Freethought & Rationalism Archive

show_no_mercy · 10-30-2009, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Good try, but....

Paul tells us that he had a different view of Jesus before God revealed him as his Son. So someone else had some ideas about someone (or something) called Jesus that engaged Paul. Paul used the LXX. (sometimes weirdly) to defend his revelations against them.

Paul says that God revealed his son in him. Of course, I doubt that this actually happened this way, for obvious reasons, but Paul does refer to scripture quite often.

As the case for Paul's Jesus can be twisted out of scripture, and Paul's denial of having learned this from anyone, I see the scripture possibility as the simplest explanation.

One question I have about this is where Paul got the name "Jesus" from, if it was all 100% revelation from scripture.

ChuckE99 · 10-30-2009, 10:48 AM

I'll stick with my pet theory (of course, unsubstantiated) that the Jesus of the Bible is a combination of three things:

1. A narrative story drawn from a variety of sources: Earlier christ cults, the Hebrew Bible (via Paul or whoever), and other early liteature (the Odyssey, possibly) and then set in Roman Palestine.

2. The collected sayings of an unknown prophet (or group) that we see evidence for in GThomas and Q.

and,

3. The savior cult beliefs (probably Greek) espoused by "Paul".

As far as dating the origin of the fully formed "myth", I defer to archeological evidence. There are no verifiable Christian artifacts until well into the second and third centuries. I'm skeptical of dating a few papyrus fragments by writing style to the early second century.

I'd say the myth and the cult of Jesus started within the persecuted ranks of Jews living in Rome.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :devil1:

Toto · 10-30-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

...
One question I have about this is where Paul got the name "Jesus" from, if it was all 100% revelation from scripture.

That's the easy part. In the Septuagint, Jesus is the Hellenistic Greek name for Joshua, Moses' lieutenant who brought the Jews into the promised land. Paul appears to have read the Septuagint.

dog-on · 10-30-2009, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Paul says that God revealed his son in him. Of course, I doubt that this actually happened this way, for obvious reasons, but Paul does refer to scripture quite often.

As the case for Paul's Jesus can be twisted out of scripture, and Paul's denial of having learned this from anyone, I see the scripture possibility as the simplest explanation.

One question I have about this is where Paul got the name "Jesus" from, if it was all 100% revelation from scripture.

The LXX would have had quite a few Jesus' to chose from, I suspect.

Ah, I see Toto beat me to the punch line.

Jeffrey Gibson · 10-30-2009, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

Doherty writes:

The recent demise of The Jesus Project, when it had barely gotten off the ground, has not been critical scholarship’s finest hour. I myself was not involved with the Project in any way (I was not invited to be) ...

I take that despite how he has cast the above as an assertion of fact, Earl intends his claim that he “was never invited to be“ involved with the Jesus Project “in any way” to be taken as something other than that – perhaps as something which he really doesn’t mean to be taken seriously, something that he would have added a “wink” to if he was capable of doing so..

For the fact is that he was invited – and on more than one occasion – to be involved “in some way” in the Jesus Project.

As I believe I’ve noted here before (and as the following e mails – reproduced with permission – show), Robert Price asked him to come to and participate in a JP meeting.

Quote:

Robert M. Price January 2 at 9:05am
Jeffrey,

I am surprised to read these words of Earl's. I invited him to the conference, but he could not attend. There has been free and open discussion of mythicism at the first JP meeting, and a session on it has been scheduled for the 2nd. I am not aware of any feeling toward excluding Earl, whose work I of course value extremely highly. I will pursue the matter. Thanks for letting me know about this.

"I love Earl's work and am eager to see it given maximum exposure. I think he may be too pessimistic about it's receiving a hearing at the Jesus Project. I will do my best to see him participating if he wishes to, and I very much hope he does."

..., yes, he was (and is and will be) invited to give papers there and to participate in other ways as well.

Bob

And Hoffmann himself actually invited Earl (through me) to submit a paper for consideration by the JP members (see below).

Quote:

Hi Jeffrey:

Thanks for the heads-up regarding Doherty. I hope at the Judgement we will not rely solely on footnotes for the final assessment.

In any event, when the JP website is back up I will invite him to write something.

I suspect we will have it up by February 1st in case he wants to get a start.

The so-called "scare quotes" were intended to mean "of the same ilk," not slavish follower, but I still maintain (a) his book is not very good and (b) I don't think anyone on the JP is afarid of myth theories.

I don't mind telling him about "disciple" but would prefer to write a contra when he produces something for the website about the JP or his master theory.

Joe

Moreover, as the following E-mail from Earl to me shows, Earl himself acknowledged not only that he was aware of Hoffmann’s invitation, but that he was going to take it up - hardly something one does if one has never been invited to be involved in the JP, let alone involved “in any way” at all.

Quote:

Jeffrey,

Thanks for this information. What Hoffmann is suggesting may be the best approach. Of course, I would not attempt to lay out the mythicist case in 2000 words, rather the reasons why I think that case, and mine in particular, ought to be investigated, with some examples given in brief. I would also give notification of my willingness to send, free of charge, a copy of my second edition of The Jesus Puzzle to all members of the Project, which they can peruse if they wish. That might get the ball rolling, although I naturally do not expect that mythicism or me in particular is going to assume a primary place in the Project's deliberations. I just feel that in needs to get onto the program in a definite way.

Submitting a short paper like this would also be best in that I would not be able to attend any meeting in the May-June period because of demands of my job at that time, and because I do not want to take too much time away from getting the second edition finally done. The work in writing and self-publishing something like this has been daunting.

I'm not sure that Hoffman's revised comment is a great improvement, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks,
Earl

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Jeffrey B. Gibson <jgibson000@comcast.net> wrote:

Earl,

I have it directly from Hoffmann himself that once the the JP website is back up (it's editing papers from the last session that has prevented him from having the time necessary to get it going again), he will be inviting you to write something that will be considered and discussed at a JP session. He also notes that I should inform you that the website should be back up by February 1st "in case [Earl] wants to get a start" on writing something for the JP's consideration.

I've asked him what word length submitted pieces are to adhere to. I'll let you know what this is as soon as I hear back from him But as you'll see from their previous "Call for Papers" at http://www.centerforinquiry.net/cser, it's probably fair to say that you should limit yourself to 2000 words.

And in the FWIW as well as the FYI departments, Joe also tells me that what he meant in his footnote by "'disciple' [not "pupil"] of Wells" was, to quote him, " 'of the same ilk,' not slavish follower".

Jeffrey

So of course Earl has to be doing something other than making a factual claim that he means to be taken as true when he says that he was never invited to be involved in any way in the JP. For if it is otherwise – if he did intend his claim to be an assertion of fact – then plainly he has distorted the truth and has misrepresented what actually is– and what he knows to be -- the case.

Jeffrey

Toto · 10-30-2009, 01:53 PM

Hi Jeffrey, welcome back.

We went through this all before. The Jesus Project allowed anyone to be in the audience, and IIRC that is the invitation that Robert Price issued at that time - to attend.

But this is all water under the bridge at this point, a bridge that Hoffman seems to want to burn, if I can mix metaphors.

Do you have any comments on current events? I think Earl wanted to send you a review copy of his book.

Solo · 10-30-2009, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Paul says that God revealed his son in him. Of course, I doubt that this actually happened this way, for obvious reasons, but Paul does refer to scripture quite often.

What do you think Paul refers to when he says that the son was revealed 'in him' ? or that he has Jesus marks 'on his body' ? Or should the ἐν τῷ σώματί μου in Gal 6:17 be read as 'in my body' ? What do you think ? Would not the 'stigmata' Paul uses in the verse be designed to convey that the Jesus' marks were sort of 'cut into' him rather that surface-branded on him ? These are important nuances, aren't they, if you really want to understand what Paul is saying and to whom it may have been of interest in his own time.

He is bragging in 2 Cor 12 that he was in third heaven as a way to assert his apostleship against competition. This was not a Bible reading skills competition from what I gather.

Quote:

As the case for Paul's Jesus can be twisted out of scripture, and Paul's denial of having learned this from anyone, I see the scripture possibility as the simplest explanation.

Good for you !

And where would you see Paul 'twisting out of the scripture' that the end of the world was coming in his generation ? (don't let maryhelena on this

)

Jiri

dog-on · 10-30-2009, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Paul says that God revealed his son in him. Of course, I doubt that this actually happened this way, for obvious reasons, but Paul does refer to scripture quite often.

What do you think Paul refers to when he says that the son was revealed 'in him' ? or that he has Jesus marks 'on his body' ? Or should the ἐν τῷ σώματί μου in Gal 6:17 be read as 'in my body' ? What do you think ? Would not the 'stigmata' Paul uses in the verse be designed to convey that the Jesus' marks were sort of 'cut into' him rather that surface-branded on him ? These are important nuances, aren't they, if you really want to understand what Paul is saying and to whom it may have been of interest in his own time.

He is bragging in 2 Cor 12 that he was in third heaven as a way to assert his apostleship against competition. This was not a Bible reading skills competition from what I gather.

Quote:

As the case for Paul's Jesus can be twisted out of scripture, and Paul's denial of having learned this from anyone, I see the scripture possibility as the simplest explanation.

Good for you !

And where would you see Paul 'twisting out of the scripture' that the end of the world was coming in his generation ? (don't let maryhelena on this

)

Jiri

"In him" sounds a bit gnostic, but ymmv.

"Like a lion, etc, etc, etc...."

As to Paul's excursion, your insight is truly amazing....

Regarding Paul's apocalyptic desires, he found the mystery hidden for ages past, now revealed, of course it would have been the end times. Of course, not a bad selling point, I might add...

So, you were saying, or was that simply the lord speaking in tongues...

youngalexander · 10-30-2009, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckE99

As far as dating the origin of the fully formed "myth", I defer to archeological evidence. There are no verifiable Christian artifacts until well into the second and third centuries. I'm skeptical of dating a few papyrus fragments by writing style to the early second century.

Not only that but early Christian art is overwhelmingly 4:1 OT:NT & what NT is included?
Why is imagery of the nativity, arrest, trial, carrying cross & empty tomb very late? Ie. >250 C.E.
Why is imagery of the suffering Christ extremely late? Ie. > 325 C.E.
When it does appear it is an exception and very much in a minority.

The archeological evidence of catacombs, art & inscriptions demonstrates a very slow emergence from a pagan background beginning no earlier than 180 CE. The NT storyline only begins to emerge after 250 CE to become more firmly established in the 4th C. Throughout this period the ordinary illiterate Christian masses were sociologically very similar to the pagan milieu which they inhabited.

aa5874 · 10-30-2009, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

...
One question I have about this is where Paul got the name "Jesus" from, if it was all 100% revelation from scripture.

That's the easy part. In the Septuagint, Jesus is the Hellenistic Greek name for Joshua, Moses' lieutenant who brought the Jews into the promised land. Paul appears to have read the Septuagint.

According to the author of Acts of the Apostles, Saul/Paul was introduced to Jesus after a Bolt of bright LIGHT made him blind.

Acts of the Apostles 9.3-6

Quote:

3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

There is no indication any where in the NT or the Church writings that Paul was considered the first to write or know about Jesus.

A Pauline writer claimed there were followers in Christ before him.

Ro 16:7 -

Quote:

Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ BEFORE me.

The Pauline writer has admitted he was not the first to know of Christ.

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

10-30-2009, 10:48 AM	#12
ChuckE99 Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Seattle Area Posts: 116	I'll stick with my pet theory (of course, unsubstantiated) that the Jesus of the Bible is a combination of three things: 1. A narrative story drawn from a variety of sources: Earlier christ cults, the Hebrew Bible (via Paul or whoever), and other early liteature (the Odyssey, possibly) and then set in Roman Palestine. 2. The collected sayings of an unknown prophet (or group) that we see evidence for in GThomas and Q. and, 3. The savior cult beliefs (probably Greek) espoused by "Paul". As far as dating the origin of the fully formed "myth", I defer to archeological evidence. There are no verifiable Christian artifacts until well into the second and third centuries. I'm skeptical of dating a few papyrus fragments by writing style to the early second century. I'd say the myth and the cult of Jesus started within the persecuted ranks of Jews living in Rome. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :devil1:

10-30-2009, 01:53 PM	#16
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Hi Jeffrey, welcome back. We went through this all before. The Jesus Project allowed anyone to be in the audience, and IIRC that is the invitation that Robert Price issued at that time - to attend. But this is all water under the bridge at this point, a bridge that Hoffman seems to want to burn, if I can mix metaphors. Do you have any comments on current events? I think Earl wanted to send you a review copy of his book.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.