freetrader

If you start from the premise that Jesus really did perform miracle cures and that his resurrection really did take place, then you have a clear-cut explanation for how the New Testament came about and how the early Jewish-Christian cult spread so rapidly.

Even if the gospel accounts are inaccurate on the details (as most written accounts were in those days), there is still the need to explain how these accounts came to be written and all the claims in them came to be put forth and propagated.

If there is no truth to the basic picture of Jesus as a miracle-worker who did cures on a uniquely-grand scale, or to the resurrection story, then how did this collection of writings come about which makes all these claims?

There were many writings back then, but where in them do we find such a figure, an individual in history near to the time when the documents were written, who is singled out this way and made into a god (not by himself but by others)? There were various messiahs and charismatic figures, most of whom had much longer public careers than Jesus and far more time to accumulate a following, and yet they had no impact comparable to that of Jesus.

And whereas each messiah or charismatic figure attracted a limited following, i.e., a group which identified with the leader's particular crusade or mission, in the case of Jesus virtually all the competing factions became attached to him, e.g., the anti-establishment zealots and Essenes as well as the pro-establishment pharisees, all of whom put their words into his mouth, to the point that they have him virtually contradicting himself from one sermon to the next.

Sometimes he talks like a mainline traditional Jew, but other times like a dissident Jew who bashes the traditions and those who rigidly observe the rituals, and then at other points he sounds like a Greek mystic or gnostic who cares nothing about Judaism. And also at points he is a violent revolutionary (the "cleansing" of the temple) who wants to overthrow the government.

How did this one individual become the mouthpiece for all these differing sentiments or philosophical visions? Why did every group want to seize upon him as an instrument to promote their crusade?

Even today competing ideologies or crusades claim Jesus really belongs in their camp and argue that he was really a this or a that, each one insisting they have the real Jesus and all the others have distorted what he was really about.

What lies at the center of this confused picture, if not an actual miracle-worker who showed the kind of power described in the healing stories? and one who did this on such a scale as to make him stand out uniquely above all the other reputed miracle-workers or healers during this period of history or even any time since?

This hypothesis explains the picture we have of Jesus, with all the differing factions wanting to use him for their mouthpiece. Whereas if we assume he was only another charismatic or wise sage or radical dissident with no unique characteristic setting him apart from all the others, we are at a loss to explain the picture of him we find in the NT accounts.

2-J

J P Holding is that you

But seriously, have a read of this if you haven't already: http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...er/improbable/ the book 'Not The Impossible Faith' also expands on that article.

show_no_mercy

Christianity spread primarily among 2nd and 3rd generation Greeks who were far removed from the events when they were supposed to have happened. The culture that these converts came from was one where they were already used to worshipping human beings as gods (the Roman emperors). Christianity did not spread among the Jews, and was not popular when Jesus was supposed to have lived and in the one or two decades after.

It wasn't until Christianity started being spread among gentiles and Judaism was responsible for two (or three) huge wars with the Roman Empire that Christianity started becoming popular. Just about everyone in the Roman empire respected the antiquity of the Jews, just not the Jews themselves. What if you stole the antiquity of the Jews and made a more acceptable religion from it mixed with a human being as both god and caesar? That would become an insanely popular religion during that time period.

If Jesus was the wandering miracle worker with an insanely huge fanbase then why don't we see any records of anyone contemporary to Jesus that knows anything about him? Not even Paul knows anything about Jesus other than the "scripturally" significant bits (i.e. no miracles or wisdom sayings). No Jewish person who lived during Jesus' time period (like Philo) writes about him, Josephus "writes" what is basically a marginal gloss about Jesus (maybe a Christian who copied Josephus' works wrote in a margin a snippet about Jesus and was later incorporated into the main body), even being generous there's no Roman account of this popular miracle worker until around 120 CE.

According to the gospels, Jesus was so popular that Herod the tetrarch of Judaea was anxious to see him - yet outside of the gospels he's a nobody.

bacht

Where are the witnesses? According to the gospels, Jesus performed miracles before large crowds of people, presumably including some gentiles. No-one said anything about it for decades, and then only the christian Mark describes his earthly career. Jews never mentioned him in the Mishnah.

Your idea that a wonder-worker may not have been a consistent teacher seems reasonable enough. But then there are all the epistles to harmonize with.

mountainman

'This man, named after Apollo,
and shining forth Tyana,
extinguished the faults of men.
The tomb in Tyana (received) his body,
but in truth heaven received him
so that he might drive out the pains of men
(or:drive pains from among men) .'

--- Ancient inscription, translated C. P. Jones

Doug Shaver

Yes, of course. If you assume your conclusion, then any further discussion of whether anyone should believe your conclusion is pointless. You know you're right, and there is no way for anyone to prove you wrong.

I have my own ideas as to how they came to be written and propagated. I doubt you would find them credible, though, since you assume that the stories are all true except for a few details which, I'm sure, you would insist are entirely irrelevant.

How does it ever come about that people believe any stories that happen not to be factual? Are you actually under the impression that people in general never believe stories except when they're true?

You're assuming that the stories are about a man who actually lived. I don't assume that.

Maybe their followers didn't have the marketing skills of Jesus' followers?

That suggests that there were no reliable accounts of what the man actually said about anything.

Because it was alleged that he was the son of god. Religious people at all times and in all places have tried one way or another to claim that their teachings came either straight from God himself or, which is more or less the same thing, from someone authorized to speak on God's behalf.

Yep. The founders of Christianity, whoever they really were, did a great sales job. They convinced the whole western world that this man had something to say that everybody was obliged to agree with.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Freetrader,

How do we explain that Superman has been in far more comic books, movies and television shows than any other comic book hero? If we start from the premise that there really was a Superman from the planet Krypton, who performed super deeds that would explain it.

On the other hand, we might try the psychological explanation that the character represented a pleasing, malleable fantasy that could be adapted to a number of situations.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

storytime

What if Herod had his own scribes to record events for the purpose of reporting to Rome what the Jews were doing? If the population of Jews were numbered and sent to Rome, taxes reported, whatever, it seems that a super miracle worker with the ability to heal the sick and restore the sight of the blind would have been on the top of Herods list for Caesar's empire. I would imagine that Herod would have personally escorted Jesus to meet with all leaders in Rome and Jesus would have received very special recognition deserved as a physician in Caesars assembly of doctors.

I think nothing nowhere found means nothing nowhere in reporting the supernatural works of Jesus, or even his disciples. All is quiet on that eastern front, so to speak.

WVIncagold

Yes lets assume magic actually exists........................................nope can not do it.

mountainman

Yes Doug, but they left their paw prints in the Theodosian Codex
in the forms of recorded laws which were enacted by the rulers
of various periods and binding on the populace, for example:

The Year 326 CE - Immediately following Nicaea
Codex Theodosianus Book 16.5.1

"Religious privileges are reserved for Christians."

Wearing our standard issue "Christian Glasses" we cannot see
that the Emperor Constantine The Great was not in fact Great.
Constantine was a fascist. Do you understand what this implies?
Before Mussolini, Constantine's modus operandi was fascist.
Take off the "Christian Glasses" and the Hellenistic civilisation
and all its glory which was rediscovered in the Age of Enlightenment
will be waiting to be perceived in its death throes.

If it had not been for Christianity we may have been out
passed Alpha-Centauri by now.