FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-24-2012, 09:59 AM   #211
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Originally Posted by*Minimalist*Quote:"Every single source that mentionsJesus up until the 18th centuryassumes that he actually existed."

Im not so sure ehrman's right here. to "exist" implies that for two thousand years jesus was thought to have "come into being" at his birth. that's simply not true. no one but the heretics thought this and only a handful of them. this is what AMERICANS think. that's all. he's appealing to popular ignorance
stephan huller is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 10:33 AM   #212
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
Originally Posted by*Minimalist*Quote:"Every single source that mentionsJesus up until the 18th centuryassumes that he actually existed."

Im not so sure ehrman's right here. to "exist" implies that for two thousand years jesus was thought to have "come into being" at his birth. that's simply not true. no one but the heretics thought this and only a handful of them. this is what AMERICANS think. that's all. he's appealing to popular ignorance
Out with it Stephan - if you are now a mythicist regarding Jesus - say so....

Otherwise - lets have you supporting this statement from your book:

Re Marcus Agrippa (II)

Quote:
His position as Messiah had been proclaimed by Jesus himself during his own ministry, and Marcus Agrippa was present at Jesus’ crucifixion.
The Real Messiah (or via: amazon.co.uk) Stephan Huller
maryhelena is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 10:44 AM   #213
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

I have long said that the story of jesus COULD have been based on a historical person and i still believe that is true. nevertheless i have also come to the conclusion that jesus was originally conceived as a heavemly hypostasis. the person on the cross wasnt jesus (at least originally). irenaeus makes clear that the gospel of mark was written with two separate figures in mind - jesus and christ. tertullian says that the jesus spirit left the guy on the cross at eloi, eloi.

There are ways to piece this together. it just takes time
stephan huller is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 10:49 AM   #214
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
I have long said that the story of jesus COULD have been based on a historical person and i still believe that is true. nevertheless i have also come to the conclusion that jesus was originally conceived as a heavemly hypostasis. the person on the cross wasnt jesus (at least originally). irenaeus makes clear that the gospel of mark was written with two separate figures in mind - jesus and christ. tertullian says that the jesus spirit left the guy on the cross at eloi, eloi.

There are ways to piece this together. it just takes time
So which is it now - Marcus Julius Agrippa (II) was present at the crucifixion of the gospel JC - or the gospel JC is a "heavenly hypostasis" i.e mythical. And come now - there is no "could" about your statement in your book:

Re Marcus Agrippa (II)

Quote:
His position as Messiah had been proclaimed by Jesus himself during his own ministry, and Marcus Agrippa was present at Jesus’ crucifixion.
The Real Messiah (or via: amazon.co.uk) Stephan Huller

How about a straight answer this time?

PS - how about a quotation re the "could" - that Jesus "could" be based upon a historical person.
maryhelena is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 11:19 AM   #215
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

The question of who is mark has little to do with the question of who is jesus
stephan huller is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 11:35 AM   #216
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
The question of who is mark has little to do with the question of who is jesus
Mark???? I never mentioned any Mark...

Stephan, I won't keep this up - your obviously not going to give a straight answer here.

In an earlier post you mentioned a new book coming out that will deal with a mythical Jesus. Since this seems to be in direct opposition to the position taken in your book - The Real Messiah - I asked for clarification on your current position. Your title for that book - The Real Messiah suggests that the christian messiah figure, the gospel JC, was not the 'real' messiah - that the real messiah was Marcus Julius Agrippa (II). For that position to be upheld - obviously, the comparison must be between two flesh and blood figures. NOW - you are going the mythical route for Jesus - I have no problem with people changing their mind - but I do have a problem when people don't put their cards on the table.

As far as I can now tell - your now a Jesus mythicist - albeit a closet one - maybe until that new book comes out.....Stephan Huller going to give us the definitive mythicist argument....now that is a turn for the books.....

Oh, and by the way - don't forget to acknowledge all the hard work by the mythicists on FRDB that helped you along the way....:constern01:
maryhelena is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 11:48 AM   #217
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

There are no certainties here. if you are writing books for a general readership you cant carry on three ot four discussions at the same time. the real messiah was about mark. there are traditions about mark which say he was a disciple of jesus. i chose to follow those traditions and ignore others. oden did the opposite in his african memory of mark. my next book will be about jesus
stephan huller is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 11:53 AM   #218
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
There are no certainties here. if you are writing books for a general readership you cant carry on three ot four discussions at the same time. the real messiah was about mark. there are traditions about mark which say he was a disciple of jesus. i chose to follow those traditions and ignore others. oden did the opposite in his african memory of mark. my next book will be about jesus
A mythical Jesus as opposed to the flesh and blood Jesus that you wrote about in The Real Messiah?

Come on Stephan - stop playing word games here.

How about a straight answer to this question - are you, Stephan Huller, now a mythicist regarding the gospel Jesus?
maryhelena is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 12:00 PM   #219
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Jesus was not the focus of that book. i am not a card carrying "mythicist." i just think i can add something to the discussion
stephan huller is offline  
Old 03-24-2012, 12:08 PM   #220
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
Jesus was not the focus of that book. i am not a card carrying "mythicist." i just think i can add something to the discussion
Actually, Stephan, I don't have a card either.....

Oh, well, since there is no straight answer coming from you regarding the question: Stephan Huller are you a mythicist regarding the gospel Jesus - I'll just have to view you as in the closet.......until your definitive book on Jesus mythicism comes out.....:grin:

PS - just had a look on your website blog - so the new book is : The Myth of Jesus Christ......?
maryhelena is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:36 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.