aa5874

You have NOT presented a CASE. You merely made a statement. To make a case you MUST provide the evidence of antiquity that support your claim.

1. You cannot show when any writings attributed to "Paul" was actually written.

2. You cannot show that "Paul" could NOT have written ALL the Pauline writings.

3. You have ZERO credible corroborative evidence from antiquity that a character called "Paul" was an HERETIC before the Fall of the Temple in the1st century.

Kapyong

Gday all,

So,
here is the list of 90 with duplications boiled down, and the best bits left till last. I have given each claim a name and number for ease of reference.

[1.DIED] Jesus Died
* Was put to death 4:25
* He died. 16 additional verses
* He died. 5 additional verses
* He died. 3 additional verses
* He died 2:21
* He died 3:10
* He died. 3 additional verses
* He died. 2 additional references

[2.CRUCIFIED] Jesus was Crucified
* Was crucified 6:6
* Was crucified 1:13,23, 2:2, 2:8
* He was crucified. 13:4
* He was crucified 2:20, 3:1
* He died on a cross 2:8
* Was crucified according to the flesh by rulers (almost for certain speaking about men) of Paul's age (time) 2:8,

[3.CROSS] Jesus was associated with a Cross
* Is associated with a cross 1:17,18
* Is associated with a cross 5:11, 6:12,14
* His blood associated with the cross 1:20
* Nailing associated with the cross 2:14

[4.BURIED] Jesus was buried
* Was buried 6:4
* Jesus was buried. 15:4

[5.MAN] Jesus was a man or in human form
* Was a man 5:15, 5:17, 5:18, 5:19
* He was a man 15:20-21, 15:45, 47,47,49
* He was in figure as a man, in human form 2:7,8

[6.BLOOD] Jesus had a body with flesh and/or blood
* Shed his blood 3:25, 5:9
* He had a body with blood 11:24,27
* His body of flesh died 1:22
* Was in the flesh 1:3,8:3, 9:4-5a
* Had a body 7:4

[7.SUFFERED] Jesus suffered
* He suffered 1:5
* He suffered 3:10
* Suffered 8:17

[8.JEWISH] Jesus was Jewish
* Was of the Jewish race 9:5
* Became a servant to the Jews 15:8
* He was a Jew 4:4

[9.TEACHINGS] Jesus gave teachings
These only count as 1 claim - and none are clearly from Jesus anyway.
* Somehow persuaded Paul that thoughts make things unclean 14:4 possible teaching of Jesus
* He expressly forbid divorce. (if Lord applies to him) 7:10
* He commanded that "preachers" should be paid for their preaching. (if Lord applies) 9:14
* He taught about the end-time. (if Lord applies to him) 4:15

[12.NICE] Jesus was a nice guy
* He humbled himself 2:8
* He was obedient 2:8
* He was meek and gentle 10:1
* He became poor 8:9

[13.DIVINE] Jesus has some special divine connection
* In his body dwells deity 2:9
* He referred to God as his Father using the term "abba". 4:6
* He was sinless 5:21

[14.RELIGIOUS] Jesus death had religious significance
* His death was an act of righteousness 5:18
* His death was a "paschal lamb" sacrifice, implying that it happened during Passover Celebration. 5:7
* He fulfilled the OT curse of those hung on a tree 3:13
* He will come from Zion (Jerusalem) as a deliverer 11:26

[15.REPROACHED] Jesus was reproached by man
* Did not live to please himself, reproached by man 15:3

[16.STUMBLE] Jesus' cross was a stumbling block
* Was a stumbling block to Jews 9:33 Gal 5:11 says the stumbling block is the cross
* The stumbling took place in Zion (Jerusalem) 9:33

[17.JEWS] Jews crucified Jesus
* Jewish authorities were responsible for Jesus' death. 2:15

[18.BETRAYED] Jesus was betrayed
* Jesus was betrayed on the night of the Lord's Supper. 11:23

[19.BORN] Jesus was born of woman
* He was born in human fashion of a woman 4:4

[20.SEED] Jesus was the seed of David
* Was a direct descendent of King David, and his father Jesse. 1:3,15:12

[21.BROTHERS] Jesus had brothers
* He had brothers 9:5
* He had a brother named James, who later became a pillar in the early church. (if Lord applies to him) 1:19

[22.SUPPER] Jesus initiated the Lord's Supper
* He initiated the Lord's supper and referred to the bread and the cup, in the same way as presented in the gospels This is my body which is broken for you.etc. 11:23

So it boils down to about 2 dozen claims, 4-5 that matter.


K.

archibald

If you wanna talk Docetic, we can agree.



Well, that all depends on how far you want to push the point about whether it's purely reluctance or bias, and whether any response necessarily has to be 'mainstream', whatever that is taken to mean.

The number of scholars on this page would tend to suggest that the idea has been both explored and advocated, often.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth#G._A._Wells

Price is even a Fellow of the Jesus Seminar.

And renowned scholars, like Allison for example, who come to a different conclusion, explore the idea and admit that we can never know.

So, I'm not convinced, particularly when Earl Doherty says he has chosen not to go down that route.

I'm taking a break. Ciao. it's been fun. :]

Kapyong

So now let's classify these 22 claims :

Claims that Jesus had human characteristics or experienced things thats humans do :
[1.DIED] Jesus Died
[2.CRUCIFIED] Jesus was Crucified
[3.CROSS] Jesus was associated with a Cross
[4.BURIED] Jesus was buried
[5.MAN] Jesus was a man or in human form
[6.BLOOD] Jesus had a body with flesh and/or blood
[7.SUFFERED] Jesus suffered
[8.JEWISH] Jesus was Jewish
[12.NICE] Jesus was a nice guy
[15.REPROACHED] Jesus was reproached by man
[17.JEWS] Jews crucified Jesus
[18.BETRAYED] Jesus was betrayed


Claims that Jesus was divine or religious or different :
[13.DIVINE] Jesus has some special divine connection
[14.RELIGIOUS] Jesus death had religious significance
[16.STUMBLE] Jesus' cross was a stumbling block


Claims that imply Jesus was historical :
[9.TEACHINGS] Jesus gave teachings
[19.BORN] Jesus was born of woman
[20.SEED] Jesus was the seed of David
[21.BROTHERS] Jesus had brothers
[22.SUPPER] Jesus initiated the Lord's Supper


Claims that clearly place Jesus in history :
<null>

So out of a grand 90, that's really 5 claims that imply Jesus was a historical figure - that's IT.
Quite a let-down.

I hope it is clear now that claims that Jesus was like humans, or experienced human things means nothing - because mythical or spiritual or legendary beings do all sorts of human things without being historical.
'Human' does NOT equal 'historical'.
I hope that is clear now TedM :-)


K.

Toto

The number??

There are three 21th century personages with their own paragraphs. Wells is an outsider, because his field of study is German, not NT studies. Price describes himself as an outsider. Alvar Ellegård is also not from the NT area, and is not currently active.

These are the three with PhD's, which is the only requirement to belong to the Jesus Seminar.

I think you have drawn the wrong conclusion from the brief quote of Allison there.

How many times are you going to say good bye before you actually leave?

Take care.

TedM

nice summaries kapyong. eom.

archibald

Yes. I said there were a number from the 21st C. Oh no, wait. I didn't.


Yes. I admit, it's hard. :redface: But it might help if I disconnected my internet, or if you don't respond. If you don't want to assist me in that way, and of course you have no obligation, then take it that for whatever you write, I will respond, 'I take your point Toto, and I totally agree'. There. Now you have carte blance, and have an opportunity to say the most controversial of things. Not that you personally would tend to, in my opinion. :]

Cheers Toto.

Doug Shaver

That's what orthodoxy always does. Anyone who disagrees about what the evidence proves is just dismissing the evidence.

archibald

You have proof. Excellent. May I offer my services as publisher? I could make us a fortune. :]

GakuseiDon

Yes, me too. Here is how that conversation went:

GDon: As Doherty notes, there is a silence about the HJ amongst the extant Second Century apologists that is almost the equal to the silence in the First Century writers.
Toto: That's because Jesus is a theological construct with no real history. There were no 'historicists' in modern terms. They didn't care about a historical Jesus.
GDon: Okay. So the same could be true of Paul and the other First Century writers.
Toto: No. They would have been concerned about a historical Jesus. That's human nature.
GDon: Can you tell me how you, 2000 years later, know how "human nature" 2000 years earlier dictated how they wrote?
Toto: It's human nature, so it would have been the same. It's simply what we would expect.

Toto, feel free to rewrite the above as appropriate. And answer this question: What are you basing your "human nature" response to how people wrote 2000 years ago on?

There IS something going on around how they wrote in the first two centuries, up until the time the NT started to gain the same kind of authority of the OT. There IS a silence in the Second Century apologists that both Wells and Doherty address. Wells calls these "unexpected silences". Doherty notes that the Second Century silence is almost the equal to the silence in the First Century writers.

For Doherty, it is because the writers had no historical Jesus at the core of their Christianity.

Wells, contra Doherty, accepts that the Second Century apologists were Christians who believed in a historical Jesus. He believes that the Second Century "unexpected silences" have no implications on the First Century silence, since the later writers were in a different situation to the earliest Christians.

I can't explain the silence in either the First Century or Second Century writings. I suggest that it has to do with high-context cultures, and as Stanton pointed out in his response to Wells, similar historical silences can be found in the Jewish writings in the period. But I don't know. However, I can certainly note that "something is going on", and that "something" is recognised by both Doherty and Wells.

The bottom line is this: If Wells is correct that the "unexpected silences" amongst Second Century apologists does NOT mean that the writers weren't HJers, then this means we need to reset our expectations about what we see amongst the First Century writers. Our expectations are simply not a good guide to how they write 2000 years ago.