FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-10-2012, 12:37 PM   #201
Talk Freethought Staff
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, eh
Posts: 42,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
If Christianity started as a personality cult, does that, in itself, falsify mythicism?
I would say no. In the 20th Century, Scientology started as a personality cult around L Ron Hubbard, but he invented a fake history which he was the prophet/spokesman for in order to justify the stance that this fake religion was about something other than his own power and profit. In the 19th Century, Mormonism started as a personality cult around Joesph Smith, but he invented a fake history which he was the prophet/spokesman for in order to justify the stance that this fake religion was about something other than his own power and profit.

Say, for the sake of argument, that Paul or Peter or someone was a 1st Century equivalent of those two. He makes up this religion about this guy who fulfilled the various Messiah prophecies or whatever in the OT and slaps on a bunch of stuff he picked up from other religions and then says that after this Messiah ascended into Heaven, he made Paul his earthly representative and so everyone should start following him and making him offerings of whatever surplus money and women they have available.

So, it's still a personality cult, but a personality cult centered around the god's representative and not the god himself, so an actual historical figure for the Jesus character is no more necessary than a historical figure is necessary for the Moroni or Xenu characters.
Tom Sawyer is offline  
Old 04-10-2012, 12:50 PM   #202
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: US
Posts: 748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by seeker View Post
You have it backwards. Logically speaking the claim being made is that Jesus existed and that claim is what must be proved.
Who made that claim? I made no such claim.
Actually you are the one asserting an HJ. The bible makes the initial claim, you only purport it to be true in that particular instance

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
I don;t think that claim means anything unless and until we decide what "Jesus" actually is.

Mythicists say that Jesus never existed, so they must mean something by "Jesus." What is it. What specifically are they saying did not happen.
Actually mythicists aren't 'claiming' Jesus didn't exist, they are saying that there is no evidence that he DID exist.

Since the only Jesus we actually know of is the biblical Jesus the definition has to be based on that to some degree or other. The problem is in what gets subtracted to create your HJ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
In the earliest sources, we have a per se, prima facie claim that the Christian religion originated as a personality cult. This is a claim which not only has multiple, independent attestation in the earliest sources, but which is not contradicted by any other early sources. No other sources claim any other origin for Christianity than a personality cult.
Actually disputable. A lot of evidence suggests that the earliest Christians were gnostics, a cult that believed only in a spiritual Jesus. Even the story of Paul clearly refers to a purely spiritual Jesus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Do mythicists see this claim as impossible, as implausible, as merely unprovable or as irrelevant?
I doubt that Jesus Mythicists are as monolithic as that. Personally I think the matter is irrelevant as no matter how you slice up the story to get to an HJ you end up with someone who is clearly not the biblical Jesus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
If Christianity started as a personality cult, does that, in itself, falsify mythicism?
See above, there is no reason to presume that Christianity was a personality cult, in fact there is reason to think that it wasn't.
seeker is offline  
Old 04-10-2012, 03:56 PM   #203
Moderator -
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 4,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeker View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Who made that claim? I made no such claim.
Actually you are the one asserting an HJ.
I have not made this assertion. If you my posts carefully, you'll see that I haven't.
Quote:
Actually mythicists aren't 'claiming' Jesus didn't exist, they are saying that there is no evidence that he DID exist.
What is "he?" What counts as "he?"
Quote:
Since the only Jesus we actually know of is the biblical Jesus
We also have the Tacitus Christus, which can be discussed without any reference to the Bible at all.
Quote:
Actually disputable. A lot of evidence suggests that the earliest Christians were gnostics, a cult that believed only in a spiritual Jesus. Even the story of Paul clearly refers to a purely spiritual Jesus.
Docetists believed Jesus was made out of spirit. They thought that "spirit" was a substance. They didn't think Jesus was mythical, they thought he had walked around earth, but only appeared to be physical, and was really a space ghost.

There is also no clear connection between Gnostic thought and Jesus prior to 2nd Century.
Quote:
I doubt that Jesus Mythicists are as monolithic as that. Personally I think the matter is irrelevant as no matter how you slice up the story to get to an HJ you end up with someone who is clearly not the biblical Jesus.
How about the Tacitus Jesus?
Diogenes the Cynic is offline  
Old 04-10-2012, 04:36 PM   #204
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
..We also have the Tacitus Christus, which can be discussed without any reference to the Bible at all....
Not one single source discussed Tactitus supposed Christus at all. If Tacitus mentioned Christus it was NOT Jesus Christ because that passage NEVER was used to prove Jesus did exist. NEVER in hundreds of YEARS after it was supposedly written.

Amazingly, incredibly, every APOLOGETIC source that claimed Nero persecuted Christians NEVER did mention Christus.

Suetonius did NOT mention Christus at all.

Sulpitius Severus in Sacred Histories 2.29 mentioned a passage that is very similar to Tacitus "Annals" 15.44 but again the part about "Christus" is MISSING.

For over 300 years, and perhaps hundreds more, Tacitus Annals with Christus was NEVER ever quoted by any source.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
..How about the Tacitus Jesus?
No, No, No!!! Tacitus Annals does not mention Jesus. How soon you forget :constern01: You just wrote Tacitus Christus--remember??? Please, don't make your imagination run wild/

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
..We also have the Tacitus Christus....
Please, make up you mind. Is it Christus or Jesus???
aa5874 is offline  
Old 04-11-2012, 08:02 AM   #205
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: US
Posts: 748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by seeker View Post

Actually you are the one asserting an HJ.
I have not made this assertion. If you my posts carefully, you'll see that I haven't.
Actually you have assumed it throughout the discussion. The tacit assumption throughout our conversation on your part is that an HJ is necessary in some way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
What is "he?" What counts as "he?"
A character described in the Bible as Jesus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
We also have the Tacitus Christus, which can be discussed without any reference to the Bible at all.
Except that Tacitus is merely repeating Christian lore, he isn't actually claiming any sort of personal knowledge that the individual actually existed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Docetists believed Jesus was made out of spirit. They thought that "spirit" was a substance. They didn't think Jesus was mythical, they thought he had walked around earth, but only appeared to be physical, and was really a space ghost.
Actually there is some dispute over that. Their views are not as well defined as you are representing them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
There is also no clear connection between Gnostic thought and Jesus prior to 2nd Century.
Considering there is no actual clear view of Christianity prior to the 2nd century that is not a surprise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
Quote:
I doubt that Jesus Mythicists are as monolithic as that. Personally I think the matter is irrelevant as no matter how you slice up the story to get to an HJ you end up with someone who is clearly not the biblical Jesus.
How about the Tacitus Jesus?
Once again he is only repeating lore he had heard, not reporting a personal experience
seeker is offline  
Old 04-11-2012, 04:54 PM   #206
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seeker View Post
... A lot of evidence suggests that the earliest Christians were gnostics, a cult that believed only in a spiritual Jesus. Even the story of Paul clearly refers to a purely spiritual Jesus...
There is NOT a lot of evidence for a Jesus cult. An apologetic source claimed there were people called Christians who did NOT even believe the Jesus story since the TIME of Claudius, since 41-54 CE.
aa5874 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:03 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.