Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 04-10-2012, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seeker

...Far from being shot down Jesus Mythicism is sort of like the minimalist movement in biblical criticism. When you really examine it only the most extremist of scholars think that a historical Jesus existed that was exactly as described in the bible. Everyone else is basically already saying that if there was a historical person that inspired the Jesus myth that he was probably not fully as the bible describes him. Essentially the HJ ends up being so vague that he becomes completely meaningless as less and less of the only description we have of him becomes useful in determining who he might have been.

The QUEST for an historical Jesus is DOCUMENTED so it recognised by Scholars universally that Jesus of the NT was NON-HISTORICAL.

The SEARCH is still on for the last 250 years and NO HJ has ever been found.

See http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/schweitzer/

Albert Schweitzer even wrote that Jesus was either LITERARY FICTION or an ESCHATOLOGICAL concept.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The QUEST for the Historical Jesus

... He will be a Jesus, who was Messiah, and lived as such, either on the ground of a literary fiction of the earliest Evangelist, or on the ground of a purely eschatological Messianic conception.

SEE http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...chapter20.html

The Historical Jesus is a figment of imagination.

outhouse · 04-10-2012, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Actually there is no extra-biblical evidence that the Yahweh worship was 'strict' before the Hellenistic period. I would be more inclined to suggest that the switch to monotheism is around the same time that the Persians start to become monotheistic, just before the end of the Achaemenid Empire.

after 622 BC the religion went monotheistic to Yahweh only

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...rael_and_Judah

Judah at this time was a vassal of Assyria, but Assyrian power collapsed in the 630s, and in around 622 Josiah and the Deuteronomists, as the circle around him are called by modern scholars, launched a bid for independence expressed as loyalty to "Yahweh alone" and the law-code in the book of Deuteronomy, written in the form of a treaty between Judah and Yahweh to replace the vassal-treaty with Assyria

Quote:

If history is about plausibility then you have destroyed your own argument as the Jesus depicted in the bible is largely implausible. You can only get to a plausible HJ by dropping most of the characteristics of biblical Jesus.

False

you need to learn that because there is biblical jesus, doesnt mean there was no historical jesus.

many mythical legends have a historical core and this varies from one legend to another. Without scholarships on the subject, you cant know these differences.

Quote:

More than a slight influence when there are so many astrological correlations. The point is that once you acknowledge that there had to be some distortion of the story in order to wedge it into the astrological template then you have to question how much, if any, underlying truth the story began with.

Nope

theres not enough to mention. This is a crackpot idea with no real valid credible work done to show a decent connection other then what was influenced to judaism by previous religions in the formation of early judaism which has evolved dramatically over the years.

Quote:

When you really examine it only the most extremist of scholars think that a historical Jesus existed that was exactly as described in the bible.

there are no credible scholars that hold this faulty view.

Quote:

Essentially the HJ ends up being so vague that he becomes completely meaningless as less and less of the only description we have of him becomes useful in determining who he might have been.

theres more to his core then one might think. because we cannot answer many details with certainty doesnt mean he never existed. The story is based on a real man and we know this by a few reasons. the main point being that there were 3 different groups ALL describing a mortal poor peasant jew teacher healer who traveled Galilee, All 3 versions have this in common. You had Jewish versions and gnostic versions, most of which were burned after the roman/gentile version took hold around 300-400 AD. we know text were burned and any text not a roamn version was outlawed.

funny none of the early versions, not one, was ever a sun based worship. They didnt hide their main deity and bury him in a Galilean jew. thats why modern scholarships look at the sun god based jesus as lonney as it gets. it holds zero credibility

seeker · 04-10-2012, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Actually there is no extra-biblical evidence that the Yahweh worship was 'strict' before the Hellenistic period. I would be more inclined to suggest that the switch to monotheism is around the same time that the Persians start to become monotheistic, just before the end of the Achaemenid Empire.

after 622 BC the religion went monotheistic to Yahweh only

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...rael_and_Judah

Judah at this time was a vassal of Assyria, but Assyrian power collapsed in the 630s, and in around 622 Josiah and the Deuteronomists, as the circle around him are called by modern scholars, launched a bid for independence expressed as loyalty to "Yahweh alone" and the law-code in the book of Deuteronomy, written in the form of a treaty between Judah and Yahweh to replace the vassal-treaty with Assyria

Sorry but how do you think that quoting a Wikipedia article that quotes the bible as its main source of information acts as proof of the biblical claim that of monotheism in Judea? You need to do better than that.

The problem you have is that the archaeological record clearly shows that other deities were being worshiped in Judah right up to the Hellenistic period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

False

you need to learn that because there is biblical jesus, doesnt mean there was no historical jesus.

Nice non-sequeter. I never claimed that biblical Jesus negates HJ. What I've said is that HJ is meaningless because the whole point of BJ is that he is so miraculicious (yes I made up a word).

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

many mythical legends have a historical core and this varies from one legend to another. Without scholarships on the subject, you cant know these differences.

Glad we cleared that up LOL.

Seriously though, the whole point of the discussion is that the mythology sometimes does not have a historical core and in this case may not have one at all. I would suggest that the fact that the Jesus story is so dependent on fantastic elements like the resurrection that an HJ without those characteristics defeats the entire purpose of the story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Nope

theres not enough to mention. This is a crackpot idea with no real valid credible work done to show a decent connection other then what was influenced to judaism by previous religions in the formation of early judaism which has evolved dramatically over the years.

Actually there have already been presented to you a number of very clear correlations. The evident panic in your pejorative dismissal of the argument only signals your own unwillingness to objectively analyze the subject fully.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

there are no credible scholars that hold this faulty view.

Actually most scholars acknowledge that the gospel story was reconstructed in some way and that references to astrology occur in the gospel stories. Nice appeal to authority though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Essentially the HJ ends up being so vague that he becomes completely meaningless as less and less of the only description we have of him becomes useful in determining who he might have been.

theres more to his core then one might think. because we cannot answer many details with certainty doesnt mean he never existed. The story is based on a real man and we know this by a few reasons. the main point being that there were 3 different groups ALL describing a mortal poor peasant jew teacher healer who traveled Galilee, All 3 versions have this in common. You had Jewish versions and gnostic versions, most of which were burned after the roman/gentile version took hold around 300-400 AD. we know text were burned and any text not a roamn version was outlawed.

funny none of the early versions, not one, was ever a sun based worship. They didnt hide their main deity and bury him in a Galilean jew. thats why modern scholarships look at the sun god based jesus as lonney as it gets. it holds zero credibility

Actually you might want to read Justin Martyr specifically his dialog with Trypho in which he directly correlates sun worship and Jesus. Clearly the early church was struggling to separate themselves from other mystery religions and so they de-emphasized sun worship. I think you are forgetting just how late our earliest versions of the gospels really are.

By the way, gnosticism stressed the notion of a spiritual Jesus. They didn't even believe in an HJ which is why Gnosticism was considered a heresy. The existence of Gnostic texts early in the history of Christianity argues against an HJ.

steve_bnk · 04-10-2012, 01:56 PM

There was a PBS show last year on the llatest semetic archeological evidence.

Part of it was finding both male and female images indcating the polarization to an alpha male god came over time.

outhouse · 04-10-2012, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

There was a PBS show last year on the llatest semetic archeological evidence.

Part of it was finding both male and female images indcating the polarization to an alpha male god came over time.

Well the real study shows a family of gods starting with El and the father, and Baal and Yahweh as sons, as well as Asherah.

Karen Armstrong does good work on this.

MrMacSon · 04-10-2012, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

... the idea of wandering mystics ... Certainly people traveled and carried stories and myths retold.

Yes, and lots would have traveled through that region over many years, with many stories and many versions of them; from Persia/east, .. Egypt, Palestine, Rome, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, with Persia nearby.

aa5874 · 04-10-2012, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

....theres more to his core then one might think. because we cannot answer many details with certainty doesnt mean he never existed. The story is based on a real man and we know this by a few reasons. the main point being that there were 3 different groups ALL describing a mortal poor peasant jew teacher healer who traveled Galilee, All 3 versions have this in common. You had Jewish versions and gnostic versions, most of which were burned after the roman/gentile version took hold around 300-400 AD. we know text were burned and any text not a roamn version was outlawed....

Where do you get your CRACKPOT Conspiracy stories from??? Please Identify your BURNT Text.

You are just an ad hoc story teller.

steve_bnk · 04-10-2012, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

There was a PBS show last year on the llatest semetic archeological evidence.

Part of it was finding both male and female images indcating the polarization to an alpha male god came over time.

Well the real study shows a family of gods starting with El and the father, and Baal and Yahweh as sons, as well as Asherah.

Karen Armstrong does good work on this.

The show showed two pieces presuned to be masculine/feminine deities.

The other hypothesis was the early group was formed in part by refugees and escapees from Egypt,... an 'exodus' of sorts, my words.

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

04-10-2012, 01:56 PM	#64
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	There was a PBS show last year on the llatest semetic archeological evidence. Part of it was finding both male and female images indcating the polarization to an alpha male god came over time.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.