Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spamandham · 08-11-2008, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

It is not very clear for me the concept about you want to express, however I think to understand that you continue to argue that there is no evidence to support the historicity of Jesus.

Not exactly. I'm arguing that the evidence is so highly legendary as to be worthless in regard to trying to recover 'the real Jesus'. That being the case, the evidence is also compatible with the idea that there was no historical Jesus. However, I'm not arguing for the absense of a historical Jesus, I'm merely arguing that it's futile to try to recover the 'real Jesus' from what we have.

I would think we all would have learned that lesson from the Jesus Seminar.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

In my previous post I did mention to the aspect relative to the jewish world and the rabbinic one in particular. I showed that the Jews, in past centuries, were persecuted by Christians as responsible for the killing of Jesus the nazarene, the God of Christians. Now you, that urgent on archaeological evidence (without knowing if they actually exist or not) could you explain, using the mere logic, as it is possible that an entire people, chased away from his land, could be accused and persecuted for having killed a man NEVER EXISTED?

Again, I'm not arguing for the nonexistence of a historcial Jesus.

What persecution of Jews by Christians are you referring to? There was no systematic persecution of Jews by Christians until the 4th century. Whether Jesus had been historical or not is not information I would expect 4th century Jews to have access to.

...and if they had argued against the historicity of Jesus, what are the odds such documentation would survive to today? 99% of all ancient documents have been lost (as Roger Pierce likes to say).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

".. that Jesus was a high priest.."

One can't rule out that it can have been so, also: obviously in his personal worship!

Ok, so we both agree Jesus might have been a high priest, he might have been a poor wandering sage, he might have been a healer, he might have been a magician.

Why stop there? What/who else might he have been? Which of the following historical figures can we rule out as being the historical core to Jesus; Simon Magus, the Essene Teach of Righteousness, Zoroaster, Appolonius of Tyana, John the Baptist, Vespian, Julius Caesar, King Tut? Which of the following could not be the mythical basis of Jesus; Joshua of the OT, King David, Horus, Enoch's 'son of man', Bacchus?

...and you think not only can we extract the 'real Jesus' from all this, but we can also rule out the idea he's a mythical figure altogether?!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

However, beyond what you can find in the sites, there are clear archaeological evidence showing the close link between the two cults, starting probably from the late third century.

Littlejohn
.

I agree they were closely related. All the ancient cults borrowed from eachother, much like modern religions tend to do.

Rick Sumner · 08-11-2008, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Perhaps you need to make this less personal and avoid imputing meanings into casual words?

With apologies, I was responding faster than I was reading--I'd read it as "I guess you need to be more careful" in place of "I guess I need. . ."

My mistake, apologies again.

Quote:

I read Ehrman's book some years ago. It impressed me as a good literary effort, but not as a convincing historical effort. Yes, Ehrman based his reconstruction on various parts of the gospel. Is this the same as "recovering the Jesus of history" - the subject of this thread? I don't think so. I think he relied on some extra assumptions that are not detailed there, in particular the assumption that some prophetic, charsimatic person must have started the Christian religion, because that's how he assumes religions start.

This conclusion is unjustified. Just because a scholar doesn't detail how he arrives at the conclusion an historical Jesus existed doesn't mean he hasn't considered it, or that he has assumed anything.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Rick Sumner · 08-11-2008, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Not exactly. I'm arguing that the evidence is so highly legendary as to be worthless in regard to trying to recover 'the real Jesus'. That being the case, the evidence is also compatible with the idea that there was no historical Jesus. However, I'm not arguing for the absense of a historical Jesus, I'm merely arguing that it's futile to try to recover the 'real Jesus' from what we have.

I would think we all would have learned that lesson from the Jesus Seminar.

I would beg to differ. I think the Jesus Seminar's approach--identifying this saying or that saying as coming verbatim from the historical Jesus--is ridiculous and unhistorical. I do not think trying to recover 'the real Jesus' is impossible.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

08-11-2008, 03:46 PM

Hiya,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

You are wrong! .. Read more closely the steps of the Talmud referring to Jesus!

Really?
Please produce the quote from the Talmud that shows a rabbi saw Jesus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

Because Philo died before Jesus

Wrong.

LJ, have you ever studied any of this ?
It appears not.

Iasion

Toto · 08-11-2008, 03:48 PM

LJ is engaged in extreme Bible studies. He has an alternative time line.

08-11-2008, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

LJ is engaged in extreme Bible studies. He has an alternative time line.

'Extreme Bible studies'

Love it :-)

mountainman · 08-11-2008, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Sumner

Quote:

Not exactly. I'm arguing that the evidence is so highly legendary as to be worthless in regard to trying to recover 'the real Jesus'. That being the case, the evidence is also compatible with the idea that there was no historical Jesus. However, I'm not arguing for the absense of a historical Jesus, I'm merely arguing that it's futile to try to recover the 'real Jesus' from what we have.

I would think we all would have learned that lesson from the Jesus Seminar.

I would beg to differ. I think the Jesus Seminar's approach--identifying this saying or that saying as coming verbatim from the historical Jesus--is ridiculous and unhistorical. I do not think trying to recover 'the real Jesus' is impossible.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

But it may be possible to recover necessary and sufficient evidence to objectively consider that 'the real Jesus' actually appeared (in literature) as late as the fourth century in association with the ever-resourceful Constantine - in a very literal and historical carbon dating sense.

Best wishes,

Pete

aa5874 · 08-11-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Sumner

Quote:

Not exactly. I'm arguing that the evidence is so highly legendary as to be worthless in regard to trying to recover 'the real Jesus'. That being the case, the evidence is also compatible with the idea that there was no historical Jesus. However, I'm not arguing for the absense of a historical Jesus, I'm merely arguing that it's futile to try to recover the 'real Jesus' from what we have.

I would think we all would have learned that lesson from the Jesus Seminar.

I would beg to differ. I think the Jesus Seminar's approach--identifying this saying or that saying as coming verbatim from the historical Jesus--is ridiculous and unhistorical. I do not think trying to recover 'the real Jesus' is impossible.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

But, I thought "the real Jesus" was already recovered long ago and the myth shattered.

I don't think there is a Jesus of the NT to recover.

Littlejohn · 08-12-2008, 03:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, I thought "the real Jesus" was already recovered long ago and the myth shattered.

I don't think there is a Jesus of the NT to recover.

Well... at least I know that I must not expect me any kind of plagiarism from you!

My best

Littlejohn
.

Littlejohn · 08-12-2008, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iasion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto
LJ is engaged in extreme Bible studies. He has an alternative time line.

'Extreme Bible studies' what

Love it :-)

Surely you are right, especially if you think to the hallucinating "mountain" of "panzane" (silly tales) that still circulate around the figure of Jesus and all his evangelical entourage!

No novelist, no publisher, no film producer ever be able to collect so much wealth as that have collected tens and tens of generations of the high clergy and their families, thanks to "extreme little stories" that can not be compared even to more modest cartoon of Walt Disney! .. The most hallucinating thing is that even today one discuss seriously of it, almost were serious things!... When the human mind will be able to free itself from such yoke? ...

Littlejohn
.

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

08-11-2008, 03:48 PM	#55
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	LJ is engaged in extreme Bible studies. He has an alternative time line.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.