Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Asha'man · 01-02-2002, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CowboyX:

The problem as I see it with Sheaffer's argument is that is highly speculative, not supported by the text evidence and seems to presume the the trial before the Sanhedrin and all that has some historical basis. I see no reason to accept any of those presuppositions, though if the original poster would like to present Shaeffer's argument in full we could certainly discuss it.

I would love to see a full discussion of Sheaffer's premise here, but I'm not exactly going to type the whole thing in.

Let me see if I can summarize, and bring out more detail as areas are discussed.

The first point is the quote at the top of the thread, and the others I pointed out earlier, that mention a tree, rather than a cross.

Add to this Deuteronomy 13:10; 21:22, which gives the punishment for blasphemy as stoning and hanging the body on a tree. The body must be removed from the tree before sundown, however. Sheaffer states that Roman practice was to leave the body up on the cross till it rotted, as a reminder to others. The gospels have Jesus being taken down immediately and put into a tomb. This makes things look like Jewish law was being followed, not Roman.

The trial of Jesus also hints of Jewish law being followed, but it is badly obscured. A trial before the Sanhedrin might be the visits to the priests that occured before Jesus was taken to Pilot. Again, Jewish law insists that a man be executed on the same day as the guilty verdict, while the Romans were more likely to let a condemned man rot in a jail for a while.

Sheaffer points to The Jewish Encyclopedia, which states that the Jews were stripped of the right to inflict capital punishment in the year 40CE. Before then, they had that right, and were fairly protective of it. He points to an uproar (docuemented by Josephus) in 48BCE, where Herod executed some bandits without giving them a trial before the Sanhedrin.

Talmudic sources also indicate that the Sanhedrin was carrying out their own executions at the time, and even mention Yeshu ben Stada being killed on the eve of passover. He also points to the Toldoth Jesu, which does document the death of Jesus as following Jewish law. (While many people argue that the Toldoth Jesu was written much later as an attack on Christianity, I see no better weapon to use than the truth, and the Jews were pretty good about keeping oral tradition alive.)

01-02-2002, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi:
Here's a fun one I haven't seen cult members deal with of late:

The imagery of the tree is archetypal and "the Y tree" was also used by many Canadian Indians. In specific the "Yellowheads" of the Canadian Rockies, the Salish and the Shuswap tribes.

01-03-2002, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amos:


The imagery of the tree is archetypal and "the Y tree" was also used by many Canadian Indians. In specific the "Yellowheads" of the Canadian Rockies, the Salish and the Shuswap tribes.

Sorry guys, I did not mean to spoil your party. You can join the "Mary was raped" party and I will not spoil your fun.

Amos

Toto · 01-03-2002, 09:18 AM

Amos - what is the 'Y' tree? Are you saying there is some universal primodial symbolism to trees, or hanging in a tree? How do you relate Native Americans to Palestine? I do know that some connections have been traced between pre-Columbian Americans and central Asia. But Palestine?

I tried doing some on line research on the Toldoth Jesu, but had to put it aside for some real work. I am not a Talmudic scholar, but from what I read, the tales in the Talmud that might be about Jesus are obviously legendary and deliberately insulting, made up as part of the reaction Jews had to the upstart Christians. They are about as likely to be true as what Jay Leno says about Osama bin Laden on late night TV.

If Apikorus sees this thread, perhaps he can add something.

Asha'man · 01-03-2002, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
I tried doing some on line research on the Toldoth Jesu, but had to put it aside for some real work. I am not a Talmudic scholar, but from what I read, the tales in the Talmud that might be about Jesus are obviously legendary and deliberately insulting, made up as part of the reaction Jews had to the upstart Christians. They are about as likely to be true as what Jay Leno says about Osama bin Laden on late night TV.

I would honestly love to see what your research could provide. I haven't been able to find much myself.

My opinion is that the Toldoth Jesu is just as reliable as the NT. Both were written with a purpose, and the authors didn't feel obligated to stick to the truth. However, by setting them side-by-side, and examining where they agree and differ, we can speculate on what might have been the original story, and what modifications may have been done later. This is essentially what Sheaffer has done. He follows the Jesus story from Paul to the gospels and later, and looks for changes and additions.

The logic seems pretty good to me. Text written before the gospels says "hung in a tree." Anything written later sticks to the crucifixion story. Why the change?

If we assume that the stories were evolving under pressure, we can look for pieces of earlier stories that didn't get completely eradicated. We can also conclude that additions were made to squash objections, and therefore see what those objections might have been.

The editor changed the most important part, the death, but didn't realize that the pre-trial and removal of the body also point to a different (older) story. Since the Toldoth Jesu also points to a different story, we can speculate about the original events.

I know this isn't science, isn't provable or refutable. But it helped me greatly, because I could see a reasonable chain of events that would alter a true story into the unbelievable one that we have today. That reasonable chain of events was critical to me.

Just like in the creationist/evolution debate, I need an alternate theory that makes sense. Sheaffer's theory makes sense to me, even if it contains a good bit of speculation.

Asha'man

PS. Sheaffer also writes about the virgin birth and the resurrection. In these cases, his writing is probably easier to accept, since he argues that Mary got pregnant the usual way, and the body of Jesus was simply removed from the tomb.

Toto · 01-03-2002, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Asha'man:

I would honestly love to see what your research could provide. I haven't been able to find much myself.

Just put "toldoth jesu" into google. You will get a number of Christian sites describing it as Jewish hate literature, but also this scholarly article:

<a href="http://www.wheaton.edu/distancelearning/Post-70.htm" target="_blank">On the hostility in the Talmud to Christians</a>

Quote:

My opinion is that the Toldoth Jesu is just as reliable as the NT. . . .

The logic seems pretty good to me. Text written before the gospels says "hung in a tree." Anything written later sticks to the crucifixion story. Why the change? . . .

Agreed, both are largely fictional. I see no reason to assume that either one is based on any real event, as opposed to a symbolic meaning.

Does this mean that you think Acts was written before the Gospels? I would be interested in any support for that.

Quote:

Just like in the creationist/evolution debate, I need an alternate theory that makes sense.

This isn't the forum to discuss it, but briefly - why doesn't evolution make sense to you, and what is the alternative?

Asha'man · 01-03-2002, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:

This isn't the forum to discuss it, but briefly - why doesn't evolution make sense to you, and what is the alternative?

Sorry, you have misunderstood my position. Evolution makes perfect sense. Creationism, not being scientific, does not provide any form of alternate theory to explain things, and rapidly falls on its face in any scientific debate. I think the debates in the Evolution/Creation forum demonstrate this quite nicely.

But those debates do demonstrate the need for a viable alternate theory when trying to reject another theory. Since the Jesus stories couldn't be true as written, I needed an alternate explanation I could live with. Either the stories were 100% fabricated, based purely on the imagination of the authors and theft from other mythologies, or there was a little bit of truth behind the stories, and they were simply blown way out of proportion. I prefer the idea that there might have been some sort of movement started by a guy named Jesus, who was subsequently killed for stirring up trouble.

(spelling fixes)

[ January 03, 2002: Message edited by: Asha'man ]

01-03-2002, 02:49 PM

Thanks Toto, it is not me who relates the Native Americans to Palestine but I just wanted to point out that the crucifixion of the ego consciousness to a tree is not restricted to our mythology. The Y Tree is just a description of a tree that fits the shape of our body well as the image of total surrender during this annihilation.

Perhaps I should make clear that in the mythology of the Yellowhead Indians they also have the four characters (personifications) that we call first Adam and second Adam (Christ) and first Eve and second Eve (Mary). These concepts are universal and can be identified in every mythology. If there are more gods, or female gods, they all fit someplace and are also universal. All we have to do is identify them.

In "The Spire" Golding called it (his "tree") the "Cathedral" and the spire was actually the ego he had built on the crossroads of his own chest (the Cathedral was his own body). The four personifications here were Goody as Eve, Pangall as Adam, Rachel as Mary, and Roger as Christ. In a "Strange Manuscript Found in a Copper Cilinder" the entire planet earth (instead of a tree) was used to describe the event. James de Mille takes his story through purgatory, past crucifixion and well into paradise.

Anthropologist never understand mythology and are actually poor reporters here.

Amos.

Toto · 01-03-2002, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Asha'man:


. . . . Either the stories were 100% fabricated, based purely on the imagination of the authors and theft from other mythologies, or there was a little bit of truth behind the stories, and they were simply blown way out of proportion. I prefer the idea that there might have been some sort of movement started by a guy named Jesus, who was subsequently killed for stirring up trouble.

Is this just an aesthetic preference? Have you read Doherty or the Jesus Mysteries?

[ January 03, 2002: Message edited by: Toto ]

Asha'man · 01-03-2002, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Sheaffer writes in The Making of the Messiah p16:
But the Toldoth clearly draws upon material that is far older still. Voltaire mentions this work both in his Philosophical Dictionary and in his Letter concerning the Jews. Voltaire says that the second-century Roman writer Celsus cites the Toldoth "with confidence." This is not correct. While Celsus' arguments against Christianity parallel those in the Toldoth--Celsus states that he is telling us facts that are known among the Jews--we do not know whether Celsus actually read that work, or possibly a predecessor to it, since none of the works of Celsus have survived (except what is quoted by Origen, attempting to refute him), undoubtedly because they were "heretical" in the extreme. What we can say with confidence is that much of the material now in the Toldoth was know to Celsus around the year 170.

As for the order things were written in,

Quote:

Sheaffer writes in The Making of the Messiah p58:
�the genuine Pauline and other early epistles, then the Acts of the Apostles, and then the Gospels: first Mark, then Matthew, then Luke, and finally John. Next, Revelations, and finally those pseudo-Pauline and other late epistles that are a product of a relatively mature theology: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, and Hebrews, and all remaining books.

Some references arguing that Paul�s writings are earlier than the gospels:

Quote:

Sheaffer writes in The Making of the Messiah p87:
That Acts 5:30 is quite old is suggested by its primitive theology in proclaiming that �the God of our fathers raised up Jesus,� implying that Jesus had not the power to raise himself, a view found throughout the genuine Pauline writings. Such views would be considered �theologically incorrect� by later writers of scripture. As for the date of composition of 1 Peter, it is estimated by The Interpreter�s Bible, (vol. 12, p. 80) as approximately 63. Galatians is older still.

and

Quote:

Sheaffer writes in The Making of the Messiah p88:
In Jesus Outside the Gospels (Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1984), pp. 8, 18, biblical scholar R. Joseph Hoffmann dates 1 Thessalonians from about the year 50, suggesting it to be the oldest book of the New Testament. Some scholars say that Galatians is the oldest, but clearly the two epistles are both extremely early, and very close in time.

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

01-03-2002, 09:18 AM	#24
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Amos - what is the 'Y' tree? Are you saying there is some universal primodial symbolism to trees, or hanging in a tree? How do you relate Native Americans to Palestine? I do know that some connections have been traced between pre-Columbian Americans and central Asia. But Palestine? I tried doing some on line research on the Toldoth Jesu, but had to put it aside for some real work. I am not a Talmudic scholar, but from what I read, the tales in the Talmud that might be about Jesus are obviously legendary and deliberately insulting, made up as part of the reaction Jews had to the upstart Christians. They are about as likely to be true as what Jay Leno says about Osama bin Laden on late night TV. If Apikorus sees this thread, perhaps he can add something.

01-03-2002, 02:49 PM	#28
Amos Guest Posts: n/a	Thanks Toto, it is not me who relates the Native Americans to Palestine but I just wanted to point out that the crucifixion of the ego consciousness to a tree is not restricted to our mythology. The Y Tree is just a description of a tree that fits the shape of our body well as the image of total surrender during this annihilation. Perhaps I should make clear that in the mythology of the Yellowhead Indians they also have the four characters (personifications) that we call first Adam and second Adam (Christ) and first Eve and second Eve (Mary). These concepts are universal and can be identified in every mythology. If there are more gods, or female gods, they all fit someplace and are also universal. All we have to do is identify them. In "The Spire" Golding called it (his "tree") the "Cathedral" and the spire was actually the ego he had built on the crossroads of his own chest (the Cathedral was his own body). The four personifications here were Goody as Eve, Pangall as Adam, Rachel as Mary, and Roger as Christ. In a "Strange Manuscript Found in a Copper Cilinder" the entire planet earth (instead of a tree) was used to describe the event. James de Mille takes his story through purgatory, past crucifixion and well into paradise. Anthropologist never understand mythology and are actually poor reporters here. Amos.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.