Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Amaleq13 · 02-15-2008, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schilling.klaus

There's still Philippans 2:5-11 which is often considered as a pre-Pauline form.
Alas, it's been doubted whether the mention of the cross is original to that hymn.

Klaus Schilling

I don't recall the name of the scholar but it has been suggested that this was added by Paul, himself.

Amaleq13 · 02-15-2008, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But there is no quality evidence that anyone knew Jesus in the first place. There is just no credible non-apologetic source that can support Jesus of Nazareth.

So, who knew Jesus?

Please avoid introducing the tangent of mythicism and focus on the OP. And do not respond to this warning in-thread.

Thanks in advance,

Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

JoeWallack · 02-15-2008, 04:54 PM

The Ballad of John and Luko

JW:
Next, let's consider:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...ter-brown.html

Quote:

The Gospel of Peter
...

[10] And they brought two wrongdoers and crucified the Lord in the middle of them. But he was silent as having no pain. [11] And when they had set the cross upright, they inscribed that THIS IS THE KING OF ISRAEL. [12] And having put his garments before him, they divided them up and threw as a gamble for them. [13] But a certain one of those wrongdoers reviled them, saying: 'We have been made suffer thus because of the wrong that we have done; but this one, having become Savior of men, what injustice had he done to you?' [14] And having become irritated at him, they ordered that there be no leg-breaking, so that he might die tormented.

...

[25] Then the Jews and the elders and the priests, having come to know how much wrong they had done themselves, began to beat themselves and say: 'Woe to our sins. The judgment has approached and the end of Jerusalem.' [26] But I with the companions was sorrowful; and having been wounded in spirit, we were in hiding, for we were sought after by them as wrongdoers and as wishing to set fire to the sanctuary. [27] In addition to all these things we were fasting; and we were sitting mourning and weeping night and day until the Sabbath.
...

[58] Now it was the final day of the Unleavened Bread; and many went out returning to their home since the feast was over. [59] But we twelve disciples of the Lord were weeping and sorrowful; and each one, sorrowful because of what had come to pass, departed to his home. [60] But I, Simon Peter, and my brother Andrew, having taken our nets, went off to the sea. And there was with us Levi of Alphaeus whom the Lord ...

JW:
The above seems to be a Direct, first-hand claim by Peter that Jesus was crucified. Too bad Christianity confesses to us that it is Forged. For that matter, there is no shortage of Forged first-hand claims that Jesus was crucified. Amazingly, Christians and even Christian Familiars often take this Type of Forged evidence, "non-Canonical" Gospels, as evidence that Jesus was crucified. But shouldn't it be evidence of the opposite, that Jesus was not crucified?

Summary so far:

1) No extant claim of Jesus' crucifixion Before Paul.

2) Paul never claims Jesus' crucifixion while Contemporary to Paul.

3) Paul claims Jesus' crucifixion based on Revelation.

4) Paul never claims that Historical witness claimed Jesus' crucifixion.

5) Paul gives no Details for the crucifixion.

6) Paul's related General comment, that Jesus was crucified by the Rulers of the age, seems like the basis for Subsequent Christian claims of Who crucified Jesus.

7) The Historical witness for Jesus, Q, makes no mention of crucifixion.

8) Abundance of universally recognized Forged claims that Jesus was crucified.

Joseph

REVELATION, n.
A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing.

The Papias Smear, Changes in sell Structure. Evidence for an Original Second Century Gospel.

Amaleq13 · 02-15-2008, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

2) Paul never claims Jesus' crucifixion while Contemporary to Paul.

I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain, please?

JoeWallack · 02-16-2008, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

2) Paul never claims Jesus' crucifixion while Contemporary to Paul.

I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain, please?

JW:
I didn't think anyone was reading this shit. Good one. It should be:

Paul never claims Jesus' crucifixion while Contemporary to Jesus.

Paul writes that he persecuted followers of Jesus before his Conversion. So presumably he knew what their basic beliefs were (sound familiar?). The following seems Typical of Paul's knowledge of Jesus' crucifixion:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/1_Corinthians_2

Quote:

2:1 And I, brethren, when I came unto you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God.
2:2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
2:3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
2:4 And my speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
2:5 that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
2:6 We speak wisdom, however, among them that are fullgrown: yet a wisdom not of this world, nor of the rulers of this world, who are coming to nought:
2:7 but we speak God`s wisdom in a mystery, [even] the [wisdom] that hath been hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds unto our glory:
2:8 which none of the rulers of this world hath known: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory:
2:9 but as it is written, Things which eye saw not, and ear heard not, And [which] entered not into the heart of man, Whatsoever things God prepared for them that love him.
2:10 But unto us God revealed [them] through the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
2:11 For who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him? even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.
2:12 But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God; that we might know the things that were freely given to us of God.
2:13 Which things also we speak, not in words which man`s wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth; combining spiritual things with spiritual [words].
2:14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged.
2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man.
2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Note:
"2:2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified."

Paul is intentionally avoiding saying other things about Jesus in order to emphasize the supposed crucifixion. The Key question for this Thread is:

What is the Relationship between Paul's "knowledge" of the crucifixion and Historical witness to the crucifixion?:

1) Paul's Revelation confirms for him the Historical claim of the crucifixion and it's Significance?

2) Paul's Revelation confirms for him the Historical claim of the crucifixion and Creates it's Significance?

3) Paul's Revelation Creates the Claim of the crucifixion and it's Significance?

In 1 Corinthians it looks like 3). The above indicates that Jesus' supposed crucifixion was the most important Assertian for Paul. Yet, at the end of 1 Corinthians:

Quote:

15:1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand,
15:2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain.
15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
15:4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;
15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve;
15:6 then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep;
15:7 then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles;
15:8 and last of all, as to the [child] untimely born, he appeared to me also.
15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not found vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
15:11 Whether then [it be] I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

where Paul's point is to show how his Revelation is Confirmed by historical witness, there is no Assertian that Historical witness claimed Jesus was crucified.

Joseph

REVELATION, n.
A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing.

The Papias Smear, Changes in sell Structure. Evidence for an Original Second Century Gospel.

Amaleq13 · 02-16-2008, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

I didn't think anyone was reading this shit.

Always. And not just because it is my job as a mod.

Thanks for the clarification.

Quote:

Paul writes that he persecuted followers of Jesus before his Conversion. So presumably he knew what their basic beliefs were (sound familiar?).

Yes. Words of wisdom.

Quote:

...there is no Assertian that Historical witness claimed Jesus was crucified.

Good point. Just "died" rather than "crucified" or even "killed" or "sacrificed".

Really just a tiny step away from Q's arguably dead-in-some-fashion Jesus toward, but considerably short of, the Gospel's explicitly described crucified Jesus.

JoeWallack · 02-17-2008, 10:43 AM

JW:
Now let's look at the apparent author of the original crucifixion narrative, "Mark", and see how he describes supposed historical witness Reaction to the crucifixion:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Mark_8

Quote:

8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
8:32 And he spake the saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.
8:33 But he turning about, and seeing his disciples, rebuked Peter, and saith, Get thee behind me, Satan; for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.
8:34 And he called unto him the multitude with his disciples, and said unto them, If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
8:35 For whosoever would save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel`s shall save it.
8:36 For what doth it profit a man, to gain the whole world, and forfeit his life?
8:37 For what should a man give in exchange for his life?
8:38 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of man also shall be ashamed of him, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

JW:
Compare to:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/1_Corinthians_15

"15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

15:4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;"

Assertians here of Paul:

1) Christ died.

2) Death was a Sacrifice ("for our sins")

3) 2) was according to Scripture

4) Christ Buried.

5) Christ raised on the third day.

6) 5) was according to Scripture

Note again that Paul has no mention here of Crucifixion. Now, the related Predictions of "Mark's" Jesus:

1) Be rejected by the Leaders.

2) Son of man will die.

3) 2) is according to Scripture ("must")

4) Son of man raised after three days.

5) 4) is according to Scripture ("must")

Note the similarity of the prediction of "Mark's" Jesus to Paul. Neither mentions the crucifixion. After the First Passion prediction Peter Opposes Jesus.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Mark_9

9:9 "And as they were coming down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, save when the Son of man should have risen again from the dead."

With this reference to the Passion "Mark's" Jesus instructs the Disciples not to proclaim that Jesus was/is/will be the son of god until after the resurrection. Now who was it who did not proclaim Jesus as the son of god until after the resurrection? Doug?

9:31 "For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered up into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and when he is killed, after three days he shall rise again.
9:32 But they understood not the saying, and were afraid to ask him."

The second Passion prediction. No mention of crucifixion.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Mark_10

10:32 "And they were on the way, going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus was going before them: and they were amazed; and they that followed were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them the things that were to happen unto him,
10:33 [saying], Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests and the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him unto the Gentiles:
10:34 and they shall mock him, and shall spit upon him, and shall scourge him, and shall kill him; and after three days he shall rise again."

The third Passion prediction. More details as they get "closer" but still no mention of the crucifixion.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Mark_16

"16:3 And they were saying among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the tomb?

16:4 and looking up, they see that the stone is rolled back: for it was exceeding great.

16:5 And entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, arrayed in a white robe; and they were amazed.

16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not amazed: ye seek Jesus, the Nazarene, who hath been crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold, the place where they laid him!

16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, He goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.

16:8 And they went out, and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them: and they said nothing to any one; for they were afraid."

JW:
And so the young man has moved the great stone/rock out of The Way so that followers may get to the crucified and resurrected Jesus (understand Dear Reader?).

And the Last in the story is the First to preach a Crucified Jesus (Paul).

Historically Paul was the "witness" who never preached Jesus as son of god or crucified before Jesus' supposed Passion. After the Passion Paul preached both. "Mark" took this Historical observation of Paul and used it for his story. "Mark's" Jesus instructs:

1) Do not Identify Jesus as Messiah during his Ministry.

2) Promote Jesus as son of god based on his Passion, after the Passion.

It is Paul who follows the instructions of "Mark's" Jesus, as Contrasted by Peter and the Disciples who do the Opposite. As "Mark" is using Paul to flesh out a Narrative, since Paul lacks mention of crucifixion in his Passion description "Mark's" Jesus also lacks mention in his Passion prediction. For Paul, a crucified Christ is based on Revelation and not historical witness and that is why "Mark's" Jesus does not predict it to supposed Historical witness.

Joseph

REVELATION, n.
A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing.

The Papias Smear, Changes in sell Structure. Evidence for an Original Second Century Gospel.

JoeWallack · 02-19-2008, 07:06 AM

The Ballad of John and Luko

JW:

Summary of the argument that Paul was the First to Assert that Jesus was Crucified:

Weakness of potential Historical witness evidence:

1) No extant writing by first-hand Historical witness asserting crucifixion.

2) Paul never claims Jesus' crucifixion while Contemporary to Jesus.

3) Potential second-hand Historical witness Paul, never asserts that first-hand Historical witness asserted crucifixion.

4) Paul does not provide any details for the crucifixion.

5) The best potential extant historical witness, Q, makes no mention of crucifixion.

6) Subsequent Christian crucifixion Assertians seem to use Paul as a primary source.

7) The first known crucifixion narrative, in "Mark", in General has an anti-historical witness attitude and Specifically casts the best potential first-hand witness, Jesus' Disciples, as opposing the idea/prediction of Jesus' Passion, never understanding/accepting the need and not witnessing the crucifixion or subsequently promoting Jesus after.

8) Christianity is blessed with multiple Forged claims of first-hand witness to the crucifixion (I have Faith that every Ruler of the Age is covered here, Peter, Caiphais, Herod, Pilate as well as the Ending of "Mark", Amen).

9) "Mark's" related narrative is smeared with implausibility indicating a lack of historical Details.

10) Subsequent crucifixion narratives closely follow "Mark" indicating lack of available historical witness.

11) Common sense, always the best argument, tells us that if Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem it's Unlikely his movement would have been permitted to promote him in Jerusalem.

Strength of potential Revelation witness evidence:

1) Paul's emphasis in General is on Revelation as opposed to Historical witness.

2) Specifically, Paul claims the crucifixion is a Mystery understood by Revelation.

3) "Mark's" crucifixion narrative uses Paul's related ideas as a primary source.

4) Christian authors subsequent to Paul, including "Mark", use the Jewish Bible as a primary source for details about the crucifixion.

Thus we have it on good Authority that it is Likely that Paul was the First to Assert the significance of the supposed crucifixion and Possible that Paul was the First to assert that Jesus was crucified.

Joseph

REVELATION, n.
A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing.

The Papias Smear, Changes in sell Structure. Evidence for an Original Second Century Gospel.

mg01 · 02-19-2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/1_Corinthians_15

"15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

15:4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;"

What "scriptures" is "Paul" refering to? Is there a particular OT passage that is being drawn from here? If not the OT, do these verses refer to some version of the passion narrative? If Paul is really pre-gospels, could this indicate an early narrative pre-Mark? Or, is Paul later and refering to the same gospel tradition we're familiar with? Or, are these verses later additions to Paul?

Toto · 02-19-2008, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mg01

Quote:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/1_Corinthians_15

"15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

15:4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;"

What "scriptures" is "Paul" refering to? Is there a particular OT passage that is being drawn from here? If not the OT, do these verses refer to some version of the passion narrative? If Paul is really pre-gospels, could this indicate an early narrative pre-Mark? Or, is Paul later and refering to the same gospel tradition we're familiar with? Or, are these verses later additions to Paul?

"According to the scriptures" refers to the Hebrew scriptures. Christians used a non-standard way of reading the Hebrew Scriptures, so there is no reason to assume that there will be an obvious reference to rising on the third day, but some people connect the third day to the three days Jonah spent in the belly of the great fish.

There is a reference to this non-standard reading in Luke 24

Quote:

25 He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

* * *

30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. 32 They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"

* * *

44 He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."

45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high."

It appears that one cannot understand the meaning of the Scriptures until one's mind has been "opened."

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

02-19-2008, 07:06 AM	#28
JoeWallack Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Nazareth Posts: 2,357	The Ballad of John and Luko JW: Summary of the argument that Paul was the First to Assert that Jesus was Crucified: Weakness of potential Historical witness evidence: 1) No extant writing by first-hand Historical witness asserting crucifixion. 2) Paul never claims Jesus' crucifixion while Contemporary to Jesus. 3) Potential second-hand Historical witness Paul, never asserts that first-hand Historical witness asserted crucifixion. 4) Paul does not provide any details for the crucifixion. 5) The best potential extant historical witness, Q, makes no mention of crucifixion. 6) Subsequent Christian crucifixion Assertians seem to use Paul as a primary source. 7) The first known crucifixion narrative, in "Mark", in General has an anti-historical witness attitude and Specifically casts the best potential first-hand witness, Jesus' Disciples, as opposing the idea/prediction of Jesus' Passion, never understanding/accepting the need and not witnessing the crucifixion or subsequently promoting Jesus after. 8) Christianity is blessed with multiple Forged claims of first-hand witness to the crucifixion (I have Faith that every Ruler of the Age is covered here, Peter, Caiphais, Herod, Pilate as well as the Ending of "Mark", Amen). 9) "Mark's" related narrative is smeared with implausibility indicating a lack of historical Details. 10) Subsequent crucifixion narratives closely follow "Mark" indicating lack of available historical witness. 11) Common sense, always the best argument, tells us that if Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem it's Unlikely his movement would have been permitted to promote him in Jerusalem. Strength of potential Revelation witness evidence: 1) Paul's emphasis in General is on Revelation as opposed to Historical witness. 2) Specifically, Paul claims the crucifixion is a Mystery understood by Revelation. 3) "Mark's" crucifixion narrative uses Paul's related ideas as a primary source. 4) Christian authors subsequent to Paul, including "Mark", use the Jewish Bible as a primary source for details about the crucifixion. Thus we have it on good Authority that it is Likely that Paul was the First to Assert the significance of the supposed crucifixion and Possible that Paul was the First to assert that Jesus was crucified. Joseph REVELATION, n. A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing. The Papias Smear, Changes in sell Structure. Evidence for an Original Second Century Gospel.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.