when he wrote about the "Fourth Philosophy"

Antiquities of the Jews 18 We have NO recovered Texts dated to the 1st century with a Jesus story or the activities of the disciples and Paul.

Speculation is NOT evidence. There is simply nothing about magical apostle-adventures texts in the 1st century.

There is actual recovered Texts dated to the 2nd-3rd century with the Jesus story but NOTHING about any mystical character called Jesus Christ in the 1st century.

You have NOT produce any actual evidence for the many mystical references to a character called Jesus Christ in the 1st century.

Where is the evidence??? Who actually made mystical references in any dated sources of antiquity??
The evidence explains that the Jesus story and the Pauline writings are 2nd century or later.

Hypothetical evidence about mystical references explains Nothing.