Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 03-30-2012, 05:50 PM

The Jesus of the NT was completely Plausible in antiquity and that is Precisely why it is claimed he was Fathered by a Ghost, was God the Creator, that walked on water, transfigured, resurrected and ascended.

Justin Martyr BOASTED that his Jesus was born WITHOUT sexual union.

First Apology 21

Quote:

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter...

Jesus was just like the Myths of the Greeks!!!!

Justin Martyr must have thought that the Holy Ghost Conception, resurrection and ascension were of great Historical value. He most probably thought the Emperor of Rome, the Senate and the Roman people would be IMPRESSED by HIS Jesus.

Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, writers of antiquity show that Jesus as the Child of a Holy Ghost was Completely plausible.

Examine Tertullian's "On the Flesh of Christ"

Quote:

Now, that we may give a simpler answer, it was not fit that the Son of God should be born of a human father's seed...

It was PLAUSIBLE for Jesus to have NO human father and was of the seed of a Spirit.

And look at Origen, in "De Principiis"

Quote:

....Jesus Christ.......was born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit: that this Jesus Christ was truly born, and did truly suffer, and did not endure this death common (to man) in appearance only, but did truly die; that He did truly rise from the dead........and was taken up (into heaven).

There is NO need to conduct a poll just use the WRITTEN statements about Jesus just as we used the information for Pilate, Caiaphas, Satan and the angel Gabriel.

In the NT, Jesus was the Son of a Ghost and Gabriel was an angel. See Matthew 1. and Luke 1.

J-D · 03-30-2012, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

There is NO need to conduct a poll

Absolutely true. There is no NEED to conduct a poll, just as there is no NEED for you to post here.

aa5874 · 03-30-2012, 08:05 PM

If one was asked to describe Pontius Pilate in the NT Canon one would NOT conduct a poll--they just go read the Canon.

If one was asked to describe the character called Gabriel in the Canon one would NOT need a poll---they just go read the Canon.

And if someone questioned the historicity of Pilate and/or Gabriel then we SIMPLY need to find credible sources of antiquity--that is all.

I can find sources that mentioned Pilate the Governor of Judea but I can't find anything about Gabriel the angel.

I will accept Pilate as historical and Gabriel as Myth.

Now where can I find an human Jesus??--Not even in my wildest dreams.

Jesus was REVEALED but not REAL.

Paul was an apostle of NO-ONE and got his gospel [Universal Salvation by the resurrection] from his Imagination. See Galatians 1

mountainman · 03-30-2012, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

HJers fail to understand the Gospels--they are about Jesus the Son of a Ghost, the angel Gabriel, the God of Moses and Satan the Devil.

I don't know who understands the Gospels and who doesn't, but I know that I have never seen anybody understand you.

Your knowledge is incomplete. aa5874 has received on numerous occassions commendations from various posters.

aa5874 · 03-30-2012, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

HJers fail to understand the Gospels--they are about Jesus the Son of a Ghost, the angel Gabriel, the God of Moses and Satan the Devil.

I don't know who understands the Gospels and who doesn't, but I know that I have never seen anybody understand you.

Your knowledge is incomplete. aa5874 has received on numerous occassions commendations from various posters.

I PRESENT evidence, written statements from antiquity so I am not really into commendations. If I wanted commendations I don't even know where to go.

Now, it is most illogical and unreasonable to conduct a poll AFTER the Quest for an historical Jesus has already started and pass its 250 th year.

If we examine the same poll we will see UTTER Confusion--it is like we are looking for a character WITHOUT a face.

Doug Shaver · 03-30-2012, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Check off everything you would need to see to say a guy was a "Historical Jesus."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver post 13

I went with the crucifixion, some disciples, and the disciples thinking he was alive again after the crucifixion. That's not exactly my own definition, but it's close enough for the purpose of this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya post 16

What would you need to see, Doug, to say that Hercules was historical, not mythical?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver post 74

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

That would depend entirely on what the defenders of his historicity were saying about him. Show me one of those defenders, and then I will tell you about the man whom I would consider the historical Hercules if his existence were proven. (emphasis by tanya)

"proven" ?

really, Doug?

Does that mean, since you have selected crucifixion and existence of disciples, that you believe that the existence of Jesus of Capernaum has been "proven"?

No, it does not mean anything like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

On what basis, may I inquire, do your regard the existence of Jesus of Capernaum as PROVEN?

I don't. I have said how I define "historical Jesus." I believe the evidence is against his actual existence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Now, Doug, whatever else you are doing, please google Hercules, and tell me if the SEVERAL enormous stone temples dedicated to him, do not serve as ample evidence of his historical existence?

Sure, just as soon as you explain how my doing so would have any relevance to the present discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya post 76

Diogenes has a poll, designed to reveal which criteria one should select, in order to "qualify" someone "as a historical Jesus".

Several members of the forum have endeavored to explain why such a poll is futile, yet, you have identified a couple of Diogenes' parameters as meaningful evidence of the historicity of Jesus of Capernaum.

So, I repeat, do you find the existence of enormous stone temples, meaningful evidence of the historicity of Hercules?

If you do not regard those temples, Doug, as meaningful evidence of the historicity of Hercules, then, if you were to excavate a temple, somewhere, say, 2nd century, like those of Hercules, impressive, reflecting a significant investment of both time and wealth, but, dedicated, not to Hercules, but rather, to Jesus of Capernaum, would you then decline to identify those temples as evidence of Jesus' historicity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver post 116

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

you have identified a couple of Diogenes' parameters as meaningful evidence of the historicity of Jesus of Capernaum.

No, I have not.

this is not a private conversation, ...

Public or private, I did not say those things. You are misrepresenting me.

tanya · 03-31-2012, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Public or private, I did not say those things. You are misrepresenting me.

You mean those are not your posts on this thread? Do you wish to write that I have forged your responses?

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Absolutely true. There is no NEED to conduct a poll, just as there is no NEED for you to post here.

I would profit from his remaining here, an outstanding member of the forum, providing words of wisdom, like this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

If one was asked to describe Pontius Pilate in the NT Canon one would NOT conduct a poll--they just go read the Canon.

If one was asked to describe the character called Gabriel in the Canon one would NOT need a poll---they just go read the Canon.

And if someone questioned the historicity of Pilate and/or Gabriel then we SIMPLY need to find credible sources of antiquity--that is all.

I can find sources that mentioned Pilate the Governor of Judea but I can't find anything about Gabriel the angel.

I will accept Pilate as historical and Gabriel as Myth.

Brilliant, in my opinion. Thank you aa5874.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

How people define a term depends on their purpose. One common reason why people define a term is because they think it will help them to communicate their meaning clearly. One common reason why people discuss somebody else's definition of a term is because they think it will help them to understand more clearly whatever it is that the other person is trying to communicate. I don't know whether your purpose in discussing definitions is one of these, or both, or something else.

purpose: both; I have no idea why you would focus on my motivation in posing the questions, instead of addressing the questions themselves. My own psyche is not only boring, it is off-topic. Perhaps you have inquired in this fashion, instead of addressing the questions themselves, because you find my questions stultifying?

I challenged Diogenes the Cynic, and he declined to respond.
Perhaps you wish to engage, if so, then, please jump in to the debate, and address those questions yourself, instead of asking me why I have posed them to Diogenes. No one cares about my motivation for anything. People do care about the issues, however.

In case the questions have been simply overlooked by you, and not ignored, you will find them, in the post preceding this one, together with Doug Shaver's reply, accusing me of fraudulently misrepresenting his responses on this thread. I deny having altered messages posted by anyone on this forum.

Doug Shaver · 03-31-2012, 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Public or private, I did not say those things. You are misrepresenting me.

You mean those are not your posts on this thread? Do you wish to write that I have forged your responses?

Your quotations are accurate. I am questioning the accuracy of the interpretations that you present as if they were paraphrases of the quotations. When I say that I did not say what you claim I said, I am referring to those interpretations.

Doug Shaver · 03-31-2012, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

In case the questions have been simply overlooked by you, and not ignored, you will find them, in the post preceding this one, together with Doug Shaver's reply, accusing me of fraudulently misrepresenting his responses on this thread.

I did not accuse you of that.

I did accuse you of misrepresenting me, but I did not say or imply that there was anything fraudulent about your misrepresentations.

tanya · 03-31-2012, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Doug Shaver
Public or private, I did not say those things. You are misrepresenting me.

...

Your quotations are accurate....

Are these two sentences not contradictory?

I accurately quoted you, while concurrently misrepresenting you? Can we please return to addressing the focus of this thread, and cease complaints about tanya's quotations?

We need Doug, to ask for a proper response to the questions posed in 136.

View Poll Results: Check off everything you would need to see to say a guy was a "Historical Jesus."
God	1	2.63%
Resurrection	3	7.89%
Healed miraculously and drove out real demons	3	7.89%
Was a conventional (non-supernatural) faith healer and exorcist, but did not do miracles	13	34.21%
Performed nature miracles such as walking on water	3	7.89%
Was born of a virgin	2	5.26%
Said all or most of what is attributed to him in the Gospels	4	10.53%
Said at least some of what is attributed to him in the Gospels	21	55.26%
Believed himself to be God	2	5.26%
Believed himself to be the Messiah	5	13.16%
Was believed by his followers to be God	1	2.63%
Was believed by his followers to be the Messiah	16	42.11%
Was involved in some kind of attack on the Temple	9	23.68%
Was crucified	27	71.05%
Was from Nazareth	8	21.05%
Was from Galilee	12	31.58%
Had 12 disciples	3	7.89%
Had some disciples, not necessarily 12	25	65.79%
Raised the dead	2	5.26%
Was believed by his disciples to still be alive somehow after the crucifixion.	17	44.74%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 38. You may not vote on this poll

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

03-30-2012, 08:05 PM	#133
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	If one was asked to describe Pontius Pilate in the NT Canon one would NOT conduct a poll--they just go read the Canon. If one was asked to describe the character called Gabriel in the Canon one would NOT need a poll---they just go read the Canon. And if someone questioned the historicity of Pilate and/or Gabriel then we SIMPLY need to find credible sources of antiquity--that is all. I can find sources that mentioned Pilate the Governor of Judea but I can't find anything about Gabriel the angel. I will accept Pilate as historical and Gabriel as Myth. Now where can I find an human Jesus??--Not even in my wildest dreams. Jesus was REVEALED but not REAL. Paul was an apostle of NO-ONE and got his gospel [Universal Salvation by the resurrection] from his Imagination. See Galatians 1

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.