Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sotto voce · 05-25-2012, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

The whole basis of the Messianic claim in every century is that it is through Judah.

Let's leave aside the whole business of Messianic claims, which I think has been thoroughly debunked here.

That's neat. It hasn't even been seriously broached.

Quote:

What is really going on is that the great mystical genius whom we call Christ represents the high point of Judaic culture.

What's really going on is that Abraham is cut off. It's a mind-boggling stampede away from origin, so-called Judaism. Abraham was justified by faith. Justification by faith demands everything. Everything is too much.

No Robots · 05-25-2012, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

But what do you know about being Jewish.

I know that Christ presents the best of Judaism; and to the extent that I am a follower of Christ, I am among the best of Jews.

Quote:

Attaching this argument to the claim that Jesus was the messiah of the Jews is like claiming that Jack Tripper on Three's Company accurately portrayed gay life in Southern California in the 1970's.

I have repeatedly demonstrated that my position is that Christ is in no way the Jewish national Messiah. Why do you continue to charge me with this?

Quote:

Jesus Christ is a white caricature misrepresentation of Jewish belief.

This position is contrary to all scholarship, Jewish or not.

stephan huller · 05-25-2012, 09:23 AM

Really "all scholarship." What about traditional jewish scholarship especially before the nation of israel got desperate? In traditional jewish scholarship jesus was a magician

stephan huller · 05-25-2012, 09:25 AM

There is no such a thing as a messiah that is unconnected to the jewish people. Like a batter who doesn't bat. A baker who doesn't bake

sotto voce · 05-25-2012, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

There is no such a thing as a messiah that is unconnected to the jewish people. Like a batter who doesn't bat. A baker who doesn't bake

But everyone eats.

Scotsguy44 · 05-25-2012, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

If there really is a valid historical methodology that can discover the historical Jesus, you would expect some agreement among historicists. But this is continually missing in action.

The gospels are a sort of Zen puzzle, a challenge to make some sort of sense out of the story and the church that claims to be based on them. All the solutions are speculative at best, whether historicist or mythicist, but the historicist solution to the puzzle is looking more and more contrived and ideologically based.

The Christian church has survived by continually reinventing itself every generation, or every decade. I fully expect a mythicist branch of Christianity to pop up, if it hasn't already.

Are you saying there is not general agreement among professional historians qualified in that area of history, that Jesus (the man) existed?

No Robots · 05-25-2012, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

There is no such a thing as a messiah that is unconnected to the jewish people. Like a batter who doesn't bat. A baker who doesn't bake

I guess you're asking why I insist on calling him Christ (ie. Messiah, the Anointed One), while denying that he is the national Jewish Messiah. I do so because my rabbi, Constantin Brunner, insists that we do so. His view is that the title is fitting for ha-Notzri because he is the Messiah of the spiritual Israel, ie. of those who are drawn to a spiritualized life through him.

No Robots · 05-25-2012, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Really "all scholarship." What about traditional jewish scholarship especially before the nation of israel got desperate? In traditional jewish scholarship jesus was a magician

He was also a jokester. The Talmud (Zarah 16b-17a) records how he was once asked what should be done with the temple donation of a whore. He answered that it should be used to build the priests' privy: "Let filth go unto filth."

stephan huller · 05-25-2012, 11:01 AM

Honestly, im not really interested in why you want to distort the original understanding of what the messiah is. scholarship before ww 2 wasnt aware of the dss material. Now that we know jews were waiting for god to come down and visit with them (a point made in celsus too) the question becomes why shouldnt we take this as the proper model for the understanding jesus in the gospel (= the marcionite, alexandrian interpretation)

Toto · 05-25-2012, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scotsguy44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

If there really is a valid historical methodology that can discover the historical Jesus, you would expect some agreement among historicists. But this is continually missing in action.

The gospels are a sort of Zen puzzle, a challenge to make some sort of sense out of the story and the church that claims to be based on them. All the solutions are speculative at best, whether historicist or mythicist, but the historicist solution to the puzzle is looking more and more contrived and ideologically based.

The Christian church has survived by continually reinventing itself every generation, or every decade. I fully expect a mythicist branch of Christianity to pop up, if it hasn't already.

Are you saying there is not general agreement among professional historians qualified in that area of history, that Jesus (the man) existed?

Yes, that is what I am saying.

There is a general agreement among professionals in the field of "Biblical studies" to claim that there is a general agreement of historians that Jesus existed. But none of these professionals have actual training in historical methodology, except for some pseudo-historical methods that they invented themselves but which have not been validated.

I know of only one contemporary professional historian, Richard Carrier, who has even examined the question using historical methods, and his professional opinion is that there is not enough evidence to show that Jesus the man existed.

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

05-25-2012, 09:23 AM	#83
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Really "all scholarship." What about traditional jewish scholarship especially before the nation of israel got desperate? In traditional jewish scholarship jesus was a magician

05-25-2012, 09:25 AM	#84
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	There is no such a thing as a messiah that is unconnected to the jewish people. Like a batter who doesn't bat. A baker who doesn't bake

05-25-2012, 11:01 AM	#89
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Honestly, im not really interested in why you want to distort the original understanding of what the messiah is. scholarship before ww 2 wasnt aware of the dss material. Now that we know jews were waiting for god to come down and visit with them (a point made in celsus too) the question becomes why shouldnt we take this as the proper model for the understanding jesus in the gospel (= the marcionite, alexandrian interpretation)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.