Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus

[David Mo]

As John Frum shows you had have a lot of smoke and no obvious fire.

Cargo Cults and John Frum are bad examples for mythicists. "John Frum" actually was a native man named Manehivi, deified under the "John Frum" alias. And the "Cargo" were inspired by the airships that supplied goods to the colonial settlements and the armed forces, specially during the Second World War.

Therefore the Cargo Cults were a mixture of real facts (discernible) with pure mythical beliefs and this is the thesis of many defenders of the "historical Jesus".

 

[pakeha]

Cargo Cults and John Frum are bad examples for mythicists. "John Frum" actually was a native man named Manehivi, deified under the "John Frum" alias. And the "Cargo" were inspired by the airships that supplied goods to the colonial settlements and the armed forces, specially during the Second World War.

Therefore the Cargo Cults were a mixture of real facts (discernible) with pure mythical beliefs and this is the thesis of many defenders of the "historical Jesus".

Curiously enough, it's also the thesis of many defenders of the MJ.
Coffee time!

But not before I thank IanS for bringing my attention to Hector Avalos.
I've just finished listening to part I of his lecture and am looking forward to listening to part II after work.
Brainache, Avalos discusses the DSS at minute 29, if you want to give it a a looksee.

 

[dejudge]

What nonsense. They are religious writings from centuries later, not sworn court testimonies.

You are not making sense. You use Galatians as testimony that Jesus did exist.

You believe the Pauline writer of Galatians is a very good witness for your assumed HJ and your imagined James Gang.

You take Galatians 1.19 at face value although it is shown that even Christians of antiquity did NOT.

Why do you take Galatians 1.19 AT FACE VALUE?

Galatians 1:19 KJV

But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

You must, must, must take parts of the Bible at face value because you have ZERO corroborative evidence from antiquity for your HJ.


Chrysostom's Commentary of Galatians

But as he considered that he had a share in the august titles of the Apostles, he exalts himself by honoring James; and this he does by calling him “the Lord's brother,” although he was not by birth His brother, but only so reputed.

 

[dejudge]

Cargo Cults and John Frum are bad examples for mythicists. "John Frum" actually was a native man named Manehivi, deified under the "John Frum" alias. And the "Cargo" were inspired by the airships that supplied goods to the colonial settlements and the armed forces, specially during the Second World War.

You have actual evidence that 'John Frum' was a native man named Manehivi?

There are multiple irreconcilable versions of 'John Frum'.

It would appear to me that 'John Frum' is a good example of the Jesus story.

Nobody really know who was John and where he was FROM!!

 

[Brainache]

You are not making sense. You use Galatians as testimony that Jesus did exist.

You believe the Pauline writer of Galatians is a very good witness for your assumed HJ and your imagined James Gang.

You take Galatians 1.19 at face value although it is shown that even Christians of antiquity did NOT.

Why do you take Galatians 1.19 AT FACE VALUE?

Galatians 1:19 KJV


You must, must, must take parts of the Bible at face value because you have ZERO corroborative evidence from antiquity for your HJ.


Chrysostom's Commentary of Galatians

There are lots of other references to James as Jesus' brother.

Centuries later, Chrysostom was trying to prove that Mary was a perpetual Virgin. He also said that Jews eat babies. He is not someone to take seriously on this subject.

Why on earth do you believe his insane ravings?

 

[Craig B]

There are lots of other references to James as Jesus' brother.

Centuries later, Chrysostom was trying to prove that Mary was a perpetual Virgin. He also said that Jews eat babies. He is not someone to take seriously on this subject.

Why on earth do you believe his insane ravings?

I have asked dejudge that too, citing Chrysostom's diatribes against the Jews, but I can't remember receiving a substantive response.

 

[pakeha]

In any case, happy birthday, Craig B!

 

[Brainache]

I have asked dejudge that too, citing Chrysostom's diatribes against the Jews, but I can't remember receiving a substantive response.

Yes. I think it was you who taught me about this Chrysostom chap.

And Happy birthday.

 

[Craig B]

Yes. I think it was you who taught me about this Chrysostom chap.

And Happy birthday.

Thank you for the birthday greetings!

The Chrysostom stuff is at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/chrysostom-jews6.asp for dejudge or anyone else who wants to look at it.

 

[Belz...]

The earliest writings of Jesus are Paul's

Yes, but we know the religion existed before him, and he speaks, presumably, of people who knew him personally. Sounds like a man to me. Plus there is the question of whether some gospels existed before then.

 

[pakeha]

Thank you for the birthday greetings!

The Chrysostom stuff is at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/chrysostom-jews6.asp for dejudge or anyone else who wants to look at it.

Not a fan of bagels with cream cheese, then.
How were those homilies received?
With derision and scorn?

 

[Brainache]

Not a fan of bagels with cream cheese, then.
How were those homilies received?
With derision and scorn?

I think the word you are looking for is "enshrined".

 

[pakeha]

Unfortunately we're going off-topic with the enshrinement of food, however worship-worthy bagels and cream cheese are.
And lox. Definitely divine, lox is.

How did those meek and mild souls turn into the Ravenous Bugblatter Beasts of Chrysostom's time?

 

[Brainache]

Unfortunately we're going off-topic with the enshrinement of food, however worship-worthy bagels and cream cheese are.
And lox. Definitely divine, lox is.

How did those meek and mild souls turn into the Ravenous Bugblatter Beasts of Chrysostom's time?

I was talking about how Chrysostom's homilies were enshrined in Christianity. That is how we know of them now. The eastern Orthodox Church praised them for their "Poetry"...

 

[pakeha]

Sorry, posting near lunch-time was warping my perceptions.

 

[Craig B]

Sorry, posting near lunch-time was warping my perceptions.

My perceptions get banjaxed after lunchtime.

 

[eight bits]

max

It is really telling when you have this "just what is Jesus?" showing up in the same epistle.

I don't know about "telling," but Paul would be way ahead of his time. Godman is not only ahead of Paul's time, but meaningless in Paul's religion. The Jewish religion has one God, he has no kids and he isn't a man.

I did look over your snippets from Paul. I didn't notice one that hadn't been discussed in these various threads. If you'd like to revisit something in particular, then that's fine.


Brainache

There are lots of other references to James as Jesus' brother.

Yes, but except for Josephus, whose received testimony is of dicey authenticity and even if more authentic than tuned up, is not necessarily talking about the right pair of brothers, the rest of the references are from people who've read Galatians. Pro or con the biological brother hypothesis, it's all commentary on Paul.

Paul uses "brothers" several times in that letter, including right at the outset (1:2) where he calls all his own companions "brothers." Among its many appearances in the letter, only at 1:19 is there even any question that he is using the term in some figurative sense. But, of course, at 1:19, he means a literal family member. Obviously.

Craig B

Many happy returns of the day.

 

[maximara]

Cargo Cults and John Frum are bad examples for mythicists. "John Frum" actually was a native man named Manehivi, deified under the "John Frum" alias. And the "Cargo" were inspired by the airships that supplied goods to the colonial settlements and the armed forces, specially during the Second World War.

Actually we don't know that.

Manehivi was the first to use the name John Frum and galvanize the locals into doing something that attracted the authorities attention but there is nothing to suggest he was the founder of the John Frum cult and plenty against it.

"The origin of the (JonFroom) movement or the cause started more then thirty years ago" (1949 letter to the Regional Commissioner reprinted in Guiart, Jean (1952) "John Frum Movement in Tanna" Oceania Vol 22 No 3 pg 165-177)

Manehivi was in his mid-thirties when he was brought to trial in 1941 and since the John Frum movement is said to have started some time before 1919 it is unlikely he was its founder.

"From elsewhere ran the rumour that, in spite of the Administration statement, Manehevi was not John Frum, and that the latter was still at liberty" (Guiart, Jean (1952) "John Frum Movement in Tanna" Oceania Vol 22 No 3 pg 165-177)

More over three sons of John Frum were said to be on the island in 1942 and in 1943 a native named Neloaig took up the name John Frum and got an "airstrip" built, and he was followed by Iokaeye in 1947 who preached a new color symbolism.

The John Frum cult caused so many problems that in 1957 there was effort made to prove John Frum didn't exist--it totally failed (Lal, Brij V.; Kate Fortune (2000) The Pacific Islands: an encyclopedia; University of Hawaii Press; ISBN: 978-0824822651; Pg 303)

This is about when the Prince Philip splinter cult came into being and John Frum not only got himself a flesh and blood brother but his image settled into the defacto standard of white literate US Serviceman. NONE of which was true of Manehivi so if he truly was the first John Frum that detail had been purged from oral memory and replaced with a new one in less then 17 years!

Furthermore it is claimed that the vision of John Frum occurred as early as February 15, 1931 some 9 years before Manehivi used that name. And that would still leave the issue of why someone in 1949 believed the JonFroom movement began in the 1910s.


So as you can see Cargo Cults and John Frum are perfect examples for mythicists for as Richard Dawkins in his 2006 The God Delusion pgs 202-203 stated:

"Unlike the cult of Jesus, the origins of which are not reliably attested, we can see the whole course of events laid out before our eyes (and even here, as we shall see, some details are now lost). 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. [...] 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."

Additional source: Worsley, Peter (1957) The Trumpet Shall Sound: A Study of "Cargo" Cults in Melanesia London: Macgibbon & Kee pp. 153–9.

 

[proudfootz]

You have actual evidence that 'John Frum' was a native man named Manehivi?

There are multiple irreconcilable versions of 'John Frum'.

It would appear to me that 'John Frum' is a good example of the Jesus story.

Nobody really know who was John and where he was FROM!!

You are the best!

 

[maximara]

Yes, but we know the religion existed before him, and he speaks, presumably, of people who knew him personally. Sounds like a man to me. Plus there is the question of whether some gospels existed before then.

And the John Frum cult was claimed to have existed since the 1910s and he was thought to be a real person by 1957. I mean he has an actual flesh and blood brother, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh and natives were carrying around photographs of people the believed to be John Frum. How could John Frum the literate white US serviceman not exist?

Seriously, it is unlikely the Gospels existed in Paul's time otherwise he would not have written things that conflicted with them and would not have been so vague regarding Jesus. As I said before Paul can't seem to keep straight if he is talking about a normal man who is bringing God's message, a demigod, or god himself taken human form. Not something you would expect regarding an actual man who preached within living memory but it is what you would expect of a vision creation that tapped into some existing belief.