dog-on

What is simpler than saying that either Mark or Paul created the central figure?

aa5874

And, bearing in mind also that the early Church writers like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen and Eusebius, who wrote the history of the Church, fundamentally agreed with the stories about Jesus as stated in the NT, including his Holy Ghost conception, transfiguration, raising from the DEAD, and ascension through the clouds.

HJers would like MJers to think that, during the 1st century, all non-apologists would have ignored HJ and all apologist would have embellished or fictionalised him, while at the same time, these very apologist potray themselves as HONEST Christians that want to be in heaven with this heavily embellished Jesus, who sat on the right hand of God.

I find it untenable that Christians would knowingly fabricate events about HJ that they know are not true. And I find it incredible that a Christian would write letters about revelations from HJ after he [HJ]was DEAD.

The simplest explanation is that some unknown writer/writers fabricated stories about Jesus and at some time afterwards these stories were believed to be true.

More and more persons were DUPED and more stories were fabricated, the deception coninued until the erroneous belief became the official BELIEF of ROME under Constantine.

gstafleu

Yes, I agree that this is an interesting question. As the crucifixion is mentioned in the early documents we are not looking for explanations based on whether the Sanhedrin was trying to pass the buck to Pilate or vice versa. Rather, the challenge for MJ is to answer the question: why would it make sense to have a mythical being be killed by crucifixion?

I won't pretend to have the answer for this, but I'll give a couple of possibilities just to show it can be done. First one extracted from a concept of general mythology: the axis mundi. Joseph Campbell e.g. thinks that this is what the crucifixion may represent. Note in this context that there are a number of places where Christ is "hung on a tree."

If this is too general for you, here is another possibility. We do not know exactly who executed Christ, it could be devils, humans, the infamous archontes... you name it. We can agree, though, that Christ was executed by "the bad guys." Now the docs were written during the Roman occupation of Palestine, and the favorite method by which the Romans executed opponents was crucifixion. Well then, what better way to show exactly how bad these bad guys were than having them adopt the method of execution of the hated occupiers. Not only does this highlight the badness of the bad guys, it also emphasizes how grateful we should be to Christ (and by extension God) for going through all this.

More research will no doubt have to be done before this question is settled. But I think I have shown that it is by no means impossible to come up with a reasonable FBI explanation for the crucifixion.

gerard Stafleu

gstafleu

Sorry, but just calling it "sophistry" doesn't accomplish much, you'll have to address my argument rather than giving it a convenient label.
We agree, clearly that FBI is part of the puzzle. Let's take a step back then to just before the start of the debate. We agree there is a mythical part to the Jesus story. The possibility is raised that there also is a historical component. So we start off with a situation where we posit a Composite Jesus, CJ, part mythical, part historical. To put it succinctly, we have CJ(M=?%,H=?%). We now have to figure out the percentages.

Someone who posits a minimal HJ would have something like CJ(M=95%,H=5%), or fill in your own percentages. My suggestion however, is CJ(M=100%,H=0%). Because I propose H=0% I do in fact not have a historical component, while you do: the historical component is "extra" to your version. But you cannot say that my mythical component is "extra" to my version, because you also have a mythical component. So my argument is certainly not sophistry: the fact that we both share the mythical, FBI, component, means that it is not "extra" to either side.
Why? We know that human inventiveness is pretty inventive. We have lots of examples where the central figure of a story has been invented as well. The only way you can pull this one off is if you can demonstrate that all (or most) such stories start with a historical figure. That is Euhemerism. What evidence to you have that Euhemerism holds?

Gerard Stafleu

aa5874

You seem not to understand that the entity in the NT is presented as a God/ Man, that is the Mythical figure of the NT, a God/Man called Jesus Christ.

The God/Man entity had human characteristics and was also the son of the God of the Jews that pre-existed before the world was created, at the same time.

The Myth of the NT is a God/Man.

And your question have already been answered by Paul; so that Jesus could be raised from the DEAD. Jesus the MYTHICAL God/Man died for your sins, and He is coming back again. Only Myths can do that--come back again for the DEAD.

1 Thessalonians 4.16 Pure Myth.

HJ IS DEAD.

gstafleu

Well yes, but the question still remains: why kill him by crucifixion rather than by some other method. If you can kill a God/Man by crucifixion, you can presumably also do it by chopping off his head. Why prefer crucifixion?
That explains why he was killed, not how he was killed.

Gerard Stafleu

spamandham

...because crucifixion fits the descriptions of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22, whereas hanging and stoning do not.

The final words of Jesus on the cross in Mark tell us precisely where the passion story originated. I really don't understand why people make such a fuss over the historical significance of the crucifixion, when it's so obvious the entire passion story is derived from exegesis of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22.

What other contemporary means of death could possibly match those descriptions the way crucifixion could?

aa5874

All the answers to your questions about the MYTH are in the NT.

The authors of the NT wrote stories about a God/Man that was crucified and if you read the NT, the authors gave their reasons that prophecies may be fulfilled, according to the scriptures. Everything about the Mythical God/Man is in the NT from his Holy Ghost conception, ascension through the clouds and his Second Coming.

I do not have to re-construct or fabricate anything.

Look at Matthew 20.18-19 Everything about the MYTH is in the NT, it's all pre-fabricated. And there are four versions of how the MYTH died in the Gospels.

Now, where can I find information about the HJ?

Why did HJ die? And was his death from natural causes when he was an old man? Was he crucified or was his neck chopped off? Did HJ drown while trying to walk on water?

jjramsey

Yet such an explanation has to account for Jesus not even being portrayed as a nazirite. He is even depicted as drinking wine--which nazirites are emphatically not supposed to do. Already, your "easy" explanation runs into difficulties.

Yes, with the Testimonium Flavianum. A case for an interpolation of the much briefer and more neutral reference to James the brother of Jesus is far harder to make. Ben C Smith has already pointed out problems with spin's attempts at arguing for an interpolation.

Nonsense. He is saying that history unrolled as Scripture predicted. Again, more tortured reading.

1. We have no evidence that "brother of the Lord" was a title.
2. There is plenty of evidence that James was understood later on to be a literal brother, even to the point of those believing in Mary's perpetual virginity engaging in tortured readings of the Gospels to argue otherwise.
3. Josephus refers to James as a brother of Jesus, with no indication at all of "brother" being used in a special fashion.

HJers can explain this trivially. MJers' explanations come off as ad hoc by comparison.

aa5874

James' existence has nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus as MJ or HJ.

The NT has already claimed that Mary is the human mother of Jesus and that she was found with child of the Holy Ghost, see Matthew 1.18.. His mother is a witness to his conception and birth.

Even if Jesus, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, had 100 real human brothers and the same amount of sisters, he was witnessed to be seen floating through the clouds on his way to heaven in Acts 1.9