What counts as a historical Jesus?

[pakeha]

...Once the more scholarly and thorough historicists left that thread, the remaining mythers went right back to their previous anachronistic and just plain ignorant assertions of the start of that huge thread, AS IF NONE OF THE MORE SCHOLARLY POSTERS HAD EVER CONTRIBUTED OR EVEN EXCHANGED TWO WORDS WITH ANY OF THE MYTHERS. ...

That's an interesting point of view, Stone.
So.
How about summarising why you think Jesus, as portrayed in the NT, is an historical person?

... Any accounts in contemporary settings are presented by an author as historical until the 6th century. ...

Are you quite sure of that, Stone?
Didn't you read the links I gave to the Greek novels?
Why do the gospels count as 'contemporary settings' anyway?

 

[Craig B]

... Nobody participating in this thread has claimed that the Gospels were written to be read as fiction or that the author intended the reader to view any of the characters in the Gospels as other than real people who existed or had existed. In this thread, the opposite situation seems to be the case, people that have commented about this have stated that they believe the author of Mark intended his work to be perceived as non-fiction.

Very true. I really am not sure why the issue has been raised. Mark may contain false data, but it is not "fiction" in the sense of belonging to the genre. The Satyricon does belong to that genre and so does Lucian's "Vera Historia", the first work of science fiction, perhaps. (ETA: and Seneca's Apocolocyntosis.) But not the gospels. But are the gospels mere relation of myths? As if a pagan author was describing the activities of the Olympian Gods? That's not obvious to me either.

 

[Belz...]

YOU have missed the entire thread.

No, I haven't. I've read the whole ridiculous thing.

Any accounts in contemporary settings are presented by an author as historical until the 6th century.

I can't make heads or tails of this sentence.

My point is that the 'brother' reference in Paul is not as clear as some people would claim, and no other mention witnesses pass muster. That we have therefore no acounts of Jesus' life before Mark, written way after the fact, makes any attempt at constructing a definitive narrative of this man's existence or deeds futile.

Go back and tackle Jayson's points one by one if that is inconvenient for you.

Why would I go and do something that is inconvenient to me ? I don't get it.

And AGAIN, calm the hell down. No one is attacking a family member of yours with a crowbar. We are having a discussion on the internet.

 

[Belz...]

To that extent, they probably had no concept of any difference between fact and fiction where their fanatical religious beliefs were concerned.

So, like religious people today, then.

 

[pakeha]

...Did the evangelising preachers like Paul and the gospel writers actually believe their interpretations of OT passages were literally real events acted out by a messiah who none of them knew? Probably they did. This was a time when, as we know from the Dead Sea Scrolls, fanatical religious Jews in that region interpreted their imagination and visionary concepts of a long awaited god-given messiah, as real happenings fulfilling the ancient words of the OT.

They preached that the faithful must believe that, as being gods fulfilment of the inerrancy of the OT.

To that extent, they probably had no concept of any difference between fact and fiction where their fanatical religious beliefs were concerned.

A good point, IanS.
If anyone wants to see a similar mentality in action today, try going to this forum:
http://www.nairaland.com/religion

My favourite current thread is
http://www.nairaland.com/1302128/sierra-leonian-came-back-hell

ETA
But this one runs a close second
http://www.nairaland.com/1348623/women-ministry-n-t-wright

Anyway, what do we really mean by an historical Jesus?

 

[IanS]

So, like religious people today, then.

Well to be fair to most Christians today, there is a big difference between what they understand as reality vs. what the Essene DSS community seem to have been practicing ... they appear to have simply been in the habit of imagining rapturous divine scenes of miraculous figures in their minds, and interpreting their imagined religious mental pictures as truly real events revealed to them by God .... they thought that was God's way of communicating with them.

The visionary thoughts appear to have invariably concerned beliefs drawn from the ancient Jewish OT. So it was a way of believing that the OT was constantly being confirmed as God-given unarguable truth and fact.

If you stop to think about it for a moment, even today most of us would probably agree that our dreams do seem like a very strange thing - you are apparently asleep (whatever that means), and you see yourself and others in highly realistic settings where people have conversations, go to real local places and do very realistic looking things. On the face of things, to completely uneducated people c.500BC - 500AD, that must have seemed very strange indeed.

 

[Craig B]

... the Essene DSS community seem to have been practicing ... in the habit of imagining rapturous divine scenes of miraculous figures in their minds, and interpreting their imagined religious mental pictures as truly real events revealed to them by God .... they thought that was God's way of communicating with them.

Could you let me have links or references to the sources which have enabled you to arrive at this concept of the Essenes? And could let me know if you're implying that the DSS community did these things to a significantly greater extent than other religious groups?

 

[dlorde]

If anyone wants to see a similar mentality in action today, try going to this forum:
http://www.nairaland.com/religion

The evolution thread is entertaining for about 30 secs...

 

[Acleron]

Apologies if someone has posted this before but I found this interview of Huddlestun by Dawkins interesting for the attitude of Huddlestun to a lot of the bible.



The measured and evidence based tone of Huddlestun was fine until the end when he just stated that HJ existed, surprisingly Dawkins didn't press him on it.

 

[davefoc]

Apologies if someone has posted this before but I found this interview of Huddlestun by Dawkins interesting for the attitude of Huddlestun to a lot of the bible.



The measured and evidence based tone of Huddlestun was fine until the end when he just stated that HJ existed, surprisingly Dawkins didn't press him on it.

It was already linked to and I had a similar impression of the interview. It is interesting that a man as objective and learned in biblical history as Huddlestun seems to thinks that is a given that an HJ existed. One can make of that fact pretty much wants to. One can discount his view because of the various biases and conflicts of interest that might influence him to lean that way or one can see it as a data point in favor of the existence of an HJ that a man that is probably more schooled in these issues than anybody that has taken part in this thread thinks that an HJ existed.

Right now it is hard for me to get past the view that HM put forth a long time ago: There just isn't enough information to make a good guess.

 

[Acleron]

It was already linked to and I had a similar impression of the interview. It is interesting that a man as objective and learned in biblical history as Huddlestun seems to thinks that is a given that an HJ existed. One can make of that fact pretty much wants to. One can discount his view because of the various biases and conflicts of interest that might influence him to lean that way or one can see it as a data point in favor of the existence of an HJ that a man that is probably more schooled in these issues than anybody that has taken part in this thread thinks that an HJ existed.

Right now it is hard for me to get past the view that HM put forth a long time ago: There just isn't enough information to make a good guess.

Sorry about the duplication

Dawkins appeared a little tetchy towards the end of the interview. I wonder if the HJ question was the aim of the whole interview and Huddlestun spun out the earlier answers so he could squeeze the comment in without any discussion. Probably my imagination though.

 

[Stone]

Piggy has left? I didn't notice that ... oh, well.

As far as Jayson saying anything to the effect that people at the time of Jesus always believed what they were writing - as I have pointed out a number of times, authors like Helms have shown how the stories of what Jesus said and did, actually come from what was written centuries before in the OT.

oh, for crying out loud PILATE AND CRUCIFIXIONS AREN'T IN THE OLD T.

READ WHAT JAYSON SAID.

Stone

 

[Stone]

Is this in reference to JaysonR's claim that fiction similar to modern contemporary fiction in which the characters are presented as fictional, in a story that is represented as fictional, and that takes place in a time roughly contemporary to the author didn't exist as early as the first century?

If that is what you are referring to, do you have any thoughts about the various pieces of fiction that seemed to provide counter examples to JaysonR's claim. I summarized some of them in an earlier post:


Regardless of whether there are exceptions or not, if I haven't completely misunderstood JaysonR's claim with regard to this, the issue seems to be moot with regard to this thread. Nobody participating in this thread has claimed that the Gospels were written to be read as fiction or that the author intended the reader to view any of the characters in the Gospels as other than real people who existed or had existed. In this thread, the opposite situation seems to be the case, people that have commented about this have stated that they believe the author of Mark intended his work to be perceived as non-fiction.

JaysonR seemed to agree the issue was moot with regard to this thread when he wrote:

The exceptions are comedies -- GREEK COMEDIES ABOUT THE MORES OF THE TIME. An account of a grim crucifixion is NOT a comedy.

Stone

 

[davefoc]

GMARK USES A CONTEMPORARY MILIEU TO TELL ITS STORY, AND IT'S NOT A COMEDY. SINCE IT'S BEFORE 500AD, IT'S OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN AS AN HISTORICAL ACCOUNT. SINCE YOU NEED THIS SPELLED OUT FOR YOU, YOU OBVIOUSLY

H A V E N ' T

READ JAYSON'S POSTINGS -- OR ARE PRETENDING YOU DIDN'T FOR PROPAGANDA ADVANTAGE TO WASTE OUR TIME.

Stone

Stone, has anybody in this thread suggested that the Gospel of Mark was intended to be read as fiction? If so can you point to what that person wrote that leads you to believe this or if not what is the point that you think JaysonR was making that is relevant to this discussion?

Could you quote the particular part of JaysonR's posts that you believe are relevant to this discussion?

 

[pakeha]

The evolution thread is entertaining for about 30 secs...

I lasted 20 seconds.

I have, countless times. In detail. It has met with the same line that creationists give me whenever I present the reasoning for evolution: either "You're lying" or "That's THEIR research; where is yours?" Ignoramuses HATE specialists. I don't; I read specialists instead. Since ignoramuses hate specialists, I don't post to persuade ignoramuses anymore. I used to. No longer. Now I just post for lurkers to show them mytherism does not have an automatic mindless Amen corner among general skeptics or atheists. A few of us really do read and have some educational background. Not all of us, but a few.

Stone

That's great, Stone.
Could you post up links to your posts with evidence of an HJ, please?

 

[davefoc]

oh, for crying out loud PILATE AND CRUCIFIXIONS AREN'T IN THE OLD T.

READ WHAT JAYSON SAID.

Stone

I think the point here is that some of the stories in the Gospels seem to be a retelling of Old Testament stories. This fact suggests that some of the content of the Gospels is an unreliable source of information because those sections are very likely to be fictional. It is also another piece of evidence that supports a view that the Gospels overall are not a source of reliable information.

I do not believe anybody in this thread has stated that everything in the Gospels is just a retelling of OT stories. It is clear that they contain material not derived from the OT to not only yourself but everybody else that has participated in this thread.

 

[davefoc]

Could you let me have links or references to the sources which have enabled you [IanS] to arrive at this concept of the Essenes? And could let me know if you're implying that the DSS community did these things to a significantly greater extent than other religious groups?

I'd like to see this also. There was an exchange between IanS and myself about this awhile ago and I didn't end up with a very good understanding of what his point was (not to say that it wasn't my fault).

Apparently there are some parts of the DSS that are similar to sections of the NT. That was interesting, but what to make of that fact? I would like to see what those sections of the DSS are again. There is also the teacher of righteousness stuff that IanS believes supplies an early example of a Jesus type fellow? What are the ramifications of this fact with regards to the NT and what are some of the details about this guy?

 

[maximara]

oh, for crying out loud PILATE AND CRUCIFIXIONS AREN'T IN THE OLD T.

READ WHAT JAYSON SAID.

Stone

Doesn't stop people from claiming prophesies regarding the event in the OT such as this little gem:

"In the Old Testament book of Psalms we find Jesus' crucifixion prophesied:

Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

17 I may tell all my bones: they look [and] stare upon me.

18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.


Matthew 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots."

Don't you just love Nostradamus like prophesies?

 

[Brainache]

I'd like to see this also. There was an exchange between IanS and myself about this awhile ago and I didn't end up with a very good understanding of what his point was (not to say that it wasn't my fault).

Apparently there are some parts of the DSS that are similar to sections of the NT. That was interesting, but what to make of that fact? I would like to see what those sections of the DSS are again. There is also the teacher of righteousness stuff that IanS believes supplies an early example of a Jesus type fellow? What are the ramifications of this fact with regards to the NT and what are some of the details about this guy?

I have posted stuff about the DSS before. Here is the "Manual of Discipline" or Community Rule Scroll. It sets out the rules for anyone who wants to join.
http://www.essene.com/History&Essenes/md.htm

I have just bought a couple of books by Robert Eisenman about all of this, so prepare to be overwhelmed with his kooky ideas (as soon as the bloody things get delivered)... Anyway, one of his ideas is that this community is the bunch of guys we have come to know in this thread as "The James Gang".

Really interesting is the Habakkuk Pesher. (BTW: Kittim = Bloody Romans!)
http://www.preteristarchive.com/BibleStudies/DeadSeaScrolls/1QpHab_pesher_habakkuk.html

Compare:

...Column 9 - "Last Priests of Jerusalem" ; "Last Days" ; Conquered by "Kittim"

And as for that which He said, "because you have plundered many nations, all the remnant of the peoples shall plunder you":

Interpreted this concerns the last Priests of Jerusalem, who shall amass money and wealth by plundering the peoples. But in the last days, their riches and booty shall be delivered into the hands of the army of the Kittim, For it is they who shall be "the remnant of the peoples."

"Because of the blood of men and the violence done to the land, to the city, and to all its inhabitants" [Hab 2.8b].

Interpreted, this concerns the Wicked Priest whom God delivered into the hands of his enemies because of the iniquity committed against the Teacher of Righteousness and the men of his Council, that he might be humbled by means of a destroying scourge, in bitterness
of soul, because he had done wickedly to His elect.

"Woe to him who gets evil profit for his house; who perches his nest high to be safe from the hand of evil! You have devised shame to your house: by cutting off many peoples you have forfeited your own soul. For the [stone] cries out [from] the wall [and]the beam from the woodwork replies [Hab 2.9-11].

[Interpreted, this] concerns the {Priest] who . ...

to:

Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. 2 Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. 3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. 4 Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. 5 You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.[a] 6 You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you.

I'm looking forward to reading these books and getting feedback from interested parties on all this stuff.

 

[IanS]

oh, for crying out loud PILATE AND CRUCIFIXIONS AREN'T IN THE OLD T.

READ WHAT JAYSON SAID.

Stone

We have discussed the origin of the name of Pilate and the crucifixion several times before in this thread.

We have now had nearly 100 pages of constant lists of references, citations, quotes, links, books etc. showing why the Jesus stories are unsafe. If believers are unable to accept that then there is little if any point in repeating it all for another 100 pages.

Please read Ellegard and Helms to see why the evidence is actually so weak.