jgoodguy

I unaware of any historical theory that asserts that Zeus built the Great Altar. Kindly provide a reference. Also provide some references to HJers asserting that Jesus went around building temples. Otherwise your analogy sounds defective.

I want to see the plans for the Temple dedicated to the Mythical Interpolator, whose devotees seem to think the MI existed. The MI's alleged exploits sometimes appear to exceed that of the Gospel Jesus in that the MI of ancient time modified text so that future JMers could see the evidence of his works and know the hidden truth while those outside of the MI Gnosticism appeal unschooled and doltish.

The case that HJers seem to argue is that the plain text indicates a belief in a HJ by the early Christians. It may or may not be a leap of faith to an actual HJ, but I see leaps of faith to impeach the plain text by the JMers. In any case, the most likely HJ had apparently no influence on the dominate orthodox Christianity other than his name leaving me to ponder the actual effective difference between the HJ and JM.

Lets call this HJ of little influence, the Ephemeral Jesus. The EJ existed only a short time and at best left only his name to a movement that was based on Greek mystical religion beliefs. I am unsure why a 800 page book would be needed to swat the EJ. A much shorter version comparing and contrasting the Jewish culture and religious beliefs of the EJ's alleged time on earth with the Greek mystical religion beliefs and demonstrating that the orthodox Christianity that morphed into the modern one had no substantial relationship to the EJ would suffice.

Then again I am reading a 1000 page book on the Historical James, brother of Jesus so who can account for tastes in big books. Granted there is a inference that a Historical James had a Historical Jesus as a brother, but to put my JM cousins at ease, I am also reading the Steven Brust Vlad Taltos series to keep my perspective of the difference between fiction and reality.

avi

Allow me, please, to rewrite your sentence above incorporating an obviously foolish modification:

We need not debate the absurdity of this second sentence. It is obviously false. Why is it false, Andrew? It is not false, in my opinion, because of some perfidy on the part of the newspapers. They were just going along with the popular story, having fun, increasing sales, and bolstering public morale during the long, dreary, cold months of winter, by discussing a supernatural person and his unique exploits, all of which were carried out, in the same geographic locale, by ordinary people, enduring the same cold temperatures, working hard, cutting trees in the winter time.

The fact that the newspapers went along with the gag, (in a progressive, public spirited fashion, entirely praiseworthy sociologically,) in no way absolves them, however, from a claim of having written fiction, despite presenting to their readers, an accurate, historical record of the legend, Paul Bunyan.

No, they are not at fault. The newspapers are honestly reporting a myth, as though it were factual. I don't blame the newspapers for this, nor do I blame the gospel writers for creating the myth of Jesus of Capernaum. One cannot, however, confound historical reporting, with reporting, detailed though it may be, of mythical creatures.

In other words, Andrew, there is nothing "historical" about claiming that the great lakes in North America were created to quench Babe the blue Ox's enormous thirst, nor that person xyz (i.e. JC): walked on water, raised folks from the dead, and cured blindness with spittle. The fact that SOME of the details within the 20th century newspaper accounts of the exploits of Paul Bunyan, and SOME of the details in the four Gospels are accurate, (Oscoda is indeed a city where extensive logging operations were carried out in North America, and the southeastern corner of Lake Galilee indeed touches the extreme western border of the Decapolis) and SOME of the details completely wrong, and still other details in conflict with details presented in one of the other Gospels, simply confirms the absence of historical utility in judging the caliber of the four written Gospels. They don't rise to the level of history.

Put another way: Any document presenting supposed eye-witness testimony confirming supernatural conduct by ordinary persons, is by definition not a member of the historical category, but rather, the religious, asking readers of such literature to accept all irrational information contained within the document, on faith. Authors of historical documents neither demand, nor expect, faith from readers of their texts. Therefore, no, Andrew, the gospels cannot be regarded as historical tracts. At best, they represent anecdotal evidence of the mythical character of JC. (anecdotal, because we know nothing about the authorship or dates of publication of the four gospels.)

avi

jgoodguy

Thus all of Josephus's writings are religious in nature because they contain eyewitness accounts of supernatural events.

mountainman

Hi Philosopher Jay,

There is certainly something about the saying "one picture can tell a thousand words".

If the scholars were even to examine what is under their feet, they would see the same thing.


I have a question about the foundations of the temple which are as yet not labelled. I would like to suggest that the foundations are Greek, moreover they are essentially Platonic, and that the temple of the historical jesus has been constructed over the top of the academy of the historical Plato. The fact that the earliest Historical Jesus is to be illicited from Greek literature only substantiates the claim that the foundations are Greek, perhaps Graeco-Roman.

The followers of Plato preserved a canon of books authored in the epoch BCE. They had a well respected lineage of "apostolic succession", and they were of the opinion that the divinity revealed in the books of Plato, and in the philosophical life of the Platonic teachers and illuminati, was supreme. The names of the key figures in the Platonic lineage prior to Nicaea are as follows: Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, Origen, Anatolius, Porphyry. If this lineage were expanded to include Pythagoreans, Apollonius of Tyana would appear in the first place.

There was a revolution in the 4th century. All the temples were destroyed to their foundations. New christian structures completed the (hostile) make-over, take-over.

Best wishes



Pete

PhilosopherJay

Hi Jgoodguy,

The analogy is not dependent on there being historical grounds or beliefs that Zeus built or was responsible for the Altar at Pergamon. Rather it is dependent on there being no historical evidence or a belief in it.

I was trying to make the point that fictional characters in text are not responsible for the text, in the same way that Zeus is not responsible for the temples dedicated to him, although the people who built the temples and the millions of people who made sacrifices near the temples believed it. There were plenty of Zeus scholars in those days who knew everything about Zeus and was sure of his historical existence too.

The Mythological interpolator/s were only the early Christians who connected up earlier text with later texts in ways that made sense to them. They meant to impress the people of their own time. I am sure they were not intending to mislead or trick the people of our time.

I like the idea of the EJ. We may say that this EJ is 2% of the Gospel Jesus and the other 98% is myth. The problem is proving this emphemeral Jesus or proving him necessary for the MJ.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

PhilosopherJay

Hi Pete,

Yes, I think at least some steps should be labelled Platonism, Neoplatonism, and Stoicism.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

aeebee50

I was looking for something celestial.

judge

Thank you. Please conform in future!

andrewcriddle

Hi Avi

In the case of Paul Bunyan the newspaper accounts were not intended to be taken seriously and the tall-stories are an indication of this.

Are you arguing a/ that the miracles in Mark indicate that Mark was not intended to be taken literally ? or b/ that the reported miracles inevitably destroy Mark's credibility as a serious historian ?

If you mean a/ then IMO you are applying modern genre conventions to an ancient text where they do not apply. If you mean b/ then you are rejecting the credibility of a great deal of ancient and medieval history.

Andrew Criddle

Yellum Notnef

Yes, the Hubble telescope got a picture of Jesus' house. It's a split level ranch with an in-ground swimming pool in the backyard.