mountainman

What a crazy idea!



The Quest for the Historical Jesus is over, whether we like it or not. The Jesus you discover here may not be the Jesus you had hoped to meet—but he did exist, whether we like it or not. We have it on authority.

In a sense, the QUEST is over for this well known man from Nazareth. He has been found by his flock at last, whether we like it or not.

We can all sleep well at night now because we know on authority, whether we like it or not, that Jesus was not invented out of whole cloth for nefarious purposes by those seeking to control the masses.

outhouse

people attributed miraculous things to Davey Crocket that we know never happened.

but he existed

Doug Shaver

The kind of hyperspecialization you're endorsing is good for insects, not humans.

If you claim that some event X happened in history, and you claim that some set of facts F constitute evidence for X, then you need a valid argument demonstrating that, to some pertinent degree of probability, the existence of F is inexplicable unless X was the case.

Doug Shaver

Bale's statement does not represent anyone's actual belief. Therefore, it is not a counterexample to Ehrman's claim.

aa5874

You promote logical fallacies--attribution of miracles is NOT evidence of existence.

You very well know that in the NT the Miraculous conception of Jesus was attributed to a Holy Ghost and a Virgin.

fatpie42

Hmmm... out of interest, did anyone in those ancient times dismiss the historicity of Zeus? At what stage does that start happening (since I'm sure Christians probably did so eventually)?

GakuseiDon

Early Christians and pagans didn't really dismiss the historicity of Zeus, as far as I am aware. Early Christians thought that the Greek/Roman gods existed, but were demons pretending to be gods. As for the Romans: there was a view that the gods were originally just men around whom legends gathered. Others thought that they were men who, through their virtue or innate power, became spirits ("daemons") that eventually ascended to heaven to become true gods.

Having said that, there was a view that the poets made up stories about the gods, and that at least some of the gods in the stories never existed, being either poetic fictions or allegory. This is expressed in Tatian's "Address to the Greeks":
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...n-address.html

According to you, Zeus is envious, and hides the dream from men, wishing their destruction. Wherefore, looking at your own memorials, vouchsafe us your approval, though it were only as dealing in legends similar to your own. We, however, do not deal in folly, but your legends are only idle tales...

For what reason is Hera now never pregnant? Has she grown old? or is there no one to give you information? Believe me now, O Greeks, and do not resolve your myths and gods into allegory. If you attempt to do this, the divine nature as held by you is overthrown by your own selves; for, if the demons with you are such as they are said to be, they are worthless as to character; or, if regarded as symbols of the powers of nature, they are not what they are called...

And Metrodorus of Lampsacus, in his treatise concerning Homer, has argued very foolishly, turning everything into allegory. For he says that neither Hera, nor Athene, nor Zeus are what those persons suppose who consecrate to them sacred enclosures and groves, but parts of nature and certain arrangements of the elements. Hector also, and Achilles, and Agamemnon, and all the Greeks in general, and the Barbarians with Helen and Paris, being of the same nature, you will of course say are introduced merely for the sake of the machinery of the poem, not one of these personages having really existed.

outhouse

they said davey crocket killed a BAR with his bare hands to LOL :constern02:

aa5874

Now, let us see what supposed Early Christians or early Apologetic sources thought of or wrote about Jesus.

1. The author of gMatthew wrote that Jesus existed as the Son of a Holy Ghost.

2. The author of gMark claimed Jesus existed as one who Walked on water and transfigured.

3. The author of gLuke claimed Jesus existed as the Holy thing of a Ghost.

4. The author of gJohn claimed Jesus existed as God the Creator.

5. The author of Acts claimed Jesus ascended in a cloud.

6. The author of the Pauline letters claimed he was NOT the apostle of a human being.

7. Justin Martyr claimed Jesus existed WITHOUT sexual union.

8. Tertullian claimed Jesus existed as the seed of a Spirit.

9. Irenaeus claimed Jesus existed a Child of the Holy Ghost.

10. Origen claimed Jesus existed as the miraculous product a Ghost.


Early Christians argued that Jesus did NOT exist as a man born of men.

Origen claimed Celsus was a LIAR when he claimed Jesus existed as human with a human father. See "Against Celsus 1"


It would appear Christians thought Jesus EXISTED as God Incarnate.

God Incarnate is a Myth.

The Jesus of early Christians was Myth [non-historical].

mountainman

On what basis does Bale's statement not represent the belief of John Bale?