Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 08-20-2002, 10:50 AM

I think that you or Tyson should try posting on the Jesus Mysteries list. There has been some recent mention of Samaritans.

But try to extract the essence of her argument. You can't expect a lot of people to take the time out to read a 309 page ebook before discussing it.

Yuri Kuchinsky · 08-20-2002, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:


I couldn't get this link to work - it told me I didn't have permission to see it.

Perhaps you can access it from this webpage?

<a href="http://listserv.lehigh.edu/lists/ioudaios-l/Articles.html" target="_blank">http://listserv.lehigh.edu/lists/ioudaios-l/Articles.html</a>

It's _The Samaritans in the Hasmonean Period._ by Lester L. Grabbe.

Basically, Grabbe is saying that the enmity between the Jews and the Samaritans may have been exaggerated. Both the Jews and the Samaritans are Israelites (i.e. members of the House of Israel), and they have been known to be quite friendly with each other at various times. But they also had their conflicts, of course.

All the best,

Yuri.

Toto · 08-20-2002, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yuri Kuchinsky:


Perhaps you can access it from this webpage?

No, same problem. But I was able to download a paper with that title from this page:

<a href="http://www.soton.ac.uk/~josephus/josephus/texts.htm" target="_blank">http://www.soton.ac.uk/~josephus/josephus/texts.htm</a>

Grabbe, Lester L. <a href="ftp://astro.cc.lehigh.edu/pub/listserv/ioudaios-l/Articles/lgsamar.Z" target="_blank">"The Samaritans in the Hasmonean Period" </a>

08-20-2002, 04:57 PM

Greetings Sparty,

Welcome

Quote:

I guess I just wanted to find a real man under all the "fluff" of Christianity.

Quote:

I have a 'working theory', a presumption, that he really did exist

Quote:

(again...I PRESUME he was an historical person, not a myth).

Hmmm..
may I politely note these comments suggest you have already made up your mind there was a 'real' Jesus, and you are just seeking arguments to buttress your belief.

Are you prepared to research and debate whether Jesus existed? or have you made your mind up already?

Quote:

Yes, have read JesusPuzzle - can't say I'm that impressed. I find it too easy - a "cop out" just to claim there was no one there at all...it isn't a way of dealing with the situatin in hand.

Again, these comments suggest you have not properly considered the argument that there was no historical Jesus - vague attacks like "cop out" have no force of argument.

Why is it not a "way of dealing with the situation in hand"? what does that mean? it sounds like you rejected Earl's work without reading that much.

Earl does not just "claim" there was no historical Jesus - he argues in depth and at length for the case - what are your actual responses to his arguments?

Quote:

If Jesus didn't exist, then are we also to deny Buddha, Muhammed? Even Santa Clause was based on a real-life person!

This is very woolly thinking - Jesus has no relation to Buddha or Muhammed or Santa Claus or St Nicholas. Whether Jesus existed has nothing to do with these unrelated figures - the existance of Jesus must stand on the evidence.

Quote:

If he didn't live, then we have on our hands a mystery even greater than the miracles themselves (e.g., why so many people think that he did!).

Well, would you claim Mithra(s) existed? or Osiris? or Dionysus, Bacchus, Attis? Many people from ancient times believed in them, just like Jesus. And how many people believed for how many centuries, that sickness was caused was demons? does that make it true?

Furthermore, there ARE arguments that Buddha and Muhammed did not exist (not to mention Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Solomon, David).

Quote:

I would like to hear anyone's ideas about what Jesus (the real person) was ACTUALLY trying to do.

Well, again, this sounds like you have already decided there WAS a historical Jesus - so let me ask you :[*] what EVIDENCE do you base the existance of Jesus on?[*] how do you explain Paul's lack of mention of Jesus of Nazareth or his story?[*] how do you explain the lack of references to the story of Jesus of Nazareth for the entire 1st century and more - even by Christian writers?[*] how do you explain the lack of contemporary references to Jesus (e.g. Justus, Philo).[*] are you aware how LATE the evidence for the Gospels is?[*] how do you explain the crucial contradictions in the NT? (e.g. the post-resurrection appearances, or the census?)

One of the key issues on this forum is HOW we determine the "real" Jesus from the mass of information we have - it has been noted that there is NO ACCEPTED METHODOLOGY for separating fact from fiction in the NT - everyone has a view, opinion, claim, argument - but no-one has a METHOD that is more than OPINION.

Your opinion, Sparty, is as welcome as anyone's - but be prepared to defend and debate it !

You may like to check my page on contemporaries:
<a href="http://members.iinet.net.au/~quentinj/Christianity/EarlyWriters.html" target="_blank">Contemporaries</a>

Also, my page on the Gospel chronology :
<a href="http://members.iinet.net.au/~quentinj/Christianity/Gospel-Timeline.html" target="_blank">Gospel chronology</a>

And my page tabling the late origins of most of the Jesus story, in terms of documentary references:
<a href="http://members.iinet.net.au/~quentinj/Christianity/Table.html" target="_blank">Table of references to the Jesus story </a>

Quote:

as I am also a keen science fiction and metaphysics buff.

Aha!

Useful background to approach this (no, not joking).

Consider this idea, sparty:[*] Iesous Christos was Paul's word for the immortal soul, the image of the Godhead which is found in all humans, an emanation of God called the Son-of-God, the Logos (have you studied the Kabalah? very useful background indeed).[*] "crucify" was Paul's word for the Iesous Christos being "incarnated" in our lives (a higher being which is deadened in our life, but "lives" our death).[*] the "cross" is the body, or by extension, the physical plane.

If you read Paul with the Gospels in mind, its possible to interpret them literally (except for tricky passages like "our old man is crucified with Christ").

But if you read Paul with the Gnostics, Philo, Dream of Scipio, Ascension of Isaiah, On the Delay of Divine Justice in mind - one gets a very different and plausible idea - one that is closer to what he meant, in my view.

regards,
Quentin David Jones

fishfood · 08-21-2002, 10:35 AM

Well, yes! IASION,
That IS my whole point, as I have tried to make clear. I DO believe there was an historical person on whom the Christian faith was based. I have no problem with that...it seems I have chosen the wrong forum for this discussion - I wanted to talk about Jesus and the Samaritans, and a book I thought others might have read, but it seems YOU have decided that this particular forum is not for those who accept the man as real.

Accepting he was a real man does not imply acceptance of Christianity, or even theism, if that is your worry.

It seems YOU have not dared to accept that he might have been real..."He/she doth protest too much!" The "proof" for Jesus being a myth is just as tenuous, if not more so, than for him being 'real'.

Although I find many of these subjects intriguing, and worthy of further discussion, I think I shall leave it to you all to sort out which topics are and are not "allowed" and to choose at least one and stick to it...I find all this jumping to and fro too distracting.

I would gladly offer in depth analysis and debate one ONE subject at a time, but this obviously isn't the place for that.

As for me, well, this experience has taught me a lot...but I think I'll stick to face-to-face debate...this is a great idea for some, but it seems like too easy an opportunity to shoot down the less forthright, and too time-consuming, without the expected rich results, to be worth the effort.

Thanks, anyway, but goodbye!

Toto · 08-21-2002, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sparty:
...it seems I have chosen the wrong forum for this discussion - I wanted to talk about Jesus and the Samaritans, and a book I thought others might have read, but it seems YOU have decided that this particular forum is not for those who accept the man as real.

. . .

There are a number of posters here who accept that the man was a real historical figure, but you have to do more than just assert it if you want to have a discussion.

Yuri Kuchinsky · 08-21-2002, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:


There are a number of posters here who accept that the man was a real historical figure, but you have to do more than just assert it if you want to have a discussion.

Well, he didn't exactly say that he wanted to have a discussion on this particular subject (i.e. the Jesus Myth theory), did he? Last time I looked, the subject of this thread was still about Jesus & the Samaritans.

Don't get me wrong. I do think that what the Jesus Mythicists are saying is very important, and should be said. Unfortunately, there are all too many golly-gee lies and deceptions in this whole Historical Jesus academic industry. So the Mythicist contribution is very important, because it challenges some of these bunglers and incompetents who write their thick volumes about the Historical Jesus -- as if they have even the first clue about what really happened there.

It's just that so often the Mythicists tend to overstate their case. For one thing, almost invariably, the Mythicists tend to disagree with each other about the positive picture re what really happened with the Christian origins. They got the negative case all right but, as for the positive, there seems to be a bit of a problem there.

I don't think that they have already proven for sure that Jesus didn't exist. And the lack of a positive agreement among them should be troubling even for the Mythicists themselves.

All the best,

Yuri.

MOJO-JOJO · 08-21-2002, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GarColga:
sparty, thanks for the tip on the book. I lurk here and rarely post because some of the 'regulars' seem to be more interested in their little in-group BS than actually having real discussions.

Wow....someone finally said it!

Vorkosigan · 08-21-2002, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MOJO-JOJO:


Wow....someone finally said it!

If you want to make change, you have to post.

Vorkosigan · 08-21-2002, 02:54 PM

I wanted to talk about Jesus and the Samaritans, and a book I thought others might have read, but it seems YOU have decided that this particular forum is not for those who accept the man as real.

Iason likes to discuss this. However, the entire forum has noted that when you were challenged, you left.

In any case, there are dozens of threads going on now that have nothing to do with the HJ. My list for the last two days is 18 threads, of which arguably 3 are HJ-related. You could easily post in one of them.

Finally, sir, YOU entitled this thread:

Historical Jesus not a "Jew" but a Samaritan!

If you didn't want to discuss the HJ, why is it in the title?

Vorkosigan

[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]

08-21-2002, 02:54 PM	#40
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	I wanted to talk about Jesus and the Samaritans, and a book I thought others might have read, but it seems YOU have decided that this particular forum is not for those who accept the man as real. Iason likes to discuss this. However, the entire forum has noted that when you were challenged, you left. In any case, there are dozens of threads going on now that have nothing to do with the HJ. My list for the last two days is 18 threads, of which arguably 3 are HJ-related. You could easily post in one of them. Finally, sir, YOU entitled this thread: Historical Jesus not a "Jew" but a Samaritan! If you didn't want to discuss the HJ, why is it in the title? Vorkosigan [ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

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

08-20-2002, 10:50 AM	#31
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I think that you or Tyson should try posting on the Jesus Mysteries list. There has been some recent mention of Samaritans. But try to extract the essence of her argument. You can't expect a lot of people to take the time out to read a 309 page ebook before discussing it.

08-21-2002, 10:35 AM	#35
fishfood Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 9	Well, yes! IASION, That IS my whole point, as I have tried to make clear. I DO believe there was an historical person on whom the Christian faith was based. I have no problem with that...it seems I have chosen the wrong forum for this discussion - I wanted to talk about Jesus and the Samaritans, and a book I thought others might have read, but it seems YOU have decided that this particular forum is not for those who accept the man as real. Accepting he was a real man does not imply acceptance of Christianity, or even theism, if that is your worry. It seems YOU have not dared to accept that he might have been real..."He/she doth protest too much!" The "proof" for Jesus being a myth is just as tenuous, if not more so, than for him being 'real'. Although I find many of these subjects intriguing, and worthy of further discussion, I think I shall leave it to you all to sort out which topics are and are not "allowed" and to choose at least one and stick to it...I find all this jumping to and fro too distracting. I would gladly offer in depth analysis and debate one ONE subject at a time, but this obviously isn't the place for that. As for me, well, this experience has taught me a lot...but I think I'll stick to face-to-face debate...this is a great idea for some, but it seems like too easy an opportunity to shoot down the less forthright, and too time-consuming, without the expected rich results, to be worth the effort. Thanks, anyway, but goodbye!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.