Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rodahi · 07-24-2002, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by IntenSity:
Rodahi
NB: The text that has been both emboldened and Italicised are those I have added after Peter Kirby portrayed me as a plagiarist for failing to indicate my sources.

1. Historians consider the narratives attributed to Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John to be evidence of a historical Jesus.
Are you saying that these so-called historians believe that tombs opened and the dead resurrected and walked in the streets? Are you saying that these historians believe that a man could go for 40 days without food and still be strong and that water could be turned into wine? And they also believe that a woman could get pregnant without being impregnated by a mans sperm?

Historians indeed!

Or do these historians only pick what they find credible?

2. You have not given good reasons why a mythmaker would create a character who has many negative qualities. You have merely shown that it is possible to do so. Have you considered the possibility that a historical Jesus existed and the writer included negative qualities because they were the ones Jesus exhibited?
The mythmaker would have to explain to you why he created such a "negative" character. That it is possible is adequate. You, OTOH, need to demonstrate that IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for someone to create such a negative character, which you have NOT.
You have merely asserted that "you see no sense" in someone doing that; the fact is, someone DID. Are you asserting that someone with such "negative" qualities is more likely to have existed historically than mythically? What are your reasons for such an assertion?
You need to make your appeal to personal incomprehension more compelling. So, far, its immanent in you.

3. I always try to go to primary sources when I discuss biblical/literary/historical issues (and I ask my students to do the same). Mark is THE primary source in this discussion. I have read this narrative numerous times and am quite familiar with it. You owe it to yourself to read it carefully BEFORE you conclude it contains NOTHING historical about Jesus.
Appeal to antiquity? I reiterate that even the earliest myth is still a myth.
I conclude its NON-Historical on several grounds:

1. Its extreme similarity to earlier ,myths Like the Homeric Epics (Iliad and Oddysey), Osiris' tory, Isis etc. From The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark,Dennis R. MacDonald explains how the Gospel of Mark could have been written. Among the parallels identified by Robert J. Rabel in a review of the book are: Odysseus and Jesus were both (sons of) carpenters and both suffered and endured many tribulations. They undertook heroic endeavors against a landscape of mountains, uninhabited regions, villages, and, most importantly, the sea. Each was surrounded by a band of foolish companions ,and each faced threats not only from a group of murderous usurpers but from dangerous supernatural foes like Circe and the demoniac in Mark 5:1-20 .Both also therefore resorted to secrecy. Jesus' transfiguration on the mountain (Mark 9:2-8) is said to be based on Odysseus' appearance to his son Telemachus in Odyssey 16, while his confrontation with the blind beggar Bartimaeus in Mark is modeled on Odysseus' meeting with Tiresias in Odyssey 11 . Odysseus' entry into the city of the Phaeacians prefigures Jesus' entry into Jerusalem, while Jesus' anointing by an unnamed woman in Mark 13-14 owes much to Odysseus' anointing by Eurycleia in Odyssey .Jesus' prayer at Gethsemane to avoid his execution resembles the end of Odyssey 10, Odysseus' "last supper" with Circe before sailing to Hades. Then compared to Iliad, Jesus imitates Achilles in his predictions of his imminent death, but otherwise he resembles Hector: both meet violent deaths and have their corpses rescued for burial--by Priam in the Iliad and Joseph of Arimathea in Mark .Finally, the young man at the tomb on Easter morning in Mark emulates Elpenor from the Odyssey. Mark's account of the death of John the Baptist was influenced by Homer's depiction of the death of Agamemnon. Mark describes two feasts at which Jesus feeds the multitudes in order to signal affiliation with the two feasts that begin Odyssey 3 and 4. "Hydropatetics" - finds Jesus walking on the water in imitation of the god Hermes, who flies over the water in both the Iliad and Odyssey. In brief, the book demonstrates that the gospel writers felt free to borrow and edit other texts, since at the very least Matthew and Luke did just that with Mark. They also took ideas from the Old Testament used midrash to add extra details. It's not unlikely a priori that these writers also took ideas from pagan traditions, especially given Paul's special interest in taking Christianity to the pagans. Paul himself said he wanted to be all things to all people, and he used certain pagan terms to explain his gospel, such as the Jewish-pagan combination of the "spiritual body."

Even Herods' baby-killing antic is very similar to the one in Moses' story. Compare Jonah spending three days in a whales belly to Jesus spending the same number of days in the tomb. Sumerian Innana also spent three days in hell before being resurrected. Prophecy or Mythmaking?

2. Its lack of Originality. Consider Psalms 22:1 and Mark 15:34 which say "My god, My God why have you forsaken me?". This is plagiarism. It is said Midrash was used to write the Gospels. If "Mark" (whoever it was) felt compelled to copy from the OT, then this is midrash at its best.

3. The anonymous nature of Mark makes it impossible to gauge how much credibility we can lend to his story. Including the idea that the original MSS were written in Greek, NOT Aramaic.

4. The late nature of the writing of the Gospels relative to Jesus' alleged death. It would have been impossible to remember all the details so many years later.

5. The total lack of evidence of existence of a hostorical Jesus outside the Gospels.

6. Mark's extreme ignorance of the Jewish customs and laws, meaning the Gospel was written by someone who was NOT a native Jew.

7. Lack of naturalistic plausibility about the claims made in the narrative ie the resurrection, driving out evil spirits, healing the sick(miracles) etc.

8. The irrational nature of the concept of Redemption, which is what the Gospels put forth.

9. Lack of any awareness of the early apostles about, Jesus' tomb, Calvary ,Nazareth or anything historical about Jesus.

10. Lack of internal consistency between the Gospel narratives.

11. Senseless nature of the Gospel stories: for example we are told in Mark 16 that "the women" bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body, YET we are told in John 19:39-40 that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus had already anointed Jesus' body, but even if that were the case, the fact that they were women and Jesus an adult male would have been questionable, even then, there was no case of anointing a well-buried body that had already been placed in a sealed tomb (it would have been ghastly to unshround the corpse to embalm it) even more ridiculous is the question they ask in Mark 16: "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?", yet they knew the stone was blocking the entrance of the tomb, were they that senseless?
And another example is In Matthew 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:17-19; Mark 8:31, and Luke 9:22 have Jesus telling the disciples that he will be 1) delivered up to the chief priests and scribes, (2) condemned to death, (3) delivered to the Gentiles to be mocked, (4) scoured, (5) crucified, and (6) raised on the third day. After their arrival in Jerusalem, the apostles saw Jesus (1) delivered up to the chief priests and scribes, (2) condemned to death, (3) delivered to the Gentiles and mocked, (4) scoured, and (5) crucified. Yet somehow, after personally witnessing these five specific fulfillments of Jesus’ statement, they didn't expect him to be resurrected. Why?

This ridiculous narratives make it difficult to take the Gospels seriously.

12. The theological lack of necessity for a historical Jesus. For example Sumerian religions also had resurrected deities but the resurrections did not necessitate a flesh-and blood person. Innana is an example, she came down to earth, died, went down to hell and resurrected after three days. Osiris is another example. These religions can be used as "proof of concept" that Jesus could still have died and resurrected without manifesting as a flesh-and blood man. The idea that there was a Jesus of Nazareth came much later.

We, as thinking, intelligent persons, can believe what we hear (or heard; I have been a non-believer for over 30 years) in Sunday School/Church about Mark. Or, we can believe many of the things commentators, in their diversity, say about Mark. BUT, ultimately, the best way to decide for ourselves what the writer says, is to read it carefully ourselves and think critically about it.
Great suggestion. Respond to my "objections" above and then we see how critically you have thought about this matter.

[ July 22, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]

I think it would be better if you were to give YOUR thoughts and opinions (rather than someone else's) AFTER you have read Mark. Let me know when you have read it, and I will be happy to continue discussing this issue.

Ted Hoffman · 07-25-2002, 04:49 AM

Rodahi
I think it would be better if you were to give YOUR thoughts and opinions (rather than someone else's) AFTER you have read Mark. Let me know when you have read it, and I will be happy to continue discussing this issue.
Are you saying my arguments are invalid because they are not mine originally? Telling me to reinvent the wheel is a cop-out, its like telling someone he has to excavate homo-erectus himself before he can argue for evolution. Shame on you!
No thank you sir. In any case, I have read Mark, if you have an argument make it, if you have none, simply back off.

rodahi · 07-25-2002, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by IntenSity:
Rodahi
I think it would be better if you were to give YOUR thoughts and opinions (rather than someone else's) AFTER you have read Mark. Let me know when you have read it, and I will be happy to continue discussing this issue.
Are you saying my arguments are invalid because they are not mine originally? Telling me to reinvent the wheel is a cop-out, its like telling someone he has to excavate homo-erectus himself before he can argue for evolution. Shame on you!
No thank you sir. In any case, I have read Mark, if you have an argument make it, if you have none, simply back off.

I am glad that you finally got around to reading Mark. Which part or parts of the narrative convince you that ALL of it is fictional? Which part or parts convince you that Jesus was not a historical personage?

Agnos1 · 07-25-2002, 09:42 PM

Intensity, I want you to know there's someone in your corner, and like you, don't wish to reinvent the wheel. Do any of your detractors have personal knowledge of quantum theory, or micro-biology? Have they ever actually compared humand DNA to chimpanzee? How do they know we share 99% of our genes with them then? Have they compared the spectral red-shift of various galaxies to confirm inflationary theory? Should we not rely on authority to some degree?

All I want to add, and thanks for those excerpts on Mark (very helpful), is please make sure to read authorities of different opinions (analysis) on this and and any issue and always try to make as objective an opinion as you can. Summarize in your own words. People will respect you more.

Ted Hoffman · 07-26-2002, 12:48 AM

Agnos1
Intensity, I want you to know there's someone in your corner, and like you, don't wish to reinvent the wheel.
So far, so good.

Do any of your detractors have personal knowledge of quantum theory, or micro-biology? Have they ever actually compared humand DNA to chimpanzee? How do they know we share 99% of our genes with them then? Have they compared the spectral red-shift of various galaxies to confirm inflationary theory? Should we not rely on authority to some degree?
We have no choice.

All I want to add, and thanks for those excerpts on Mark (very helpful), is please make sure to read authorities of different opinions (analysis) on this and and any issue and always try to make as objective an opinion as you can.

For 21 years, I listened to authorities in the name of bishops and priests and pastors. If you are referring to authorities on the "other side" like J.P. Holding, Prof McDowell (if he is an authority at all) etc, I have their books and I am busy debunking their arguments one by one.
One thing is for sure, when you meet a solid argument, you cant beat it down, you cant go around it and you cant jump over it.

So far, I havent encountered an irrefutable evidence for a historical Jesus. I will keep looking and thats why I started this thread. If I do not encounter one, I will hold my beliefs.

Summarize in your own words. People will respect you more.
Yeah, I have learnt the hard way, thanks to Kirby.

Ted Hoffman · 07-26-2002, 01:42 AM

[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]

Ted Hoffman · 07-26-2002, 01:59 AM

Rodahi
I am glad that you finally got around to reading Mark. Which part or parts of the narrative convince you that ALL of it is fictional?
I did NOT say ALL of it is fictional. This is a strawman argument on your part. It could be a story about a fictional person set on a real place. Would that make all of it fictional? I think NOT.

Which part or parts convince you that Jesus was not a historical personage?
His deeds and the events Mark puts in his life.
Like Mark 1: 23-26 "Just then there was a man in their synagogue with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
24 saying, "(21) What business do we have with each other, Jesus [3] of (22) Nazareth? Have You come to destroy us? I know who You are--(23) the Holy One of God!"
25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be quiet, and come out of him!"
26 Throwing him into convulsions, the unclean spirit cried out with a loud voice and came out of him."

Now, which spirit is this that cries out with a loud voice and comes out? How did they know it came out? Did they see it?
This is pure myth and can Not be history.

And Mark 1: 41 Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I am willing; be cleansed."
42 Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cleansed."
In Mark 2:1-5 a paralytic is healed

Do you believe this? that a lepers'wounds disapeared and maybe the missing limbs appeared?

In Mark 3: 3-5" He said to the man with the withered hand, "Get up and come forward! 4 And He said to them, "Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or to kill?" But they kept silent.
5 After (5) looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored."

Mark 4:39 And He got up and (27) rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Hush, be still." And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm.

You believe this?

Mark 5: 9-13 "And He was asking him, "What is your name?" And he said to Him, "My name is (7) Legion; for we are many."
10 And he began to implore Him earnestly not to send them out of the country.
11 Now there was a large herd of swine feeding nearby on the mountain.
12 The demons implored Him, saying, "Send us into the swine so that we may enter them."
13 Jesus gave them permission. And coming out, the unclean spirits entered the swine; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, about two thousand of them; and they were drowned in the sea."

Why should I believe this?

Mark 5:25-29 "A woman who had had a hemorrhage for twelve years,
26 and had endured much at the hands of many physicians, and had spent all that she had and was not helped at all, but rather had grown worse--
27 after hearing about Jesus, she came up in the crowd behind Him and touched His cloak.
28 For she thought, "If I just touch His garments, I will get well."
29 Immediately the flow of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of her (25) affliction."

I definitely do not believe this story actually took place.

In Mark 5:41-43 "Taking the child by the hand, He said to her, "Talitha kum!" (which translated means, "Little girl, (35) I say to you, get up!").
42 Immediately the girl got up and began to walk, for she was twelve years old. And immediately they were completely astounded.
43 And He (36) gave them strict orders that no one should know about this, and He said that something should be given her to eat."

I do not believe dead people can react to any sorts of commands.

Mark 6: 24-28 "And she went out and said to her mother, "What shall I ask for?" And she said, "The head of John the Baptist."
25 Immediately she came in a hurry to the king and asked, saying, "I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter."
26 And although the king was very sorry, yet because of his oaths and because of his dinner guests, he was unwilling to refuse her.
27 Immediately the king sent an executioner and commanded him to bring back his head. And he went and had him beheaded in the prison,
28 and brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the girl; and the girl gave it to her mother."

Too much mythical overtones.

Mark 6: 41-43 "And He took the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up toward heaven, He (41) blessed the food and broke the loaves and He kept giving them to the disciples to set before them; and He divided up the two fish among them all.
42 They all ate and were satisfied,
43 and they picked up twelve full (42) baskets of the broken pieces, and also of the fish.
44 There were (43) five thousand men who ate the loaves."

I dont believe in this either.

Mark 6:48-51 "Seeing them straining at the oars, for the wind was against them, at about the (49) fourth watch of the night He came to them, walking on the sea; and He intended to pass by them.
49 But when they saw Him walking on the sea, they supposed that it was a ghost, and cried out;
50 for they all saw Him and were terrified. But immediately He spoke with them and said to them, "(50) Take courage; it is I, (51) do not be afraid."
51 Then He got into (52) the boat with them, and the wind stopped; and they were utterly astonished"

This too I find incredible.

Mark 7: 25-30 "But after hearing of Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately came and fell at His feet.
26 Now the woman was a [4] Gentile, of the Syrophoenician race. And she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter.
27 And He was saying to her, "Let the children be satisfied first, for it is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs."
28 But she answered and said to Him, "Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table feed on the children's crumbs."
29 And He said to her, "Because of this answer go; the demon has gone out of your daughter."
30 And going back to her home, she found the child lying on the bed, the demon having left."

This too I do NOT believe sir.

Mark 8:5-9 "5 And He was asking them, "How many loaves do you have?" And they said, "Seven."
6 And He directed the people to sit down on the ground; and taking the seven loaves, He gave thanks and broke them, and started giving them to His disciples to serve to them, and they served them to the people.
7 They also had a few small fish; and (3) after He had blessed them, He ordered these to be served as well.
8 And they ate and were satisfied; and they picked up seven large (4) baskets full of what was left over of the broken pieces.
9 About four thousand were there; and He sent them away."

Unbeleivable!

Mark 9:2-4 "(2) Six days later, Jesus took with Him (3) Peter and James and John, and brought them up on a high mountain by themselves. And He was transfigured before them;
3 and (4) His garments became radiant and exceedingly white, as no launderer on earth can whiten them.
4 Elijah appeared to them along with Moses; and they were talking with Jesus. "

Dead people showing up in bright light? I do not believe this happened.

Mark 9:25-29 "When Jesus saw that (17) a crowd was rapidly gathering, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, "You deaf and mute spirit, I command you, come out of him and do not enter him again."
26 After crying out and throwing him into terrible convulsions, it came out; and the boy became so much like a corpse that most of them said, "He is dead!"
27 But Jesus took him by the hand and raised him; and he got up.
28 When He came (18) into the house, His disciples began questioning Him privately, "Why could we not drive it out?"
29 And He said to them, "This kind cannot come out by anything but prayer." "

Another fictitious event.

Mark 10:52 "And Jesus said to him, "Go; (49) your faith has made you well." Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road."

I do not believe this took place.

Mark 11:12-14: On the next day, when they had left Bethany, He became hungry.
13 Seeing at a distance a fig tree in leaf, He went to see if perhaps He would find anything on it; and when He came to it, He found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs.
14 He said to it, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again!" And His disciples were listening."
Mark 20 "As they were passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots up. "

This, I do not believe either.

Mark 15:37-38 "And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last.
38 And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom."

This too is unbeleivable.

Mark 15:46 "Joseph bought a linen cloth, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen cloth and laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb."
Its been argued that this was anachronistic because Jews at the time blocked tomb entrances with square stones, NOT round ones.

About Mark 16: I have said this in an essay I am working on to refute one of Josh McDowells books:

Quote:

About anointing dead bodies, McDowell is right that it was a Jewish custom, however, the women could not have been going to embalm Jesus because the body was customarily washed and anointed before being placed in a tomb or grave, which Joseph of Arimathea had already done to Jesus body.

In John 19:39-40: 38Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jews. With Pilate's permission, he came and took the body away. Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night, accompanied him. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds.[4] 40Taking Jesus' body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs.

There was no such a thing as second anointing. Furthermore, Jewish women were not allowed to anoint corpses of adult males so it would have been unthinkable for the women to set off to anoint Jesus’ body. The women are portrayed as unthinking and foolish when they travel to the tomb then on arriving, Mark 16:3 says they asked each other: Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb? It’s as if they went to the tomb expecting to find someone to roll it back for them.

It would also have been bizarre and ghastly for the women to get the buried corpse, remove the shroud, unwrap any other wrappings from it and then anoint it. If they felt so compelled, they would have looked for a man to do it for them. It also would have been nonsensical to anoint a body that had been properly buried.
Joseph of Arimathea is said to have taken the body of Jesus from the cross as Mark 16:43-46 says “Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. 44Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. 45When he learned from the centurion that it was so, he gave the body to Joseph. 46So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.”

Bryon R. McCane, a professor of religion, in The Scandal of the Grave says: “Jewish funerals almost always took place the same day as the death. The eyes of the deceased were closed, the corpse was washed with perfumes and ointments, its bodily orifices were stopped, and strips of cloth were wrapped tightly around the body—binding the jaw closed, fixing arms to the sides, and tying the feet together. Once prepared, the corpse was placed on a bier or in a coffin and carried out of town in a procession to the family tomb, usually a small rock-cut cave entered through a narrow opening that could be covered with a stone…But the Jewish rituals of death did not end with the burial. A week of intense grieving, called shiv'ah ("seven") followed, during which family members stayed at home and received the condolences of friends. (Mary and Martha were in this period of grief for Lazarus when Jesus arrived at their home.) Regarding the burial of criminals in the Jewish society he says “In Jesus' day, shameful burial meant two things: (1) a condemned criminal could not be placed in the family tomb until secondary burial, and (2) a condemned criminal could not be mourned in public. The family was not to observe either shiv'ah or shloshim. On the contrary, they were expected to agree with the verdict of the court.
Then he adds “It is striking that the burial of Jesus conforms to both these Jewish customs of dishonorable burial. In each Gospel story, Jesus was neither buried in a family tomb, nor did anyone observe the rituals of mourning for him. Even when the women came to the tomb, they came only to "see the tomb" or to anoint the body…Furthermore, Matthew, Luke, and John each explicitly described Jesus' tomb as one "where no one had yet been laid””
He then concludes: “Jesus' humiliation, then, did not end with his crucifixion. Even after he died, Jesus' body was treated as an object of shame—he was buried in disgrace like a condemned Jewish criminal.”
But who buried Jesus and where was he buried?
Marks’ Gospel establishes that it was only Joseph of Arimathea who took down Jesus’ body and buried him in his own new tomb. Luke and Matthew echo the same account. But is Marks that consistent with other books?

John 19:39-40 adds Nicodemus also and that they carried seventy pounds of spices.

In Acts 13:28-29: Though they found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb.

What do the non-canonical books say about Jesus’ burial?

In the Gospel of Peter 21-34 “And then they plucked the nails from the hands of the Lord and laid him upon the earth: and the whole earth was shaken, and there came a great fear on all. Then the sun shone forth, and it was found to be the ninth hour. And the Jews rejoiced, and gave his body unto Joseph to bury it, because he had beheld all the good things which he did. And he took the Lord and washed him and wrapped him in linen and brought him unto his own sepulchre, which is called the Garden of Joseph. Then the Jews and the elders and the priests, when they perceived how great evil they had done themselves, began to lament and to say: Woe unto our sins: the judgement and the end of Jerusalem is drawn nigh. But I with my fellows was in grief, and we were wounded in our minds and would have hid ourselves; for we were sought after by them as malefactors, and as thinking to set the temple on fire. And beside all these things we were fasting, and we sat mourning and weeping night and day until the Sabbath. But the scribes and Pharisees and elders gathered one with another, for they had heard that all the people were murmuring and beating their breasts, saying: If these very great signs have come to pass at his death, behold righteous he was. And the elders were afraid and came unto Pilate, entreating him and saying: Give us soldiers that we (or they) may watch his sepulchre for three days, lest his disciples come and steal him away and the people suppose that he is risen from the dead, and do us hurt. And Pilate gave them Petronius the centurion with soldiers to watch the sepulchre; and the elders and scribes came with them unto the tomb, and when they had rolled a great stone to keep out (al. together with) the centurion and the soldiers, then all that were there together set it upon the door of the tomb; and plastered thereon seven seals; and they pitched a tent there and kept watch. And early in the morning as the Sabbath dawned, there came a multitude from Jerusalem and the region roundabout to see the sepulchre that had been sealed.”

The Secret Book of James (dated circa 150 CE) says: The Lord answered and said: "What is your merit when you do the will of the Father if it is not given to you by him as a gift, while you are tempted by Satan? But if you are oppressed by Satan and are persecuted and you do the Father's will, I say that he will love you and will make you equal with me and will consider that you have become beloved through his providence according to your free choice. Will you not cease, then, being lovers of the flesh and being afraid of sufferings? Or do you not know that you have not yet been mistreated and have not yet been accused unjustly, nor have you yet been shut up in prison, nor have you yet been condemned lawlessly, nor have you yet been crucified without reason, nor have you yet been buried in the sand, as was I myself, by the evil one? Do you dare to spare the flesh, you for whom the spirit is an encircling wall? If you contemplate the world, how long it is before you and also how long it is after you, you will find that your life is one single day and your sufferings, one single hour. For the good will not enter the world. Scorn death, therefore, and take concern for life. Remember my cross and my death and you will live."
Peter Kirby, in Burial Traditions, explains: “…The setting (for the Secret book of James) of the work is a post-resurrection encounter with the risen Lord. The summary description of the hardships undergone by Jesus includes that Jesus was buried "in the sand." This Coptic phrase is sometimes translated non-literally to mean "shamefully," but it should be made clear that the very reason why the burial is shameful is that it is a burial in the sand… Thus, the Secret Book of James reflects a tradition that Jesus was buried in the sand or, to speak generally, in a dishonorable makeshift shallow grave instead of in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.”
Epistle of the Apostles (the Epistle of the Apostles is also known as Epistula Apostolorum). Although originally written in Greek, it is preserved in translations of Coptic and Ethiopic. The Coptic manuscript comes from the late fourth to early fifth century CE. The Ethiopic manuscripts come from the eighteenth century but preserve the entire text). He of whom we are witnesses we know as the one crucified in the days of Pontius Pilate and of the prince Archelaus, who was crucified between two thieves and was taken down from the wood of the cross together with them, and was buried in the place called [the place of the skull], to which three women came, Sarah, Martha, and Mary Magdalene. They carried ointment to pour out upon his body, weeping and mourning over what had happened. And the approached the tomb and found the stone where it had been rolled away from the tomb, and they opened the door and did not find his body.
In Summary, the Gospel of Peter says the Jews, not Joseph of Arimathea took down Jesus from the cross. The Secret Book of James says that Jesus was buried in the sand by the “evil one”. The Epistle of the Apostles says that Jesus was taken down from the three cross together with the three Jews and was buried in a tomb, not Joseph of Arimatheas’ tomb.
This proves that there are other independent traditions that do not entail the anonymous figure of Joseph of Arimathea and tomb burial. These traditions contradict Marks tradition, which as has been demonstrated, leaves a lot of questions unanswered and contradicts even other canonical burial traditions.
Peter Kirby adds “It is possible that Mark unwittingly retained a pericope that was formed by Christians who did not believe Jesus was given proper tomb burial by Joseph of Arimathea. The Parable of the Tenants is interpreted as referring to Jesus. In Mark 12:8, it is said, "So they seized him and killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard." This quite plausibly reflects an early tradition that those who arranged the execution of Jesus also arranged his shameful burial”.
What is evident thus far is that Joseph of Arimathea did not necessarily bury Jesus in a tomb as McDowell would have us believe. In fact, he could have been buried as a criminal, which would have been in line with Jewish customs. At the very best the Markan burial tradition is shaky and is contradicted by both non-canonical and canonical gospels.

And of course I do NOT believe in the resurrection and post-ressurection appearances.

Now, what have I left out?

For the reasons I explained earlier, which you evaded addressing, and for the above reasons, I do NOT believe the Jesus of Mark was a historical Character.

[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]

rodahi · 07-26-2002, 06:08 AM

Rodahi: I am glad that you finally got around to reading Mark. Which part or parts of the narrative convince you that ALL of it is fictional?

Intensity: I did NOT say ALL of it is fictional. This is a strawman argument on your part. It could be a story about a fictional person set on a real place. Would that make all of it fictional? I think NOT.

OTOH, it could be a story about a historical person with some fictional elements added.

rodahi · 07-26-2002, 07:10 AM

Initially, I will deal with a portion of the original posting. Hopefully, later, I will have time to address all of it.

rodahi: Which part or parts convince you that Jesus was not a historical personage?

IntenSity: His deeds and the events Mark puts in his life.
Like Mark 1: 23-26 "Just then there was a man in their synagogue with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
24 saying, "(21) What business do we have with each other, Jesus [3] of (22) Nazareth? Have You come to destroy us? I know who You are--(23) the Holy One of God!"
25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be quiet, and come out of him!"
26 Throwing him into convulsions, the unclean spirit cried out with a loud voice and came out of him."

Now, which spirit is this that cries out with a loud voice and comes out? How did they know it came out? Did they see it?
This is pure myth and can Not be history.

There is historical evidence proving that there were Jewish exorcists before, during, and after the time of Jesus. Superstitious people of that day (and some moderns) believed in the reality of demons. I personally do not think demons exist, but Jesus and his audience certainly did. I don't think the demon cried out, but that the "possessed" man himself spoke. Perhaps the audience became convinced that the demon had left the man when he calmed down.

IntenSity: And Mark 1: 41 Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I am willing; be cleansed."
42 Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cleansed."
In Mark 2:1-5 a paralytic is healed

Do you believe this? that a lepers'wounds disapeared and maybe the missing limbs appeared?

I think the following translation better depicts the above incident:

"Then a leper comes up to him, pleads with him, falls down on his knees, and says to him, 'If you want to, you can make me clean.'
Although Jesus was indignant, he stretched out his hand, touched him, and says to him, 'Okay--you're clean?'
And right away the leprosy disappeared, and he was made clean.
And Jesus snapped at him, and dismissed him curtly with this warning: 'See that you don't tell anyone anything, but go, have a priest examine your skin." Mk. 1:40-44, The Complete Gospels

If this translation better tells the story, then it is not really incredible. Jesus (magician par excellence) became angry at a victim's insistence that he help him; Jesus performed a magical act. The skin disease didn't actually disappear, but members of the audience may have been convinced that it did. Jesus sent the victim away.

IntenSity: In Mark 3: 3-5" He said to the man with the withered hand, "Get up and come forward! 4 And He said to them, "Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or to kill?" But they kept silent.
5 After (5) looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored."

This is another example of what Jewish magicians could do. The hand was not actually healed but the audience was convinced that it was.

IntenSity: Mark 4:39 And He got up and (27) rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Hush, be still." And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm.

You believe this?

I don't think anyone can get the wind to follow verbal commands, BUT ancient superstitious people believed that it could be done, especially if they were under the spell of a good magician.

IntenSity: Mark 5: 9-13 "And He was asking him, "What is your name?" And he said to Him, "My name is (7) Legion; for we are many."
10 And he began to implore Him earnestly not to send them out of the country.
11 Now there was a large herd of swine feeding nearby on the mountain.
12 The demons implored Him, saying, "Send us into the swine so that we may enter them."
13 Jesus gave them permission. And coming out, the unclean spirits entered the swine; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, about two thousand of them; and they were drowned in the sea."

Why should I believe this?

This incident may not have happened precisely as presented; however, there is evidence that ancient superstitious people believed that demons could be successfully commanded (by a good magician) to leave a person and go into another person, animal, or object. I agree with you. I don't think the incident actually happened the way Mark suggested.

I do think there are historical elements present, however. After Jesus had sent the demons into the pigs, the townspeople came to see what had occurred: "And they come to Jesus and notice the demoniac sitting with his clothes on and with his wits about him, the one who had harbored Legion, and they got scared. And those who had seen told them what had happened to the demoniac, and all about the pigs. And they started begging him to go away from the region." Mk. 5:15-17, The Complete Gospels.

Question: Why would a person write an account about a great fictional exorcist AND include the part about people begging him to leave their area?

Ted Hoffman · 07-26-2002, 07:48 AM

[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]

07-26-2002, 01:42 AM	#76
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]</p>

07-26-2002, 07:48 AM	#80
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	[ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: IntenSity ]</p>

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

07-25-2002, 04:49 AM	#72
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	Rodahi I think it would be better if you were to give YOUR thoughts and opinions (rather than someone else's) AFTER you have read Mark. Let me know when you have read it, and I will be happy to continue discussing this issue. Are you saying my arguments are invalid because they are not mine originally? Telling me to reinvent the wheel is a cop-out, its like telling someone he has to excavate homo-erectus himself before he can argue for evolution. Shame on you! No thank you sir. In any case, I have read Mark, if you have an argument make it, if you have none, simply back off.

07-25-2002, 09:42 PM	#74
Agnos1 Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Walnut Creek Posts: 41	Intensity, I want you to know there's someone in your corner, and like you, don't wish to reinvent the wheel. Do any of your detractors have personal knowledge of quantum theory, or micro-biology? Have they ever actually compared humand DNA to chimpanzee? How do they know we share 99% of our genes with them then? Have they compared the spectral red-shift of various galaxies to confirm inflationary theory? Should we not rely on authority to some degree? All I want to add, and thanks for those excerpts on Mark (very helpful), is please make sure to read authorities of different opinions (analysis) on this and and any issue and always try to make as objective an opinion as you can. Summarize in your own words. People will respect you more.

07-26-2002, 12:48 AM	#75
Ted Hoffman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: "" Posts: 3,863	Agnos1 Intensity, I want you to know there's someone in your corner, and like you, don't wish to reinvent the wheel. So far, so good. Do any of your detractors have personal knowledge of quantum theory, or micro-biology? Have they ever actually compared humand DNA to chimpanzee? How do they know we share 99% of our genes with them then? Have they compared the spectral red-shift of various galaxies to confirm inflationary theory? Should we not rely on authority to some degree? We have no choice. All I want to add, and thanks for those excerpts on Mark (very helpful), is please make sure to read authorities of different opinions (analysis) on this and and any issue and always try to make as objective an opinion as you can. For 21 years, I listened to authorities in the name of bishops and priests and pastors. If you are referring to authorities on the "other side" like J.P. Holding, Prof McDowell (if he is an authority at all) etc, I have their books and I am busy debunking their arguments one by one. One thing is for sure, when you meet a solid argument, you cant beat it down, you cant go around it and you cant jump over it. So far, I havent encountered an irrefutable evidence for a historical Jesus. I will keep looking and thats why I started this thread. If I do not encounter one, I will hold my beliefs. Summarize in your own words. People will respect you more. Yeah, I have learnt the hard way, thanks to Kirby.

07-26-2002, 06:08 AM	#78
rodahi Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Weslaco, TX, USA Posts: 137	Rodahi: I am glad that you finally got around to reading Mark. Which part or parts of the narrative convince you that ALL of it is fictional? Intensity: I did NOT say ALL of it is fictional. This is a strawman argument on your part. It could be a story about a fictional person set on a real place. Would that make all of it fictional? I think NOT. OTOH, it could be a story about a historical person with some fictional elements added.

07-26-2002, 07:10 AM	#79
rodahi Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Weslaco, TX, USA Posts: 137	Initially, I will deal with a portion of the original posting. Hopefully, later, I will have time to address all of it. rodahi: Which part or parts convince you that Jesus was not a historical personage? IntenSity: His deeds and the events Mark puts in his life. Like Mark 1: 23-26 "Just then there was a man in their synagogue with an unclean spirit; and he cried out, 24 saying, "(21) What business do we have with each other, Jesus [3] of (22) Nazareth? Have You come to destroy us? I know who You are--(23) the Holy One of God!" 25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be quiet, and come out of him!" 26 Throwing him into convulsions, the unclean spirit cried out with a loud voice and came out of him." Now, which spirit is this that cries out with a loud voice and comes out? How did they know it came out? Did they see it? This is pure myth and can Not be history. There is historical evidence proving that there were Jewish exorcists before, during, and after the time of Jesus. Superstitious people of that day (and some moderns) believed in the reality of demons. I personally do not think demons exist, but Jesus and his audience certainly did. I don't think the demon cried out, but that the "possessed" man himself spoke. Perhaps the audience became convinced that the demon had left the man when he calmed down. IntenSity: And Mark 1: 41 Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I am willing; be cleansed." 42 Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cleansed." In Mark 2:1-5 a paralytic is healed Do you believe this? that a lepers'wounds disapeared and maybe the missing limbs appeared? I think the following translation better depicts the above incident: "Then a leper comes up to him, pleads with him, falls down on his knees, and says to him, 'If you want to, you can make me clean.' Although Jesus was indignant, he stretched out his hand, touched him, and says to him, 'Okay--you're clean?' And right away the leprosy disappeared, and he was made clean. And Jesus snapped at him, and dismissed him curtly with this warning: 'See that you don't tell anyone anything, but go, have a priest examine your skin." Mk. 1:40-44, The Complete Gospels If this translation better tells the story, then it is not really incredible. Jesus (magician par excellence) became angry at a victim's insistence that he help him; Jesus performed a magical act. The skin disease didn't actually disappear, but members of the audience may have been convinced that it did. Jesus sent the victim away. IntenSity: In Mark 3: 3-5" He said to the man with the withered hand, "Get up and come forward! 4 And He said to them, "Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or to kill?" But they kept silent. 5 After (5) looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he stretched it out, and his hand was restored." This is another example of what Jewish magicians could do. The hand was not actually healed but the audience was convinced that it was. IntenSity: Mark 4:39 And He got up and (27) rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Hush, be still." And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm. You believe this? I don't think anyone can get the wind to follow verbal commands, BUT ancient superstitious people believed that it could be done, especially if they were under the spell of a good magician. IntenSity: Mark 5: 9-13 "And He was asking him, "What is your name?" And he said to Him, "My name is (7) Legion; for we are many." 10 And he began to implore Him earnestly not to send them out of the country. 11 Now there was a large herd of swine feeding nearby on the mountain. 12 The demons implored Him, saying, "Send us into the swine so that we may enter them." 13 Jesus gave them permission. And coming out, the unclean spirits entered the swine; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, about two thousand of them; and they were drowned in the sea." Why should I believe this? This incident may not have happened precisely as presented; however, there is evidence that ancient superstitious people believed that demons could be successfully commanded (by a good magician) to leave a person and go into another person, animal, or object. I agree with you. I don't think the incident actually happened the way Mark suggested. I do think there are historical elements present, however. After Jesus had sent the demons into the pigs, the townspeople came to see what had occurred: "And they come to Jesus and notice the demoniac sitting with his clothes on and with his wits about him, the one who had harbored Legion, and they got scared. And those who had seen told them what had happened to the demoniac, and all about the pigs. And they started begging him to go away from the region." Mk. 5:15-17, The Complete Gospels. Question: Why would a person write an account about a great fictional exorcist AND include the part about people begging him to leave their area?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.