No Robots

[T]he Gospel, which was originally something Jewish, becomes a book—and certainly not a minor work—within Jewish literature. This is not because, or not only because, it contains sentences which also appear in the same or a similar form in the Jewish works of that time. Nor is it such—in fact, it is even less so—because the Hebrew or Aramaic breaks again and again through the word forms and sentence formations of the Greek translation. Rather it is a Jewish book because—by all means and entirely because—the pure air of which it is full and which it breathes is that of the Holy Scriptures; because a Jewish spirit, and none other, lives in it; because Jewish faith and Jewish hope, Jewish suffering and Jewish distress, Jewish knowledge and Jewish expectations, and these alone, resound through it—a Jewish book in the midst of Jewish books. Judaism may not pass it by, nor mistake it, nor wish to give up all claims here. Here, too, Judaism should comprehend and take note of what is its own.--"The Gospel as a document of history". In Judaism and Christianity / Leo Baeck. Philadelphia : Jewish Publication Society of America, 1958. p. 101-102.

Solo

Yes, of course, if you are dyslexic...

Jiri

aa5874

Only the dyslexic will argue that absence of evidence is evidence of existence.

Absence of evidence is consistent with non-existence. It reasonable to assume non-existence with absence of evidence unless you are dyslexic.

All things considered non-existent will have absence of evidence.

All things that are known to exist exhibit some form of evidence.

Absence of evidence cannot increase or confirm existence.

Achilles was deemed to be mythical because historical evidence is absent, just like Jesus.

Absence of evidence is exactly what the mythicist needs.

Jesus was truly believed to be a God and there is no evidence anywhere that Jesus lived as human or a God.

Jesus was a total myth. Well, unless you are dyslexic.

No Robots

It is Cartledge who equates the historical Alexander with the historical Christ.

Most of Jewish literature was oral. The Talmud was completely oral until a.d. 200.

The amazing thing about the Gospels is that they do reveal so much of the personality at their center.

Well, in my view, there is no uncertainty about the existence of either of them. I do not expect to arrive at any agreement on that question with you, however.

No Robots

It is preposterous to deny that Christ was anything other than a Jew. In the end, humanity divides into those who are receptive of Christ's prophetic Judaism, and those who are not. There is nothing wrong in not being so receptive. Hell, not everybody likes Shakepeare's plays. However, if some people make it a habit to slam Shakespeare as a fraud, a hack, a plagiarist or even an illusion, it behooves those who are truly receptive of his work to make their case for his veracity, authenticity and integrity. The same responsibility applies to those who are receptive of Christ. In a sense, mythicists are the last virgin territory for evangelism. What is needed, though, is not the old evangelism of Christian religion; but rather the as yet unpracticed evangelism of Christ's own prophetic Judaism.

aa5874

It is absurd to think that Jesus of the NT was a Jew or human. Jesus of the NT was conceived through a multiplicity of errors.

Jesus of the NT was the fulfillment of errors.

Simon barCocheba, almost 100 years later, was the type of Messiah expected by the Jews. Simon was the real Jew, not Jesus.

Jesus was portrayed in effect as the anti-Christ to the Jews.

gentleexit

The failure of Simon et al would make a Christ ala Jesus positively welcome. Down on your luck, first lose temple, then lose city, how not to lose everything? Put "the city of god" up elsewhere (as Augustine would later as Rome fell). Definitely put it there if you are a Hellenised Jew trying to fit in, trying to distance yourself from troublemakers. Far from being the Anti-Christ, after the two wars, "Jesus" was the only Christ - other than saying, one would come soon, which begged - after what? Havn't we suffered enough?

Was there once a messianic Jesus of Galilee? Maybe. Actually probably. Maybe more than one. It's a common name and shtick. But does it matter whether there was a somebody underneath? We know the robes were piled on. Pealing them off, one by one, is the interesting thing. Whether there's a peasant preacher under them all - not so much.

aa5874

A man executed for blasphemy by the Jews was the Christ? Jesus of the NT was a total failure by any standard. If Jesus was a man, he only predicted that he would be dead.

There are no layers to peel from Jesus of the NT, except perhaps fake layers. Virtually every single so-called fulfillment of prophecy of Jesus is completely in error by mutilation of Hebrew scriptures.

Jesus of the NT is as fake as can be from conception [Isaiah 7.14], crucifixion [Psalms 22] and death [Jonah1.17].

His message was contradictory and was based on erroneous and mis-guided interpretations of Hebrew scripture.

In the NT, Jesus asked his followers to forgive 70 times 7, yet Jesus was extremely unforgiving to the Pharisees. He called them vipers and agents of the devil. Jesus even spoke to them in parables that they might remain in their sins.

Matthew 13.13-15 Sometime after speaking those words, based on the NT, Jesus was executed for blasphemy.

Jesus has been exposed, he has no real layers, he was a fraud. There is nothing left.

It is untenable that such a fraud was offered as a sacrifice to God, was worshipped as a God to provide salvation for the Jews during the very time Philo was on his way to the Emperor of Rome to have effigies removed and when Josephus wrote about a similar occurence during the time of Pilate.

The human Jesus is full of contradiction and errors.

Roger Pearse

It's not an argument that I have come across. Just thinking about the literary evidence only... wouldn't it be rather a good argument, considering the lateness of our best sources? Our dependence on Arrian, writing in the second century AD?

I was wondering what contemporary literary accounts exist. Do any? Demosthenes is a bit early... <wondering>

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

Interesting; I'd like a list of both if you have it, or a link to one.

All the best,

Roger Pearse