outhouse

im following mainstream scholarships based on solid evidence


to use a statement like yours above and then claim this

is a bit hypocritical is it not???

Grog

I do think that is open for debate. Why wouldn't it be debatable? What credible source are you going to cite to support your claim that "Jesus hated romans?" Even if the Gospels make that claim, directly or indirectly, how do we know the Gospel writer, the chronicler (for the moment) recorded Jesus's thoughts, feelings, actions accurately? How do we know that what we read of Jesus's thoughts on Romans do not more accurately reflect the thoughts of the chronicler?

You have a naive understanding of oral tradition. I recommend Teeple's 1970's paper for a beginning understanding of oral tradition. Also, the site oral tradition dot org has many good articles, including one whole journal dedicated to christianity and oral tradition. However, to summarize some of the main points that I find most compelling: Oral tradition is not indepedent of a literary tradition. Oral tradition depends on the authority of a literary traditon. IN pure oral traditions (which doesn't really apply in the environment of hellenistic judaism of the first century), there is a problem with precision (lacking authority) and accuracy (in the service of authority). So to say that there was this "oral tradition" that existed that at some point in time was written down faithfully as close as possible to how it originally occurred in Real Time is truly naive.

Try an experiment. Pick out a Youtube video on a topic. Maybe even one on the historical Jesus. Watch it one time...make it short, like 10 minutes. Then transcribe it word for word. See how accurately you can come to what was actually said.

Now, consider: an illiterate follower of Jesus witnesses an event, a sermon (on a plain, on a mount, in a train, wherever), then later recounts it from memory word for word and then that is passed on from memory word for word, etc. How accurate could that possibly be? Now, consider, 12 illiterate followers of Jesus all doing the same thing! Could they possibly reconcile what they heard? Whose biases will win out in the resulting debates over what happened?

Are we, then, even at the earliest stage getting a good approximation of what Jesus may have said or done? I think it highly unlikely that oral tradition could preserve any of these events accurately and precisely over the course of a few hours let alone 40 years.


Perhaps you could enlighten me on what you think I don't know.

outhouse

3 questions all dealing with my one statement. lets break it down.


Jesus was a poor peasant living in poverty, raised by parents in backwoods Galilee who were probably not home owners. We was a hard working hand laborer who possibly helped build Sepphoris.

When jeus was a child theres was a tax revolt in Galilee in which 3000 were killed and another 6000 sent to slavery by romans. this could have very been family and friends to jesus family, shortly after jesus death there was another tax war.

Romans were taxing these poor slobs to death and keeping jesus, and his family in extreme poverty. Taxes were raised in the area during jesus life due to the cost associated with building not only the "gem of Galilee" Sepphoris but Tiberias as well.

With the influx of over 8000 people to Sepphoris extra labor was required a long with extra taxes. So we have increased work rates, and if quotas were not met and taxes not paid they would take your property away if you had any property at all! and or condemned you to slavery.

These were oppressed people under the heavy roman hand, and fighting was not a option and jesus knew this. Romans were excellent at extorting taxes out of a culture to the brink of collapse of said cultures.


this is the anthropology behind the scenes of the biblical literature. Romans were in fact jesus enemy and the enemy to all poor jewish people kept in poverty.

outhouse

why would they?

roman eyes of a poor jew, were only getting a few parables through the editing proccess

outhouse

history tells you what poor jews thought of romans in general.


the unknown authors who never met or knew jesus or heard a word pass his lips, writing for a roman audience would get it accurate why??

outhouse

already read some of it, theres better.

Grog

You've only told us what a poor, Jewish peasant in general would have thought about Romans and Roman rule. My specific area of history is peasant revolt and I don't have any problems with what you say here. However, that does not tell us what "Jesus" did feel toward the Romans or even if there WAS a Jesus of the gospel stories. It could be...try this on for size...that Jesus's immediate family, being a carpenter family, found significant work with the Romans and maybe would have, maybe not felt deep affection for, at least saw an accommodation with Roman rule an advantage. Artisans do not necessarily share the interests of peasants, and it seems to me, that if we have any biographical information at all (I don't believe we do) it indicates that Jesus was the son of an artisan and was probably trained as an artisan as well.

I am certainly not arguing that Jesus and his family did not hate Romans. My argument is that we don't know. If this not debatable, it is due to lack of credible evidence, not to the existence of overwhelming, indisputable evidence.

Grog

citations would be helpful. And also, specifics in regard to Teeple would be helpful. I'm sure there's better, there's always better. This one is a good entry point though.

Toto

I don't understand your difficulty here.

Marcion published, or produced, or promulgated, the first attempt at a canon - including the Apostilikon, consisting of 10 Pauline epistles. Why do we think we know this? Because his enemies attacked him for it. And we have no indication that there was a previous version.

This is the basic consensus on the matter, shared by Christians and secular scholars. If you think there is a problem with this, you need to explain why. Why would Marcion's opponents accuse him of publishing the Apostolikon? What is your alternate explanation of the evidence?

outhouse

except for a few problems in your context.

Tekton means handworker in this case. These were poor people below the average peasant who were not homeowners.


take into account of who jesus surrounded himself with which were what amounts to be the lowest scum of the Galilee. Tax collector, crazy lady possibly a prostitue, and some fisherman who at that time were a very low class of peole . He surrounded himself with what amounts to pirates lol, not a aristocratical crowd of a artisan.


the fact he possibly came from Nazareth shows you he was living in poverty, like the rest of the poor peasants.