Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 12-11-2008, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

I have often thought the same thing myself. I also suspect that I know where their real weakness lies, and it might be an idea to question them in this specific area. If you were to start a new thread about putting Eusebius and Tertullian in a cell at Scotland Yard, I will certainly contribute.

But, we have their written statements. Inadvertently, they have confessed their errors.

This is Tertullian, or (?Eusebius?) in "On the Flesh of Christ" chapter 1

Quote:

Let us examine our Lord's bodily substance, for about His spiritual nature ALL are Agreed.

It is his Flesh that is in question.

Its verity and quality are the points in dispute.

Did it ever exist? Whence was it derived? And of what kind was it?

Dear aa5874,

This appears to be a retrojected literature reference for the purpose of authenticating such issues about the historical existence of the HJ, to be used at that point in time when the HJ became a political reality.

Quote:

Everyone has agreed that Jesus was Divine during the reign of Tiberius, but it is not certain if he had human flesh, or where his flesh would come from or what kind of flesh Jesus had.

General disagreements and controversies started with those of Arius' "He was made from nothing existing". This is usually explained away because it was only at the time of Arius that the previously little-known religion of the HJ was catapulted into the role of an official state religion, and the role of the new testament canon assumed an official religious canon for the Roman state under Constantine.

Best wishes,

Pete

aa5874 · 12-12-2008, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, we have their written statements. Inadvertently, they have confessed their errors.

This is Tertullian, or (?Eusebius?) in "On the Flesh of Christ" chapter 1

Dear aa5874,

This appears to be a retrojected literature reference for the purpose of authenticating such issues about the historical existence of the HJ, to be used at that point in time when the HJ became a political reality.

Quote:

Everyone has agreed that Jesus was Divine during the reign of Tiberius, but it is not certain if he had human flesh, or where his flesh would come from or what kind of flesh Jesus had.

General disagreements and controversies started with those of Arius' "He was made from nothing existing". This is usually explained away because it was only at the time of Arius that the previously little-known religion of the HJ was catapulted into the role of an official state religion, and the role of the new testament canon assumed an official religious canon for the Roman state under Constantine.

Best wishes,

Pete

Well, I am going to deal with the manufacturers/fabricators, or those who claim to know the manufacturers or know how Jesus of the NT was manufactured.

They have confirmed that Jesus of the NT was made from nothing but fiction, conceived through the Holy Ghost and born of a virgin during the days of Tiberius.

Church History 2.1

Quote:

Since in Christ there is a two-fold nature and the one-- in so far as he is thought of as God--resembles the head of the body, while the other may be compared to the feet...

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-12-2008, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

General disagreements and controversies started with those of Arius' "before He was made from nothing existing" ...

Careful, Pete. You are once again betraying your profound ignorance of pre-fourth century Christological controversies. I would suggest that you bone up on these by reading one of the most authoritative accounts of these -- i.e. A. Grillmeier's Christ in Christian Tradition (or via: amazon.co.uk) Vol. 1 -- or a recent publication by S. W. Need's Truly Divine and Truly Human (or via: amazon.co.uk), let alone the standard text on Early Christian Doctrine (or via: amazon.co.uk) by J.N.D Kelly. But as none of these are available in full on the internet, the suggestion is a foolish one.

Be that as it may be, I wonder if you'd be so kind as to tell us where this quotation of Arius comes from and what you think, given its context (if you know it), it means.

Quote:

This is usually explained away because it was only at the time of Arius that the previously little-known religion of the HJ was catapulted into the role of an official state religion, and the role of the new testament canon assumed an official religious canon for the Roman state under Constantine.

Can you tell me who exactly it is among scholars who write on the Constantinian era/Nicea/early Christological controversies/(and especially) Arius and Arianism who actually engage in the type of "explaining away" that you say is "usual?

Does Gwatkin? Greg & Groh? Harnack? R. Williams? A.M.H. Jones? Kelly? Hanson? Barnes & D. H. Williams? E. Ferguson? T.A. Kopecek? J. T. Lienhard? M. Simonett? A Louth?

Do you even know?

Jeffrey

aa5874 · 12-12-2008, 11:11 AM

In order for Jesus believers to worship Jesus of the NT, they must insist Jesus was primarily and essentially a God, and that his human nature was secondary and temporary.

Jesus believers do NOT worship humans as Gods, it was for that very reason why they did not worship the Caesars as Gods or call or pray to the Caesars as Gods.

So, for Jesus believers to have flourished Jesus must have been a God, without doubt, during the reign of Tiberius, but that is impossible.

This is Tertullian in "Ad Nationes" 1.17

Quote:

....Well, we do not call the Emperor God........but the truth is, that you who call Caesar God mock him, by calling him what he is not, and curse him, because he does not want to be what you call him. For he prefers living to being made a god.

There is just no way for Jesus of the NT to have been a mere human, unless Jesus believers were completely dishonest when they refused to call or worship the Emperor as God while worshipping a mere man executed for blasphemy.

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-12-2008, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

In order for Jesus believers to worship Jesus of the NT, they must insist Jesus was primarily and essentially a God, and that his human nature was secondary and temporary.

Jesus believers do NOT worship humans as Gods, it was for that very reason why they did not worship the Caesars as Gods or call or pray to the Caesars as Gods.

So, for Jesus believers to have flourished

:huh:"flourised??" :huh:

Jesus must have been a God, without doubt, during the reign of Tiberius, but that is impossible.

No. All that's necessary was that he must have been regarded as worthy of exclusive devotion. Big difference.

This is Tertullian in "Ad Nationes" 1.17

Quote:

....Well, we do not call the Emperor God........but the truth is, that you who call Caesar God mock him, by calling him what he is not, and curse him, because he does not want to be what you call him. For he prefers living to being made a god.

There is just no way for Jesus of the NT to have been a mere human, unless Jesus believers were completely dishonest when they refused to call or worship the Emperor as God while worshipping a mere man executed for blasphemy.

Leaving aside the fact that the Gospels are clear that Jesus was executed on the charge of claiming to be "king of the Jews", I take it that you have never read Larry Hurtado's Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, (or via: amazon.co.uk) let alone his briefer How On Earth Did Jesus Become A God?: Historical Questions About Earliest Devotion To Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk) or God Crucified : Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Richard Bauckham or Tom Wright's "Jesus's Divinity Within Jewish Monotheism"?

But of course that goes with out saying, doesn't it.

Jeffrey

Toto · 12-12-2008, 01:29 PM

Jeffrey - you claim that the gospels are clear on the reason for Jesus' execution? And that the reason is his claim to be King of the Jews?

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-12-2008, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Jeffrey - you claim that the gospels are clear on the reason for Jesus' execution? And that the reason is his claim to be King of the Jews?

Please look again -- and carefully this time -- at what I actually wrote. I said the Gospels are clear that he was executed on a charge of his having claimed to be "king of the Jews". I said nothing about the Gospels being clear about Jesus himself ever overtly making that claim -- though one has to wonder about what claim was implicitly being made when Jesus engaged (if he actually did) in riding into Jerusalem on a donkey and thereby calling to mind the kingly figure in Zechariah and in allowing his followers to wave palm branches at him.

Jeffrey

Toto · 12-12-2008, 02:21 PM

Are the gospels clear on why Jesus was executed? It appears that Pilate ordered his execution after a rabble of Jews shouted at him, but Pilate seems to have thought Jesus was innocent. The Jews were more concerned with blasphemy, but even the Sanhedrin seems to have lacked a coherent reason for Jesus' execution.

Was claiming to be King of the Jews a capital crime?

Ben C Smith · 12-12-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Are the gospels clear on why Jesus was executed?

Mark 15.26:

The inscription of the charge against him read: The king of the Jews.

Ben.

No Robots · 12-12-2008, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Larry Hurtado's Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, (or via: amazon.co.uk) let alone his briefer How On Earth Did Jesus Become A God?: Historical Questions About Earliest Devotion To Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk) or God Crucified : Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Richard Bauckham or Tom Wright's "Jesus's Divinity Within Jewish Monotheism"?

Whoa! That's some heavy-duty Trinitarianism.

View Poll Results: What do you think the probability of a historical Jesus is?
100% - I have complete faith that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person.	8	6.15%
80-100%	10	7.69%
60-80%	15	11.54%
40-60%	22	16.92%
20-40%	17	13.08%
0-20%	37	28.46%
o% - I have complete faith that Jesus of Nazareth was not a real person,	21	16.15%
Voters: 130. You may not vote on this poll

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

12-12-2008, 01:29 PM	#316
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Jeffrey - you claim that the gospels are clear on the reason for Jesus' execution? And that the reason is his claim to be King of the Jews?

12-12-2008, 02:21 PM	#318
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Are the gospels clear on why Jesus was executed? It appears that Pilate ordered his execution after a rabble of Jews shouted at him, but Pilate seems to have thought Jesus was innocent. The Jews were more concerned with blasphemy, but even the Sanhedrin seems to have lacked a coherent reason for Jesus' execution. Was claiming to be King of the Jews a capital crime?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.