Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 06-20-2013, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

The fact that an article passes peer review definitely does not mean that the reviewers agreed with the conclusions.

Peer review in the case of Richard Carrier's article would seek to ensure that the raw data (What our text of Josephus says what Hegesippus says what Origen says etc) is presented in an accurate and non-misleading fashion and that a clear plausible and interesting argument is developed on the basis of the raw data. If a reviewer held that the paper satisfied these criteria it would be quite wrong to oppose publication just because the reviewer personally held that there was a better explanation of the raw data.

Andrew Criddle

Whether or not an article passes peer review and whether or not the reviewer agrees with any article is not really of significance in this thread.

We have the Canonised NT books and Apologetic writings from antiquity.

The Jesus character in the Canonised NT and Apologetic writings was described as a Son of a Holy Ghost, God the Creator, and a transfiguring sea water walker who resurrected sometime later.

In the same sources, the Jews REJECTED Jesus as a Son of a God and the Christ and had him Crucified after have he was found gulity of death for Blasphemy.

Again, in the same sources, Jesus secretly told his disciples that he did NOT want the Populace to be converted but to REMAIN in sin and DEMANDED that his disciples tell NO-ONE he was Christ.

Neither Jesus nor the Jews started the Jesus cult--it was the Holy Ghost in Acts of the Apostles.

The Son of a Ghost sent the Promised Ghost from the Father to give the disciples Power AFTER God the Creator ascended to heaven in a cloud.

It is clear we are dealing with a monstrous fable which has nothing in it that is divine.

There is no known evidence from non- apologetic sources that Jews worshiped a Man as a God who abolised the Laws of the Jews before the Fall of the Temple.

Toto · 06-20-2013, 12:09 PM

Yes - but the peer review is not generally made public. One of the reviewers who disagreed with the conclusion might later write a reply.

Jaybees · 06-20-2013, 12:31 PM

What started Christianity?

There's a larger question here that needs answering. What is it that starts any cult, and why is it that some catch on and flourish while others die aborning?

Buddhism, Xtianity, Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism are still thriving. Once widespread, Zoroastrianism is surviving only in small pockets. Judaism has always been a minority religion, but it continues generation after generation. Mormonism shows promise of lasting for quite a while. On the other hand, Christian Science flourished for a time, but only a whisper of its former self remains.

What gives?

Toto · 06-20-2013, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

True. I guess all you really can to argue against what I said is to claim that either Eusebius was really stupid if the was trying to be a clever forgerer (not a good argument) or that he accidently allowed Josephan phrases to slip into what he had wished Josephus said in his history. The latter to me isn't something that happens 'accidentally', which takes us back to the 'stupid' argument. Neither seem likely to me, but I take it that you are ok with the latter one.

I don't think Eusebius was stupid. I do not think that he intended to actually deceive anyone, so he did not try to make his interpolation look like Josephus wrote it. But he was writing in Koine Greek, after having read through Josephus. It would be unlikely if there were no words in common between what he wrote and what he read in Josephus.

Quote:

Most likely - Eusebius, based on Ken Olson's analysis. Least likely - a Josephan original.

Then, the marginal slip is not likely in your opinion. Yet we still have the issue mentioned above. Was he or was he not trying to sound like Josephus? Or, is the TF overwhelmingly full of phrases not found in Josephus, but that ARE found in Eusebius, as Olson argues?

The marginal slip was an example of how interpolations happen without either an intent to deceive or to imitate someone else. Richard Carrier has shown that this is the most likely explanation of "called Christ".

I don't seem to be able to get you off the idea that you know the interpolator's intent, and that you can actually divine that intent and make it the crux of your argument. That's why I don't see the point of dragging this point out any further.

outhouse · 06-20-2013, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaybees

What started Christianity?

There's a larger question here that needs answering. What is it that starts any cult, and why is it that some catch on and flourish while others die aborning?

Buddhism, Xtianity, Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism are still thriving. Once widespread, Zoroastrianism is surviving only in small pockets. Judaism has always been a minority religion, but it continues generation after generation. Mormonism shows promise of lasting for quite a while. On the other hand, Christian Science flourished for a time, but only a whisper of its former self remains.

What gives?

The evolution of monotheism.

A religion that copied and compiled the best of different cultures in its beginning with a refined monotheism that was open to everyone.

Instead of specific social groups in certain cultural settings.

J-D · 06-20-2013, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

I just skimmed the thread, so I apologize if this has already been posted.

In 70 AD, the Second Temple was destroyed (along with much of Jerusalem), and the vast majority of the Jews were driven from Israel. Suddenly there was a vacuum of sorts in Judaism - without the Temple, how could the Jews follow the Law, which requires regular Temple sacrifices? With no Temple, what did YHWH require of them now - and why would he allow the Temple to be destroyed?

There were a number of attempts to answer this question. The two that survived are these: Messiah already came and sacrificed himself on our behalf, thus bringing an end to the need for Temple sacrifices (Christianity), or - alternately - YHWH has decreed that the Jews shall sacrifice metaphorically, by devoting themselves to study of the Torah and to doing good deeds (Judaism). Since these two surviving branches of OT Judaism were at odds with each-other, they engaged in a theological struggle.

Jewish Christianity was seriously diverging from OT Judaism by saying that YHWH had put an end to Temple sacrifice via a single human sacrifice. This idea is anathema to any OT adherent. Add to this the fact that Jewish Christians decided to allow Gentiles into their cult, and it was inevitable that Christianity would cease to be a Jewish religion at all within a very short time.

I can see how Jews might have faced a question about how to proceed when the Temple is destroyed, but I don't see where you think the answer came from.

The answers came from the myriad of Jewish cults which survived the destruction of the Temple and the Diaspora. The largest Diaspora cult was the Pharisees, who had moved their HQ out of Jerusalem years earlier. But other groups survived as well, and each of them had their own theories as to why YHWH had allowed the Temple to be destroyed.

The Pharisees became the torch-bearers of what is today Orthodox (Rabbinic) Judaism. The Jesus cult was considered apostate by the Pharisees, and the two groups split early in the 2nd century, with the Jesus cult becoming more and more Gentile as Pharisaical Judaism pushed them further and further away.

"Where the answer(s) came from" was classical Jewish argument and discussion. Some of these arguments were written down in the Talmud. Others are lost to time.

I don't see how that answers my question. You suggested that some people answered the question 'How should we proceed now that the Temple has been destroyed?' by saying 'Messiah already came and sacrificed himself on our behalf', but it is not an informative response to the question 'Where did people get that answer from?' to say 'Some people came up with it'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

3- What did the one Jewish sect believe in before its expulsion from the synagogue circa 80 AD?

There was no "one Jewish sect" prior to the Diaspora. Judaism was as diverse as Christianity or Islam today, with dozens of competing schools of thought arguing between and among themselves. The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple also destroyed most of these sects, since their schools were in Jerusalem. When Jerusalem was sacked, most of the the Rabbis were killed. The only major sect to survive was the Pharisees, whose school had left Jerusalem years earlier in protest against the "unclean" practices of the Sadducees, among other reasons.

This left the Pharisees as the only major Jewish sect in the post-Diaspora world, making it possible for them to determine the course of Judaism going forward.

As to what they believed, there's a decent wiki on the

Pharisees which is worth a read.

ETA: Apologies, I misunderstood your original question. Are you asking what the Jewish sect of Yeshua Messiah believed before the Pharisees effectively barred them from participation in the Jewish synagogue? The answer would appear to be that they believed pretty much as the Pharisees believed, with the oddball addition that Messiah had already come, and been killed with the consent of a Jewish mob.

NT Christianity as expressed in the Gospels was Pharisaical. Jesus was a Pharisee, if his teachings are any indication. This is actually another bit of evidence for Christianity emerging in the post-Diaspora period, when Pharisaical Judaism was the only Judaism left standing.

Perhaps I have misunderstood you, but to me it seems contradictory to say that Christianity was produced by the Pharisees and to say that Christianity was rejected by the Pharisees.

MrMacSon · 06-20-2013, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaybees

What started Christianity?

There's a larger question here that needs answering. What is it that starts any cult, and why is it that some catch on and flourish while others die aborning?

Buddhism, Xtianity, Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism are still thriving. Once widespread, Zoroastrianism is surviving only in small pockets. Judaism has always been a minority religion, but it continues generation after generation. Mormonism shows promise of lasting for quite a while. On the other hand, Christian Science flourished for a time, but only a whisper of its former self remains.

What gives?

What started a cult as a fore-runner to a religion 2-3,000 yrs ago would be different to what starts a cult today.

Don't forget Christianity is essentially an off-shoot of Judaism, and Catholicism & Protestantism are versions of Christianity. Many variations & versions of Protestantism now exist, too: some starting in continental Europe, some starting in the UK.

J-D · 06-20-2013, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

There is no corroborative evidence whatsoever from antiquity that Jews worshiped a Jewish man as a God and no evidence whatsoever that the Jesus cult of Christians was ever known in Judea before the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

What absolute absurdity you post!!! Absence of evidence is a fundamental condition to argue for non-existence of Jewish Christians.

If you were charged with a crime--absence of evidence is extremely important for your acquittal.

It is completely acceptable and known throughout the world that absence of evidence is a primary and fundamental factor to argue for non-existence.

It is most logical that once there were no Jewish Christians there would be absence of evidence.

'Affirming the consequent' is not a logically correct form of reasoning.

J-D · 06-20-2013, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

1. The Jews killed Jesus in Acts.

Jefferson Hope killed Joseph Stangerson in A Study In Scarlet.

J-D · 06-20-2013, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaybees

What started Christianity?

There's a larger question here that needs answering. What is it that starts any cult, and why is it that some catch on and flourish while others die aborning?

Buddhism, Xtianity, Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism are still thriving. Once widespread, Zoroastrianism is surviving only in small pockets. Judaism has always been a minority religion, but it continues generation after generation. Mormonism shows promise of lasting for quite a while. On the other hand, Christian Science flourished for a time, but only a whisper of its former self remains.

What gives?

When I try to think of well-documented examples of the beginnings of religions, the common features I see are an individual preaching a religious message and other people accepting it. I don't know of any well-documented example of a religion starting without those ingredients.

Obviously by itself that's not an adequate explanation of the origin of any religion, but it suggests the structure an explanation could have: who was the founding preacher? what was the original message preached? what was that message produced from? what were the founder's motives? what were the characteristics of the first group of people to accept the founder's original message? why did they accept it?

If those questions were answered for Christianity, I think that would count as an explanation of what started Christianity, which I think is a separate question from the subsequent history of Christianity.

'Why did Christianity acquire so many adherents?' may be a more important or more interesting question than 'How did Christianity start?', but 'How did Christianity start?' is the question this thread began with.

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

06-20-2013, 12:09 PM	#322
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Yes - but the peer review is not generally made public. One of the reviewers who disagreed with the conclusion might later write a reply.

06-20-2013, 12:31 PM	#323
Jaybees Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Hawaii Posts: 9,233	What started Christianity? There's a larger question here that needs answering. What is it that starts any cult, and why is it that some catch on and flourish while others die aborning? Buddhism, Xtianity, Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism are still thriving. Once widespread, Zoroastrianism is surviving only in small pockets. Judaism has always been a minority religion, but it continues generation after generation. Mormonism shows promise of lasting for quite a while. On the other hand, Christian Science flourished for a time, but only a whisper of its former self remains. What gives?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.