Wallener

I think you need to insert the word "Christian" in there somewhere. There are all kinds of theists on this planet who do not see the Christian texts as demonstrating the divinity of Jesus.

Wallener

As opposed to what has actually happened over the past 2k years.

Avatar

Hear, hear. Heaven forbid that we ever try to look for the truth instead!

WCH

If you haven't heard of me
I wouldn't be surprised
I bet you know my relatives
Their names will never die
My mother is a saint
And my brother is a god
But all I am is Jesus' brother Bob

Jesus' brother Bob, Jesus' brother Bob
A nobody relative of the son of God
If only I'd been born just a little sooner
I'd be more than the brother of God Junior

I have to take the ferry
To cross the Galilee
But not my brother
No not him
He walks across for free
I finally get to work
'Bout a quarter after nine
Already he's turning water into wine

Jesus' brother Bob, Jesus' brother Bob
A nobody relative of the son of God
If only I'd been born just a little sooner
I'd be more than the brother of God Junior

One day when I was home
I heard a mighty r oar
There were a thousand people
Right outside the door
Help us, Jesus, help us!
Came the cheering from the mob
But then they got a look at me
Oh nuts, it's only Bob

Jesus' brother Bob, Jesus' brother Bob
A nobody relative of the son of God
If only I'd been born just a little sooner
I'd be more than the brother of God Junior

He died upon the cross
I thought that I was free
Finally people would get to know
Me for me
(Hi Bob, Hi Judas!)
This was my big chance
To finally get ahead
The next thing you know
He's rising from the dead

Jesus' brother Bob, Jesus' brother Bob
A nobody relative of the son of God
If only I'd been born just a little sooner
I'd be more than the brother of God Junior

Everybody!

Jesus' brother Bob, Jesus' brother Bob
A nobody relative of the son of God
If only I'd been born just a little sooner
I'd be more than the brother of God Junior

The Arrogant Worms rule...

Amaleq13

No we don't. We are told it was Bethlehem or Nazareth or even Capernaum. Arguments can be and are made for all three.

No we don't. The names of some family members are given in a story about him but we have no reason to assume the author based this on anything except his imagination. The fact that depictions of these alleged family members is not consistent across accounts is problematic for assumptions of historicity.

Ignoring the possibility that Paul's reference to Pilate (per Carrier) actually refers to when the appearances took place, we could say this rather vague statements was "known". Otherwise, the imagination of the original author cannot be discounted as a possible source (inspired by Paul or the actual appearance claims) and we can't really call this "known".

We don't know this if Paul added the concept of crucifixion to earlier beliefs.

I would question the certainty that any particular saying can be reliably attributed to him but, given the parameters I already described, I would agree with the rest.

I would say Jewish, male, started a movement with followers and died from something other than old age are the only things one can really say are "known" about Jesus. I agree with you that, even accepting everything else you suggested, it isn't very much at all.

PS Long time, no read. Glad to read you!

spin

I'd now add Nazara to the list.

It is the lectio difficilior, ie the more difficult reading, and one normally gets easier readings as time goes by and one gets one's act together, so Nazara has a strong case for being the original reading against Nazareth. And Nazara actually explains the linguistic problems, the relationship of nazarhnos, why the Greek has a zeta and not the usual sigma when a TSADE is transliterated from Hebrew into Greek. (One expects Nasareth from the Hebrew name NCZT)

From nazarhnos one derives a back-formation of nazara, "recognizing" the gentilic suffix "-hnos", ie the word Nazara didn't exist before the "recognition", but was created by subtracting the gentilic suffix. (This is how we get the verb "to edit" in English through French from the original noun "editor" by removing the apparent suffix "-or".)

Once nazarhnos was explained as pertaining to a place and nazara was derived, the only step left was to find this place Nazara and, in failing to do so, one found NCZT which was sufficiently close.

Working only on the synoptic gospels with the presence of Nazara in Lk 4:16, Mt 4:13 (these two in the Alexandrian tradition of the text), and Mt 2:23 (less well attested though in the earliest manuscripts), we are left with Nazareth in Luke only in the birth narrative and in Matt only at 21:11. The birth narrative is overtly additive to the Marcan core, just as Matt's birth narrative is. Mt 21:11 is in an extension of a Marcan passage (compare Mt 21:9-17 with Mk 11:9-11), which deals with the cleansing of the temple -- though Lk which also has the cleansing here has nothing about Nazareth.

Nazareth is remarkably poorly attested in the synoptic gospels.


spin

Anat

So where was (is) Nazara?

spin

That's the problem: they couldn't find it, so obviously they thought it must have been a slight mistake and it should have been Nazareth when they came upon it, getting the TSADE where Nazara had a zeta and not a sigma.

Nazara never existed. As I said the word was created as a back-formation from nazarhnos.

This hypothesis explains how we get both Nazareth and Nazara in the texts and relates them to nazarhnos. Starting from Nazareth provides a very different gentilic with a sigma, something like nasarethnos or nasaretaios.


spin

Amaleq13

Thanks, spin.

Upon further consideration, I think I might add "from somewhere in Galilee" as one of the "knowns" but that might depend largely on whether Q is accepted as a legitimate source.

Llyricist

This comparison makes no sense. To be a valid comparison, you should compare how much is known about Matthew, Mark, Luke or John with how much is known about Wm Shakespeare. Or compare how much is known about Jesus with how much is known about Romeo, or Hamlet.