Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
07-06-2011, 11:08 PM | #21 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
|
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2011, 11:12 PM | #22 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
1. Jesus spoke in parables so that the Jews would NOT be converted. Mark 4 2. Jesus was NOT known as Christ by the Jews. Mark 8 3. Jesus did NOT first tell his disciples he was Christ it was Peter who FIRST told the disciples that Jesus was the Christ. Mark 8 4. Jesus commanded his disciples to tell no man he was Christ. Mark 8 5. When Jesus was arrested the disciples abandoned Jesus. Mark 14 6. Peter denied ever knowing Jesus. Mark14 7. The visitors to the tomb fled and did Not say anything . Mark 16. The Jesus story crashed. Reality Check: Based on gMark, the Jews did NOT call Jesus the Christ. Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 is a forgery. |
|
07-06-2011, 11:58 PM | #23 | |||||
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. (24) Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.James was important enough for Ananus to convene the Sanhedrin and get him and some friends stoned for being law breakers, and important enough for others to protest this. How did he get there from being a Galilean fisherman who thought his brother was crazy? The whole story does not hang together. |
|||||
07-07-2011, 01:26 AM | #24 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
|
I'm not sure that one needs to posit a lost passage in Josephus. I think an innocent gloss, based on confusion stemming from the writings of Origen, pretty much explains Ant. 20.
|
07-07-2011, 01:29 AM | #25 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
|
CHAUCER
Josephus mentions this in a way that indicates this Jesus was more famous than his brother James (Josephus identifies others by reference to more famous brothers elsewhere). Quote:
And why would Josephus call James 'the Just'? |
|
07-07-2011, 02:37 AM | #26 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
|
Quote:
He wouldn't. That is what Origen would call James. |
|
07-07-2011, 02:53 AM | #27 | ||||
Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
|
Quote:
So, my question was, "Why not just believe that Josephus actually wrote that?" My question stands. Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
07-07-2011, 03:02 AM | #28 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
|
Quote:
And why reference James to his more 'famous' brother, when this brother wasn't famous? |
|
07-07-2011, 03:15 AM | #29 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
|
Quote:
Jesus wasn't famous enough in his own time to be mentioned by Philo. Nor was John the Baptist, though the figure of John the Baptist grew after his time corresponding to the growth of his cult, much like Jesus, and both figures are mentioned by Josephus (or their interpolators?). I want you to remember that point. Remember it, please, because it is very relevant. I keep on bringing it up, and it keeps on getting ignored. |
|
07-07-2011, 03:25 AM | #30 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Location: eastern North America
Posts: 1,468
|
Quote:
Are you certain of that? Can you please provide a link to Origen's Greek manuscript?? Oh, I see. Ok, well then, how about a link to the translation in Latin. Oh. Well, then, how about a link to Tertullian..... **** The claims that James was called "the Just", derive from Clement of Alexandria, (according to Eusebius), Hegesippus (according to Eusebius and Jerome), and two tracts by unidentified authors, cited by Jerome: Gospel according to the Hebrews--main canon of the Ebionists and Nazarenes; Gospel of Thomas (Nag Hammadi)--aka "fiction of Heretics" according to Eusebius; Hey Abe, you want to try your big dog trick with me? I am thoroughly unconvinced, though I will grant Chaucer plus one for excellent writing. Why doesn't Origen cite TF? Who was the guy complaining about massive interpolation, in the third century? Was that Origen??? Chaucer is hanging his "reality check" on Josephus. I hope someone can explain to me how a Jewish priest, leader of an insurrection against the Romans, could somehow compose any text sympathetic to a group of traitors to his beloved Judaism.... I simply find it much easier to attribute the supposed references to "Jesus the Christ" to Christian manipulation decades after the fact.... avi |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|