Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dog-on · 06-15-2011, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Are you saying that people would still continue to claim that Popeye did not exist, even if we found a picture of the sailor that the character was based on?

Some people are so committed to the idea that Popeye never existed that the most solid evidence in the world would not convince them that there was a real historical person at the centre of the Popeye stories.

A picture can be forged and is not solid evidence. First place I'd check is the WIKI which indicates that Popeye is pure fiction.

The subject is an alleged human that lived 2000 years ago. What primary, tangible or credible secondary evidence would be needed to convince a dedicated JMer of Jesus' existence.

It would have to be something that overcame the prima facie evidence that the Jesus character was wholly derived from the Septuagint and contemporary Hellenic mythos.

ApostateAbe · 06-15-2011, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenaphobe

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Jesus and Moroni are never said to have penned a single word, and Joseph Smith did.

Almost. Moroni is said to be guardian of the golden plates. Joseph is said to have merely translated them.

Ah, but you and I both know Moroni didn't write or guard anything at all. We both know, Moroni doesn't exist. Mythical beings don't write stuff, people who claim to have been in communion with them often do though.

As an added note, isn't it strange that no one in Jesus' circle of disciples and family wrote or dictated anything about him at all?

We have the rejected gospels of Mary and Peter and others, but how come nothing has ever been uncovered that looks even remotely genuine?

I know absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence, but one would think that a historical person who garnered crowds of 5000 or more people and who got into scuffles with the religious authorities at every turn would have managed to capture some headlines.

Smith is venerated now, but I doubt we could say the same concerning when he was alive and making known his revised gospel.

In the stories about Jesus, he was worshiped by people whom he had contact with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Jesus and Moroni left no artifacts, Smith did.

You got me there.

One out of three ain't bad.

Again, I'm not trying to say that the beginnings of Christianity and Mormonism are totally analogous, but, Smith's venture does seem to lay to rest the old "why would they make it up" argument that apologists are fond of repeating.

If one posits a HJ that no consensus can really be agreed upon, how is that much better than a MJ that no consensus can be reached on? If we know fictional beings have been created and perpetrated as real, it would seem in the absence of a smoking gun, myth might have a thumb on the scales over the historical.

I'm not even going as far as the "Jesus lived and died in a spiritual realm" theory, I'm aiming for a composite character that was shoehorned to try and "fulfill" a creative interpretation of a host religion. Trying to tease out fact from fiction in the genesis of a religion known to be full of forgeries and a generally fast and loose handling of "truth", is quite difficult to say the least.

Anyway, it's fun to put forth a theory and see if it holds water or not. :grin:

OK, thanks for hanging in there with me, Zenaphobe. You proposed that there is no hint that either Jesus or the Angel Moroni wrote anything, and Joseph Smith did, so I will give you that, too. As for the point that Joseph Smith is not explicitly "worshiped," I don't think it is so significant, since he is highly venerated as a prophet and founder, one way or the other. Neither is the Prophet Muhammad "worshiped," but Muslims act just as though he is the most important human being who ever lived. Mormons behave the same with respect for Joseph Smith.

So, Jesus and the Angel Moroni do have a few things in common. You can also say that Jesus and the Angel Moroni are each reputed to be more "divine" in nature than Joseph Smith.

I just don't think that such similarities compete in significance to the point that both Jesus and Joseph Smith are both reputed to be the human founders and first leaders of their respective doomsday cults. Those are the seeming roles that made those two figures important to begin with. That is the commonality that all but defines who they are and their places in history, be they myth or historical people.

You brought up a tangential objection: "...isn't it strange that no one in Jesus' circle of disciples and family wrote or dictated anything about him at all?"

This wouldn't be so strange at all if the circle of Jesus was truly poor, as they were reputed to be (not an unlikely myth since the vast majority of people really were poor). Writing was primarily an activity either of the rich or of organizations. Only 10-15% of people could read, and writing was a job that was always hired out to educated professional scribes--they were the only ones who knew how to write.

aa5874 · 06-15-2011, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Are you saying that people would still continue to claim that Popeye did not exist, even if we found a picture of the sailor that the character was based on?

Some people are so committed to the idea that Popeye never existed that the most solid evidence in the world would not convince them that there was a real historical person at the centre of the Popeye stories.

A picture can be forged and is not solid evidence. First place I'd check is the WIKI which indicates that Popeye is pure fiction.

The subject is an alleged human that lived 2000 years ago. What primary, tangible or credible secondary evidence would be needed to convince a dedicated JMer of Jesus' existence.

What evidence would be needed to convince a dedicated HJer that Jesus was just a STORY that people BELIEVED in antquity just like Christians BELIEVED Marcion's Phantom existed even WITHOUT birth and Flesh?

Again, it is those who allege that Jesus was human and NOT a story that MUST provide the evidence for their allegations.

It is COMPLETELY irrelevant to introduce some a straw argument about "Popeye".

The existence of an historical Popeye NEEDS a SEPARATE and Indepedent Inquiry and the results of the Inquiry cannot be transferred to the historicity of Jesus.

One could be wrong about the existence of Popeye and be right about the non-existence of Jesus and vice-versa.

It is just completely pointless to be ENGAGED in MULTIPLE investigations of characters that have NO bearing at all on Jesus of the NT.

There is one description of Jesus that HJers cannot OVERCOME. Jesus was described as TRULY the Child of a Ghost in the NT CANON.

What other evidence is NEEDED for a dedicated HJer to admit that Jesus was JUST a story that was BELIEVED like Christians BELIEVED Marcion's Phantom actually existed WITHOUT birth and flesh in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius and was actually in Capernaum of Galilee?

There were MANY MANY myth fables that were BELIEVED to be TRUE in antiquity and it is a FACT that people BELIEVED Jesus was REALLY a Child of the Holy Ghost.

Jesus was NOT like Joseph Smith.

Joseph Smith was NOT described as the Child of a Ghost who had NO human father. In fact, Joseph Smith claimed Jesus Christ was GOD.

Joseph Smith was NOT even deified and in the NT Jesus was the Creator of heaven and earth. Joseph Smith was NOT ever called the Creator.

John 1:1-3 -

Quote:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

It is CLEAR that Jesus was just one of the HUNDREDS of Myth fables that was BELIEVED in antiquity and could not be like Joseph Smith.

The NT CANON itself contains FOUR Myth fables of Jesus and "Paul" has another Myth fable about the Resurrected Jesus in his Epistles.

bacht · 06-15-2011, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

You brought up a tangential objection: "...isn't it strange that no one in Jesus' circle of disciples and family wrote or dictated anything about him at all?"

This wouldn't be so strange at all if the circle of Jesus was truly poor, as they were reputed to be (not an unlikely myth since the vast majority of people really were poor). Writing was primarily an activity either of the rich or of organizations. Only 10-15% of people could read, and writing was a job that was always hired out to educated professional scribes--they were the only ones who knew how to write.

I think this stretches credulity. There were supposedly 12 (or 11) disciples, plus Jesus' mother, father, brothers and sisters, plus various acquaintances. Surely some of these could've scraped up enough moolah to ask a scribe to record their memoirs (or maybe a rich patron like Nicodemus).

ApostateAbe · 06-15-2011, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

You brought up a tangential objection: "...isn't it strange that no one in Jesus' circle of disciples and family wrote or dictated anything about him at all?"

This wouldn't be so strange at all if the circle of Jesus was truly poor, as they were reputed to be (not an unlikely myth since the vast majority of people really were poor). Writing was primarily an activity either of the rich or of organizations. Only 10-15% of people could read, and writing was a job that was always hired out to educated professional scribes--they were the only ones who knew how to write.

I think this stretches credulity. There were supposedly 12 (or 11) disciples, plus Jesus' mother, father, brothers and sisters, plus various acquaintances. Surely some of these could've scraped up enough moolah to ask a scribe to record their memoirs (or maybe a rich patron like Nicodemus).

It is conceivable, sure, and maybe for a cult that was concerned for future generations and didn't believe that the world was going to end very shortly, that would even be a reasonable expectation, but there are also a lot of other important figures of the ancient world, rich and poor, whose immediate circles never left written materials, so I don't see it as such a strong expectation.

bacht · 06-15-2011, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

I think this stretches credulity. There were supposedly 12 (or 11) disciples, plus Jesus' mother, father, brothers and sisters, plus various acquaintances. Surely some of these could've scraped up enough moolah to ask a scribe to record their memoirs (or maybe a rich patron like Nicodemus).

It is conceivable, sure, and maybe for a cult that was concerned for future generations and didn't believe that the world was going to end very shortly, that would even be a reasonable expectation, but there are also a lot of other important figures of the ancient world, rich and poor, whose immediate circles never left written materials, so I don't see it as such a strong expectation.

Yes, and this reinforces the idea that Jesus wasn't special enough to be noticed by his own contemporaries. If he was just another doomsayer then how did he become the Son of God? We all know the world didn't end in the 1st C.

ApostateAbe · 06-15-2011, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

It is conceivable, sure, and maybe for a cult that was concerned for future generations and didn't believe that the world was going to end very shortly, that would even be a reasonable expectation, but there are also a lot of other important figures of the ancient world, rich and poor, whose immediate circles never left written materials, so I don't see it as such a strong expectation.

Yes, and this reinforces the idea that Jesus wasn't special enough to be noticed by his own contemporaries. If he was just another doomsayer then how did he become the Son of God? We all know the world didn't end in the 1st C.

Yeah, that easily leads us back to the analogy with Joseph Smith, does it not? whom millions today believe is a true prophet, though he believed that Jesus would return in 1891. Early Christians reinterpreted the failed prophecies of Jesus--a "generation" actually means an age, and seeing the "kingdom of God" actually meant the Transfiguration. Mormons, in turn, deny that Joseph Smith ever spoke such a prophecy.

DCHindley · 06-15-2011, 04:22 PM

Let me get this straight ...

My only choices are that Jesus was

1) a Moronic angel -or-

2) a commonly named Joe

Why not Clem Kadiddlehopper (country bumpkin), or a member of the Revolutionary Three Stooges Brigade (revolutionary), or Chicken George (escaped slave), or Longhorn Leghorn (tutor/tormenter of tied up dogs and chicken hawks)?

DCH

aa5874 · 06-15-2011, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

Yes, and this reinforces the idea that Jesus wasn't special enough to be noticed by his own contemporaries. If he was just another doomsayer then how did he become the Son of God? We all know the world didn't end in the 1st C.

Yeah, that easily leads us back to the analogy with Joseph Smith, does it not? whom millions today believe is a true prophet, though he believed that Jesus would return in 1891. Early Christians reinterpreted the failed prophecies of Jesus--a "generation" actually means an age, and seeing the "kingdom of God" actually meant the Transfiguration. Mormons, in turn, deny that Joseph Smith ever spoke such a prophecy.

So, Joseph Smith is NOTHING at all like Jesus. Why are you just wasting time when you KNEW ALL ALONG that Jesus was GOD in the Mormon Bible and that Joseph Smith was considered a prophet.

Joseph Smith's OWN MORMON BIBLE has DEBUNKED your assertion. Mermon's do not consider that Joseph Smith was the VERY GOD.

But, there is ONE extremely signifcant observation it was most likely the very FAILED prophecies of Joseph Smith that probably HELPED his religion.

And it was probably the same way the Jesus cult was STARTED when some UNKNOWN apocalyptic person, LIKE a Joseph Smith character, claimed Jesus Christ the Son of God was COMING to JUDGE the world in the 2nd century.

Joseph Smith claimed the sun will be darkened and the moon turned into blood in 1832 like the UNKNOWN authors claimed would happened in the Synoptics.

The Doctrine and Covenants.

Quote:

... 87 For not many days hence and the earth shall tremble and reel to and fro as a drunken man; and the sun shall hide his face, and shall refuse to give light; and the moon shall be bathed in blood; and the stars shall become exceedingly angry, and shall cast themselves down as a fig that falleth from off a fig-tree.
...

See http://carm.org/religious-movements/...nts-section-88

Joseph Smith is MORE like the UNKNOWN authors of the Synoptics. They ALL wrote about Jesus and the FAILED Prophecies except that Joseph Smith claimed it would happen in 1891 and NOT immediately AFTER the Fall of the Temple.

ApostateAbe · 06-15-2011, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Let me get this straight ...

My only choices are that Jesus was

1) a Moronic angel -or-

2) a commonly named Joe

Why not Clem Kadiddlehopper (country bumpkin), or a member of the Revolutionary Three Stooges Brigade (revolutionary), or Chicken George (escaped slave), or Longhorn Leghorn (tutor/tormenter of tied up dogs and chicken hawks)?

DCH

Nothing stopping you from making such analogies. The point is that, if you want to make a plausible case that Jesus Christ fits the Angel Moroni at the expense of the model of Jesus as a human doomsday cult leader, then you will have Joseph Smith breathing down your neck.

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

06-15-2011, 04:22 PM	#58
DCHindley Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Mondcivitan Republic Posts: 2,550	Let me get this straight ... My only choices are that Jesus was 1) a Moronic angel -or- 2) a commonly named Joe Why not Clem Kadiddlehopper (country bumpkin), or a member of the Revolutionary Three Stooges Brigade (revolutionary), or Chicken George (escaped slave), or Longhorn Leghorn (tutor/tormenter of tied up dogs and chicken hawks)? DCH

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.