• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

What counts as a historical Jesus?

Status
Not open for further replies.
^
Great. I'm looking forward to reading that.
Good luck with the rats.



Well, judging my experience with scammers, he was targeting anything that had financial potential.

eight bits said it quite well.



However, even my thinking Paul was a scammer doesn't mean I'm not following your posts on his letters with a great deal of interest.

I think Paul is likely setting off your scammer buttons because his words are used by holy rollers today.

As we go, we'll see whether he appears to be running a scam (with dozens of other scammers) or if he appears to be an end-timer.
 
I think Paul is likely setting off your scammer buttons because his words are used by holy rollers today.

As we go, we'll see whether he appears to be running a scam (with dozens of other scammers) or if he appears to be an end-timer.
Why couldn't he be both?
 
-- or James passage? Show me where you get that.

Stone

"Moreover, in the sixteenth century Vossius had a manuscript of the text of Josephus in which there was not a word about Jesus." (Drews, Arthur (1912) The Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus)

Logically if the James passage existed in this copy Josephus then it could not be claimed there was not a word about Jesus because that mentions Jesus. QED.
 
I've yet to see HC proponents address the John Frum cargo cult, AFAIK.

Richard Dawkins directly refers to it in his 2006 book God Delusion:

"It is fascinating to guess that the cult of Christianity almost certainly began in very much the same way, and spread initially at the same high speed."

"In particular, they suggest four lessons about the origin of religions generally, and I'll set them out briefly here.

First is the amazing speed with which a cult can spring up.

Second is the speed with which the origination process covers its tracks. John Frum, if he existed at all, did so within living memory. Yet, even for so recent a possibility, it is not certain whether he lived at all.

The third lesson springs from the independent emergence of similar cults on different islands. The systematic study of these similarities can tell us something about human psychology and its susceptibility to religion.

Fourth, the cargo cults are similar, not just to each other but to older religions.

Christianity and other ancient religions that have spread worldwide presumably began as local cults like that of John Frum. Indeed, scholars such as Geza Vermes, Professor of Jewish Studies at Oxford University, have suggested that Jesus was one of many such charismatic figures who emerged in Palestine around his time, surrounded by similar legends. Most of those cults died away. The one that survived, on this view, is the one that we encounter today."


"Belief in Christ is no more or less rational than belief in John Frum." Worsley, Peter (1957) "The trumpet shall sound: a study of cargo cults in Melanesia"

It may be because John Frum got connected with the whole ancient astronaut nonsense but the information is there.
 
Actually the consensus is that a Jesus existed. Of course as pointed out before John M. Robertson stated that "The (Christ) myth theory is not concerned to deny such a possibility (that Jesus existed as a flesh and blood person)" but rather "What the myth theory denies is that Christianity can be traced to a personal founder who taught as reported in the Gospels and was put to death in the circumstances there recorded."


This is nothing but disingenuous babble. If anything is clear from the previous 70 odd pages, it is that those who oppose the HJ are simply convinced that there is not sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that there ever was such a character. If you want to include a new category of opposition ( “we actually agree there was a Jesus, but he’s not the one etc. etc.”), go right ahead, but that isn’t what has been argued here.

As for your contention on the consensus (it could be any old Jesus)…I seriously doubt that all those who agree with the ‘universal assent’ position will immediately qualify it with…’ but the Jesus we’re supporting may not actually be the same that is connected to the establishment of Christianity.’

"There is not a shred of evidence that a historical character Jesus lived, to give an example, and Christianity is based on narrative fiction of high literary and cathartic quality. On the other hand Christianity is concerned with the narration of things that actually take place in human life." (Fischer, Roland (1994) "On The Story-Telling Imperative That We Have In Mind" Anthropology of Consciousness. Dec 1994, Vol. 5, No. 4: 16)


‘There is not a shred of evidence.’….and yet, the academics who study this very issue come to the exact opposite conclusion. They not only agree that ‘that Jesus’ did, in fact, exist…they are of the opinion that there is more than sufficient evidence to issue a proclamation of universal assent.


Let me give you some other examples of "crank" scholarship:

Continental drift - crackpot for 362 years

The existence of Troy - crackpot until a total amateur discovered it.

Heliocentrism - crackpot for 1934 years if one is generous; 2224 years if one is not.

The Norse colonization of the Americas: known nearly from the beginning through the "Eirik the Red's Saga" and the "Saga of the Greenlanders" both written about three centuries after the events happened. Dismissed largely because the experts saw it as harkening to the Imperial Synthesis Era of the 19th century. Finally accepted in the 1970s.

Big Bang theory: crackpot for about 1450 years.


Want to see good examples of crank scholarship?....go look for someone providing examples of crank scholarship from periods of time when scholarship barely existed as a coherent social phenomenon.

Steven C. Bitterman was fired from Southwestern Community College for saying the Adam and Eve story was a myth. With that kind of nonsense going on in academia do you think that anyone is going to rock the boat? John Schneider was forced into early retirement from Calvin College for the same thing.

Please note Southwestern Community College and Calvin College are ACCREDITED colleges (North Central Association of Colleges and Schools respectively). So if your are US taxpayer your tax money in the form of loans and grants is being used to push the idea that not only did Jesus exist but the story of Adam and Eve is historically accurate. We are supposed to take this form of academia seriously?!?


Let me get this straight. You’re honestly equating the issue of the historical Jesus to the issue of the historical adam and eve! That will do wonders for your credibility. And don’t jump in and accuse me of failing to recognize the point. The point is…if you were to poll every credible academic who supports the HJ position, I doubt you would find a single one who would agree that the Adam and Eve story is historically accurate.

Hu. Actually you are wrong. You can demonstrate quantum mechanic in a "dirty" lab (home) or even in no lab at all. You can cite them the experiment to do , and they can then do it and read it. It might not be spectacular, and difficult but it is doable.

But so far as I can see you (the "certainty" clan) are not even bothering with that, you jsut say "thrust us it is too complicated".


It never ceases to surprise me just how simplistic many are in the hard sciences. So…you can demonstrate quantum mechanics…just about anywhere. No doubt. Actually…it’s happening everywhere…all the time. Problem is…you need a pile of years of training to have the faintest idea what the hell is going on. Forgot that bit did you? As has been pointed out a number of times…that seems to be the fulcrum upon which the ship of opposition so frequently founders. You simply doubt, or dismiss, the academic scholarship in this area. Many seem to be of the opinion that the means and methods used are simply incapable of resolving the issues in question.

I'll get to propper responses tomorrow, but for the moment I just wanted to ask everyone to please read my adresses as only me.
I am no member of any group; I am not in any clan or the like.
I have not given an absolute certainty stance, nor will I; in either direction.

I am Jayson; not piggy or stone or any other person.
I am not a party or group and I will not assume anyone else to be anything other than themselves.
I will not belittle you nor think poorly of you for not agreeing with me.
I understand the tediousness of this topic well and will always extend my fullest patience and will always attempt to explain myself as best as I can.

I'll get to propper responses tomorrow; tonight...sleep.


JaysonR…you are a sterling example of Alaskin equanimity.
 
What evidence are you referring to? Which "evidence" did you cite for Jesus?

Post #2772.



Jayson - as you must well know, that post of yours does not give any evidence whatsoever to show Jesus was a real person.

Here is what you actually said in that post #2772 ….



One Letter by Mara Bar-Serapion written no earlier than 73 CE and not later than the 1st c CE.


One Letter by Mara Bar-Serapion written no earlier than 73 CE and not later than the 1st c CE.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-N...on_of_Serapion

What are we to say, when the wise are dragged by force by the hands of tyrants, and their wisdom is deprived of its freedom by slander, and they are plundered for their superior intelligence, without the opportunity of making a defence? They are not wholly to be pitied. For what benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death, seeing that they received as retribution for it famine and pestilence? Or the people of Samos by the burning of Pythagoras, seeing that in one hour the whole of their country was covered with sand? Or the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them? For with justice did God grant a recompense to the wisdom of all three of them. For the Athenians died by famine; and the people of Samos were covered by the sea without remedy; and the Jews, brought to desolation and expelled from their kingdom, are driven away into every land. Nay, Socrates did “not” die, because of Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King, because of the new laws which he enacted.



One document titled, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars and within that, the chapter The Life of Claudius by Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus : ~120 CE

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Li...rs/Claudius#25

He forbade men of foreign birth to use the Roman names so far as those of the clans were concerned. Those who usurped the privileges of Roman citizenship he executed in the Esquiline field. He restored to the senate the provinces of Achaia and Macedonia, which Tiberius had taken into his own charge. He deprived the Lycians of their independence because of deadly intestine feuds, and restored theirs to the Rhodians, since they had given up their former faults. He allowed the people of Ilium perpetual exemption from tribute, on the ground that they were the founders of the Roman race, reading an ancient letter of the senate and people of Rome written in Greek to king Seleucus, in which they promised him their friendship and alliance only on condition that he should keep their kinsfolk of Ilium free from every burden. Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.



As far as your first source & quote is concerned from Mara Bar-Serapion - the very first brief look in Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mara_Bar-Serapion) immediately shows that Mara Bar Serapion is someone for whom they apparently cannot even guess any likely date of birth or date of death. So we do not actually know when he lived. And in Wiki, for the estimated date of that letter, it does not say 73 to 1st cent. AD, it says about 73AD to 3rd century AD. Here’s the Wiki quote -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mara_Bar-Serapion

See also: Mara Bar-Serapion on Jesus
Mara's letter to his son begins with: "Mara, son of Serapion, to Serapion, my son: peace." The letter was composed sometime between 73 AD and the 3rd century



But your quote from Mara Bar-Serapion, has in any case, nothing at all as any evidence of a real Jesus. And to that we might also add the caution of yet again asking (as it seems we have to ask with every such claimed “1st century!!” document ever quoted about Jesus) - what is the actual date of the earliest extant readable copy of this letter?


As far as your second example of evidence is concerned, where you quote from Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus -

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus is someone who is supposed to have lived from 69AD until after 122AD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suetonius). So on that basis he would not even have been born until long after Jesus was supposed to have died! And could therefore not possibly have known himself what Jesus might ever have said or done.

He can at the very most, be yet again (as with Josephus and Tacitus and the rest) merely be repeating hearsay stories of the day. And again as with Josephus and Tacitus, failing (afaik) to tell us who gave him such stories. That is not by any stretch of the imagination reliable credible evidence of a living Jesus.

Added to which we have to ask the same question yet again - although the date for that Suetonius writing is given as 120AD, I don’t suppose we have any original copies do we? In which case, what is the actual date of the earliest extant copies that were actually used to quote that sentence?
 
‘There is not a shred of evidence.’….and yet, the academics who study this very issue come to the exact opposite conclusion. They not only agree that ‘that Jesus’ did, in fact, exist…they are of the opinion that there is more than sufficient evidence to issue a proclamation of universal assent.

Appeal to authority. Ok, so there's evidence. Where is it ?
 
But your quote from Mara Bar-Serapion, has in any case, nothing at all as any evidence of a real Jesus. And to that we might also add the caution of yet again asking (as it seems we have to ask with every such claimed “1st century!!” document ever quoted about Jesus) - what is the actual date of the earliest extant readable copy of this letter?

Or at least, the earliest mention of the work.
 
Why couldn't he be both?

True end-timers don't scam people b/c, first, they don't believe there's going to be a future in which to enjoy the spoils of their scam, and in most cases they believe that there's something they have to do to prove their status to whoever is coming to save them.

As we'll see, Paul is concerned about having enough funds for the missionary work, but is he getting rich off this?

Also, when we take a look at the scene he describes, and the arguments he documents, there's no hint that this is some kind of organized hoax. In fact, everyone seems to be scrambling around trying to figure out exactly what Jesus's death really meant and how exactly it plays into the end-time scenario.

So it certainly doesn't appear to be a group who decided on a story and then went out to pull the wool over people's eyes with it. Rather, this appears to be a group who really believes the world is about to end.

We'll see as we go how the religion changes as the end of the world continues to not arrive.
 
I'll get to propper responses tomorrow, but for the moment I just wanted to ask everyone to please read my adresses as only me.
I am no member of any group; I am not in any clan or the like.
I have not given an absolute certainty stance, nor will I; in either direction.

I am Jayson; not piggy or stone or any other person.
I am not a party or group and I will not assume anyone else to be anything other than themselves.
I will not belittle you nor think poorly of you for not agreeing with me.
I understand the tediousness of this topic well and will always extend my fullest patience and will always attempt to explain myself as best as I can.

I'll get to propper responses tomorrow; tonight...sleep.

Jayson, the game of imputing fundie apologist status to anyone who suggests that professional modern historians do their job right is as old as the first on-line myther. Your plea is a hopeless one. Personal experience tells me that.

Stone
 
True end-timers don't scam people b/c, first, they don't believe there's going to be a future in which to enjoy the spoils of their scam, and in most cases they believe that there's something they have to do to prove their status to whoever is coming to save them.

Yeah but you can be an end-time scammer ! :D
 
Because I have a brain.

I also have a brain but that qualification doesn't tell me why it couldn't be both so your answer does not answer the question I asked you.

True end-timers don't scam people b/c, first, they don't believe there's going to be a future in which to enjoy the spoils of their scam, and in most cases they believe that there's something they have to do to prove their status to whoever is coming to save them.

...snip...

Isn't that not just the "no true scotsman" fallacy? I really can't see why it has to be one or the t'other. For a more recent example look at Jim Jones - he scammed whilst also seemingly believing in his own end-times predictions.
 
It never ceases to surprise me just how simplistic many are in the hard sciences. So…you can demonstrate quantum mechanics…just about anywhere. No doubt. Actually…it’s happening everywhere…all the time. Problem is…you need a pile of years of training to have the faintest idea what the hell is going on. Forgot that bit did you? As has been pointed out a number of times…that seems to be the fulcrum upon which the ship of opposition so frequently founders. You simply doubt, or dismiss, the academic scholarship in this area. Many seem to be of the opinion that the means and methods used are simply incapable of resolving the issues in question.

No you are mixing two things. You are m ixing describing superficially QM and how to show there is indeed discreet quanta, and youa re mixing it with a COMPLETE QM theory (like manipulating the Heisenberg equation for QM systems).

With QM you can describe in wide brush what's happening and what are the consequence.
Sure you won't be able to construct more theory on it, you won't be able to explain semi conductor behavior, or even more complicated QM effects. But you can explain in wide brush and say what evidence are there of this. H spectra, photoelectric effects. Even nuclear physic I was taught and got some evidence before the bachalaureat - 18 year old (due to security we could not have a direct access but still).

We are not saying we want a complete JC theory. We are asking a list of the independent evidence more or less. So far all we got is "it is so complicated you need to have a PhD in it to even begin to grasp it".

That is compelte BS.
 
Last edited:
Piggy

True end-timers don't scam people b/c, first, they don't believe there's going to be a future in which to enjoy the spoils of their scam... Rather, this appears to be a group who really believes the world is about to end.
Many people report that they can spend money as fast as it comes in. The end of the world nicely removes some behavioral constraints on consumption. No sense worrying about packing on a few extra pounds, for instance.

Paul visibly has enough commitment to an immediate future to write a letter, arrange for its delivery, and maybe call for a reply or some other response. He also has occasion to comment about how to adapt the message to accommodate Jesus visibly taking his time about this return thing.

but is he getting rich off this?
Wrong question. Does this produce enough revenue to cover the opportunity cost of doing it instead of something else Paul could and would actually do that spins money?
 
Last edited:
This is nothing but disingenuous babble. If anything is clear from the previous 70 odd pages, it is that those who oppose the HJ are simply convinced that there is not sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that there ever was such a character. If you want to include a new category of opposition ( “we actually agree there was a Jesus, but he’s not the one etc. etc.”), go right ahead, but that isn’t what has been argued here.

As I have pointed out before the Christ Myth theory has MANY definitions. Since it is considered the antithesis of the HJ position you must consider its ENTIRE SCOPE.

"This view (Christ Myth theory) states that the story of Jesus is a piece of mythology, possessing no more substantial claims to historical fact than the old Greek or Norse stories of gods and heroes..." (Bromiley, Geoffrey W. (1982) International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: E-J William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company)

Please note that this says NOTHING about Jesus the man not existing but that the story of him is "possessing no more substantial claims to historical fact than the old Greek or Norse stories of gods and heroes."

There are modern examples of stories of known historical people "possessing no more substantial claims to historical fact than the old Greek or Norse stories of gods and heroes"--George Washington and the Cherry Tree; Davy Crockett and the Frozen Dawn; Jesse James and the Widow to mention a few. King Arthur and Robin Hood are two more examples of suspected historical people whose stories are most likely fictional in nature.

Remsburg the darling of the armchair Christ Myther stated it clear as day in 1909: "Jesus of Nazareth, the Jesus of humanity, the pathetic story of whose humble life and tragic death has awakened the sympathies of millions, is a possible character and may have existed; but the Jesus of Bethlehem, the Christ of Christianity, is an impossible character and does not exist."

The Christ Myth has always been regarding if the Gospel Jesus (Jesus of Bethlehem) existed. You may not like it but that are the cards you have been dealt regardless of it being 1909 or 1982.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom