Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrMacSon · 07-27-2013, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

First of all, the above appears to be a contradiction. How could the 'cult' START when there was ALREADY a pre-existing story about Jesus. Who started THAT story?

the first two posts on this page give some answer - there is a story of another Jesus as a leader in Jerusalem 66-8AD who also had a brother named James.

The story was either retold by Eusebius, or elaborated on by him.

jdboy · 07-27-2013, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdboy

There is no problem in understanding who what where when and why, it's all Rome. People conspire everyday
.

Do you personally think the Roman governement created the movement?

Quote:

Nero persecuted christians not followers of Jesus

Is there a difference here?

The Romans that authorized Wars of the Jews created the NT. Constantine created the town of Nazareth as a tribute to the emperor Titus

That is the crux of the matter the term Christian was in play without a Jesus. Most likely these were the zealots found in Wars of the Jews

"When the Acts of Nero's reign were reversed after his death, an exception was made as to the persecution of the Christians (Tertullian, Ad Nat., i, 7). The Jewish revolt brought upon them fresh unpopularity, and the subsequent destruction of the Holy City deprived them of the last shreds of protection afforded them by being confounded with the Jews."

MrMacSon · 07-27-2013, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdboy

The Romans that authorized Wars of the Jews created the NT. Constantine created the town of Nazareth as a tribute to the emperor Titus

That is the crux of the matter the term Christian was in play without a Jesus. Most likely these were the zealots found in Wars of the Jews.

"authorized"? - you mean 'authored' or 'allowed'?

aa5874 · 07-27-2013, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

aa, what more is there to discuss about the James passage? Origen wrote that it was in Josephus, so it clearly was in his copy, and that's the earliest reference we have to the James passage, I think. Whether Josephus wrote it or not we cannot say. IF he wrote it, why was it taken out? IF he didn't who put it in the copy Origen had, and why? At this point I don't think we have those answers.

I asked you to show me where exactly in the writings of Josephus it is claimed that the Temple was destroyed because of the death of James.

You cannot do so.

Again, I have shown you that Josephus claimed the Temple was destroyed because it was made FOUR-SQUARE and that it was stated in the Oracles of the Jews.

Wars of the Jews 6.5.4

Quote:

..... for the Jews, by demolishing the tower of Antonia, had made their temple four-square, while at the same time they had it written in their sacred oracles, "That then should their city be taken, as well as their holy house, when once their temple should become four-square."

We now know what Josephus wrote about the reason for the destruction of
Temple and Jerusalem and it had nothing whatsoever to do with James.

Also examine Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1---there is NO claim whatsoever that the death of James was the reason for the destruction of Jerusalem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

....My response is this: The above appears to be a contradiction. How could the 'cult' START when there was ALREADY a pre-existing story about Jesus? After all, one can't believe a story if it doesn't exist. Please clarify. Also, who started THAT story, why did they start it, and when?

Your post is contradictory and is barren of logic.

Please, the question of the OP is NOT who, or why but "WHAT STARTED CHRISTIANITY".

Aristides has ALREADY answered the question 1800 years ago. Those who BELIEVE the story were called CHRISTIANS.

The Jesus STORY most likely predated the Jesus cult of Christians.

Even today, people who BELIEVE the 1800 year old stories of Jesus are called Christians.

Aristides' Apology

Quote:

The Christians, then, trace the beginning of their religion from Jesus the Messiah; and he is named the Son of God Most High.

And it is said that God came down from heaven, and from a Hebrew virgin assumed and clothed himself with flesh; and the Son of God lived in a daughter of man.

This is taught in the gospel, as it is called, which a short time was preached among them; and you also if you will read therein, may perceive the power which belongs to it.

This Jesus, then, was born of the race of the Hebrews; and he had twelve disciples in order that the purpose of his incarnation might in time be accomplished.

But he himself was pierced by the Jews, and he died and was buried; and they say that after three days he rose and ascended to heaven.

Thereupon these twelve disciples went forth throughout the known parts of the world, and kept showing his greatness with all modesty and uprightness.

And hence also those of the present day who believe that preaching are called Christians, and they are become famous.

MrMacSon · 07-27-2013, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

aa, what more is there to discuss about the James passage? Origen wrote that it was in Josephus, so it clearly was in his copy, and that's the earliest reference we have to the James passage, I think. Whether Josephus wrote it or not we cannot say. IF he wrote it, why was it taken out? IF he didn't who put it in the copy Origen had, and why? At this point I don't think we have those answers.

I asked you to show me where exactly in the writings of Josephus it is claimed that the Temple was destroyed because of the death of James.

What about this? -

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

From

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

OF

EUSEBIUS PAMPHILIUS
(c. 265 - 339)

BISHOP OF CESAREA, IN PALESTINE
Written In A.D. 325

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Chur...s_history.html

Quote:

BOOK II, CHAPTER XXIII.

The Martyrdom of James, who was called the Brother of the Lord.

[snip]

... ... Josephus, at least, has not hesitated to testify this in his writings, where he says,

Quote:

"These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a most just man."

And the same writer [Josephus] records his death also in the twentieth book of his Antiquities in the following words:[2]

Quote:

"But the emperor, when he learned of the death of Festus, sent Albinus to be procurator of Judea. But the younger Ananus, who, as we have already said, had obtained the high priesthood, was of an exceedingly bold and reckless disposition. He belonged, moreover, to the sect of the Sadducees, who are the most cruel of all the Jews in the execution of judgment, as we have already shown. Ananus, therefore, being of this character, and supposing that he had a favorable opportunity on account of the fact that Festus was dead, and Albinus was still on the way, called together the Sanhedrim, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, James by name, together with some others, and accused them of violating the law, and condemned them to be stoned. But those in the city who seemed most moderate and skilled in the law were very angry at this, and sent secretly to the king, requesting him to order Ananus to cease such proceedings. For he had not done right even this first time. And certain of them also went to meet Albinus, who was journeying from Alexandria, and reminded him that it was not lawful for Ananus to summon the Sanhedrim without his knowledge. And Albinus, being persuaded by their representations, wrote in anger to Ananus, threatening him with punishment. And the king, Agrippa, in consequence, deprived him, of the high priesthood, which he had held three months, and appointed Jesus, the son of Damnaeus."

These things are recorded in regard to James, who is said to be the author of the first of the so-called catholic epistles.

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Chur...s_history.html
.

and what I quoted in the first post of this page??

Quote:

"The rash action for which he [Ananus the Younger] was deposed was the murder of James the brother of Jesus."

aa5874 · 07-27-2013, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

I asked you to show me where exactly in the writings of Josephus it is claimed that the Temple was destroyed because of the death of James.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

What about this? -

What about actually quoting Josephus??

You must actually quote the passage from Josephus because we all know the Gentiles invented stories about Jesus and James.

What about this in Wars of the Jews 6.5.4. This is not Jerome, Origen or Eusbius. This is Josephus

Wars of the Jews 6.5.4

Quote:

..... for the Jews, by demolishing the tower of Antonia, had made their temple four-square, while at the same time they had it written in their sacred oracles, "That then should their city be taken, as well as their holy house, when once their temple should become four-square."

You will not find what the Gentiles invented about the death of James in Josephus.

jdboy · 07-27-2013, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdboy

The Romans that authorized Wars of the Jews created the NT. Constantine created the town of Nazareth as a tribute to the emperor Titus

That is the crux of the matter the term Christian was in play without a Jesus. Most likely these were the zealots found in Wars of the Jews.

"authorized"? - you mean 'authored' or 'allowed'?

Sorry, i meant the Romans approved the work and were anxious that it be published right away so as to deter more nations from rebellion. It's all there, the who what when where why

TedM · 07-27-2013, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa

The Jesus STORY most likely predated the Jesus cult of Christians.

I guess if I ask you now where that story came from you would say that it was created by Gentiles to explain the destruction of the Temple. Right? Yet there is no evidence that Gentiles created the 'story' that you quoted from Aristides, NOR that they created it in order to explain the Temple destruction.

In fact, Aristides--your own source for origins information--says the story was spread by Jesus' own 12 disciples, who were JEWISH. And, your quote from him says nothing about the need to explain the Temple destruction.

You appear to simply be making things up. Yes, retroactively the temple destruction was explained in terms of Jesus by those that BELIEVED the story (for there was no need for a temple when Jesus' body was the temple). But there is nothing indicating that the destruction of the temple MOTIVATED the origin of the story by Gentiles, and that only makes sense because Gentiles had no reason to explain the temple destruction. WHy should they? And certainly there was no need to explain it in terms of a Jewish Messiah.

Your logic and reasoning simply doesn't add up.

outhouse · 07-27-2013, 08:14 PM

All my opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdboy

The Romans that authorized Wars of the Jews created the NT.

Yet you have zero evidence to support this.

I doubt there is a single scholarship that comes to that conclusion.

You also have to explain away Paul, you cannot with any credibility, no one has as of yet.

Quote:

Constantine created the town of Nazareth as a tribute to the emperor Titus

False.

Even Carrier thinks Nazareth was a small village when Jesus lived.

Quote:

That is the crux of the matter the term Christian was in play without a Jesus.

Sources please because your wrong. the Jesus character has always been the center and foundation of the movement.

Quote:

Most likely these were the zealots found in Wars of the Jews

False again.

Some Zealots may have joined the movement, but that doesn't make all Christians Zealots, nor all Zealots Christians.

Quote:

The Jewish revolt brought upon them fresh unpopularity, and the subsequent destruction of the Holy City deprived them of the last shreds of protection afforded them by being confounded with the Jews."

That's really funny considering the movement flourished in the Diaspora much more so then Jerusalem.

Since we are dealing with Hellenist and Gentiles living in the Diaspora, they were never confounded with traditional Judaism. They had distanced themselves from the Jews from the beginning.

outhouse · 07-27-2013, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

"authorized"? - you mean 'authored' or 'allowed'?

Sorry, i meant the Romans approved the work and were anxious that it be published right away so as to deter more nations from rebellion. It's all there, the who what when where why

Published?? Really?

You do understand the movement started out very small, even in Pauls time it was not that large and the core of the message was already there and all through the Empire and not used to control any sort of any rebellions. It was only in a few select houses, not churches and kept secret.

The movement wasn't even popular in Judaism, do you really thing that Romans wanted to control their own people using a Jewish messiah which amounts to one of their slaves, to control the Gentile populations in the Diaspora?

Is there a source for this kind of unfounded view?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.