The Historical Jesus III

[dejudge]

Jesus as he stands now is on par with Robin Hood, King Arthur, and even John Henry -if the person existed they were a relative no body that the public for what ever reason latched on and promoted to a level of importance they never had in life.


This is why it is easier to accept the relatively obscure Paul that wrote seven epistles rather then the wildly important Paul of Acts actually existed as a person.

It is extremely difficult and void of logic to accept the NT stories of Jesus and Paul as historical accounts based on a complete lack of credible corroborative historical evidence from antiquity.

Saul/Paul is a main character in the established Myth/Fiction fables of Acts of the Apostles.

The Pauline Corpus is a compilation by a GROUP of persons or Church [NOT a single person].

The name "Paul" actually refers to a GROUP or AGENTS of the Church.

The authors of the Pauline Corpus are claiming to be WITNESSES of the Resurrected Jesus--an event which did NOT and could NOT have happened.

No ACTUAL person was a WITNESS to the Fictional Resurrection of Jesus.

There was NO Pauline Corpus up to c 180 CE based on the INTERNAL evidence of MULTIPLE Apologetic and non-apologetic writings like "The Apology", "First Apology", "Dialogue with Trypho", the short gMark, gMatthew, Acts of the Apostles, Municius Felix "Octavius", "Against Celsus", Epraem's "Against Marcion" and other writings of antiquity.

The overwhelming evidence from antiquity shows that the Jesus story and cult was initiated AFTER the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE and sometime in the 2nd century or later--NOT since the time of Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero.

Writings attributed to 1st century writers like Philo, Josephus, Pliny the Elder, Tacitus and Suetonius show ZERO knowledge of Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus.

 

[maximara]

I want to be sure I understand what you are saying here. Are you stating this?

You are trying to either strawman or twist my arguments. I am perfectly clear on exactly what I am saying.

- The purpose of Columbus' voyage was to prove that the Earth is round

Christopher Columbus sailing west to prove the Earth was round is a myth; it just happens to be a myth with a firm historical foundation.

- The Inquisition was innocent of excesses, so that people went out of their way to draw themselves to its attention.

Contrast that with the image of the Spanish Inquisition as an all powerful tyrannical organization composed of sadistic religious zealots answerable to only itself that terrorized areas controlled by Spain from 1478 to its final dissolving in 1813.

While the Spanish Inquisition did exist its excesses of 1500 on are a total fiction; compared to the courts of its day it and the similar Inquisitions were perhaps the most enlighten courts of the period. In fact, conditions were so bad in many secular courts and prisons of the time that people were blaspheming to get into the Inquisition courts.

 

[maximara]

I think for a myth to grow in a certain epoch you need an uneducated mass.

Untrue. Look at how many modern myths exist today.

For example, Martin Luther King was a popular leader who might be made into a myth if the public wasn't better educated than 2000 years ago.

The problem as I have said in the past this is not so much education but the dissemination of information. Take the modern popularity of a certain prince of Wallachia; if not for the printing press it is unlikely anyone outside what is modern day Romania would even know about him.

The news of his excesses came to Germany just as the whole Reformation thing kicked into high gear. Coupled with the excesses that were going on in the Spanish Inquisition (which finally got cleaned up in 1500) he arguably became the first propaganda piece for the early Protestant movement.

From the 1480s until the 1560s German pamphlets detailing his excesses were printed regularly as "proof" of the "barbarity" of Roman Catholicism. The fact his father belonged to as the Order of the Dragon which were creatures now viewed as a symbols of Satan was just icing on the cake.

Thanks to the printing press there were still enough of these pamphlets left in the 19th century for a certain author to use them for the description and name of the vampire antagonist in his novel.

Vlad III of Wallachia became the vampire Count Dracula and a 'modern' myth was born....and the 20th century promptly decided to over use him to the point he became a self caricature joke ot the point that it seemed the only way to 'fix' the myth was to formally join the actual man and the fictional vampire.

The greatness of MLK stands on itself. I remember people like myself scoffing about him at the time and making crude jokes about the "Doctor" but over the years his worthiness still stands without the need for lies.

But you are talking of someone, for comparison, was on par with Plato, Confucius (Kong Qiu), or Socrates.

Men of great stature in history tend to attract myths. Take Winston Churchill and the Coventry Blitz myth for example. Or the myth that Hitler founded the Nazi party or the Nazis winning the popular vote is what allowed them to take over.

Or how about Lincoln being a beloved president when he was shot (he was in fact the most reviled president during his life time)

The Kennedy presidency being a modern Camelot is another one (let's just forget about Lancelot and Mordred shall we?)

As you can see modern myths are more along the lines of propaganda.

 

[Craig B]

You are trying to either strawman or twist my arguments. I am perfectly clear on exactly what I am saying.

Bear with me. Let's look at the other statement then; it's simpler. Are you saying that the purpose of Columbus' voyage was to prove that the Earth is round?

 

[waters]

Bear with me. Let's look at the other statement then; it's simpler. Are you saying that the purpose of Columbus' voyage was to prove that the Earth is round?

No, Craig. Columbus already knew that Eratosthenes had measured the circumference of the "round" earth, based on the manuscripts brought to Italy by the Greeks fleeing Constantinople, after the sack by the Muslims.

What he sought was a LESS EXPENSIVE method of procuring the spices of the far East, than the route traditionally traveled, around the Cape of Good Hope, in South Africa, to reach Indonesia, and the lucrative black pepper trade.

Both Columbus and Copernicus had studied the important secular Greek manuscripts of Eratosthenes and Aristarchus, and made their respective discoveries, accordingly.

 

[dejudge]

Let us not get diverted from the subject of this thread.

In the NT Canon it is clearly stated that:

1. Jesus was a Transfigurer.

2. Jesus was a Water Walker.

3. Jesus was FATHERED by a Ghost.

4. Jesus was God Creator.

5. Jesus was the LORD from heaven.

6. Jesus Resurrected on the THIRD after he was buried.

7. Jesus Ascended in a cloud before the day of Pentecost.

Those statements were BELIEVED to be true in antiquity because there was NO historical data to contradict.

The mere fact that the NT and Pauline Corpus contain Monstrous Blatant Fiction [events which did not and could NOT have happened] suggest that those writings were composed very long after the supposed events.

The INTERNAL evidence from writings attributed to Justin Martyr, Aristides, Municius Felix, Celsus, the author of the short gMark, the author of the Muratorian Canon, Arnobius and Ephraem the Syrian appear to show that the Pauline Corpus and Acts of the Apostles were UNKNOWN at least in the 2nd century or c 180 CE.

 

[Craig B]

The mere fact that the NT and Pauline Corpus contain Monstrous Blatant Fiction [events which did not and could NOT have happened] suggest that those writings were composed very long after the supposed events.

Monstrous Blatant Fiction as well as perjury? Wow!

 

[maximara]

No, Craig. Columbus already knew that Eratosthenes had measured the circumference of the "round" earth, based on the manuscripts brought to Italy by the Greeks fleeing Constantinople, after the sack by the Muslims.

What he sought was a LESS EXPENSIVE method of procuring the spices of the far East, than the route traditionally traveled, around the Cape of Good Hope, in South Africa, to reach Indonesia, and the lucrative black pepper trade.

Both Columbus and Copernicus had studied the important secular Greek manuscripts of Eratosthenes and Aristarchus, and made their respective discoveries, accordingly.

A round earth was known to the people of the Middle ages

L'Image du monde (ca. 1246) shows one.

Dante's The Divine Comedy (1308-1320) has Purgatory mountain in the Southern Hemisphere of Earth.


“There is no doubt that intelligent people in the Middle Ages knew perfectly well that the earth was a globe. Aquinas, in the thirteenth century, wrote that, ‘the astronomer and the natural philosopher both demonstrate the same conclusion, such as that the world is round; yet the astronomer does so through mathematics, while the natural philosopher does so in a way that takes matter into account.’

Roger Bacon, living at the same time as Aquinas, had been taught that Greek mathematicians had measured the earth’s circumference. “It was obvious that it was round – for how else did things disappear beyond the horizon? As he wrote: ‘The . . . curvature of the earth explains why we can see further from higher elevations.” - Alan Ereira & Terry Jones. Terry Jones' Medieval Lives

What are presented as "maps" are actually memory aids and conversation pieces. Navigators that needed actual maps had them and for inland you had travel itineraries with roads (distances were measured in hours and days of travel time). One of the best examples is that of Matthew Paris of the thirteenth century. These are the maps pilgrims would have used (if they could have afforded such a map) to get to a holy shrine and were likely used by the Crusaders.

 

[Craig B]

A round earth was known to the people of the Middle ages

L'Image du monde (ca. 1246) shows one.

Yes I assumed you were aware of that, but what you wrote was a bit ambiguous.

Christopher Columbus sailing west to prove the Earth was round is a myth; it just happens to be a myth with a firm historical foundation.

This might be read to mean that the idea that CC was trying to prove that the Earth is round is well founded historically. Some poorly-informed people do think that, of course.

 

[dejudge]

The mere fact that the NT and Pauline Corpus contain Monstrous Blatant Fiction [events which did not and could NOT have happened] suggest that those writings were composed very long after the supposed events.

Monstrous Blatant Fiction as well as perjury? Wow!

It is also FOOLISH and CHILDISH according to Julian.

May I remind you that Skeptics of antiquity have acknowledge that the Pauline writers were Liars and that the stories of the Galileans are Fiction of men.

"Against Hierocles"

And this point is also worth noticing, that whereas the tales of Jesus have been vamped up by Peter and Paul and a few others of the kind,--men who were liars and devoid of education and wizards...

WOW!!!

"Against the Galileans"

It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.

Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that the monstrous tale is truth.

WOW!!! The NT is known fiction.

"The Apocritus"

We conclude then that he [Paul] is a liar and manifestly brought up in an atmosphere of lying.

The NT Canon is a pack of lies [historical garbage].

Why do you use the NT Canon as a credible historical source instead of fiction and mythology?

Why Do you thank God??

There are lots of Scholars who thank God for the sacrifice of his Son who was raised from the dead on the THIRD day..

 

[maximara]

Yes I assumed you were aware of that, but what you wrote was a bit ambiguous. This might be read to mean that the idea that CC was trying to prove that the Earth is round is well founded historically. Some poorly-informed people do think that, of course.

But logic would suggest that since 'Christopher Columbus sailing west to prove the Earth was round' is a myth then some part of that statement is NOT factual.

Since 'Christopher Columbus sailing west' is undeniably factual then logic indicates the unfactual part must be the 'to prove the Earth was round' part.

I know that at times the internet as a whole can come off as being about as bright as a dead firefly but here on the Randi forums one would expect better.

 

[Craig B]

But logic would suggest that since 'Christopher Columbus sailing west to prove the Earth was round' is a myth then some part of that statement is NOT factual.

Since 'Christopher Columbus sailing west' is undeniably factual then logic indicates the unfactual part must be the 'to prove the Earth was round' part.

I know that at times the internet as a whole can come off as being about as bright as a dead firefly but here on the Randi forums one would expect better.

There was not stated to be a factual and an unfactual part. Simply a well founded historical part, to wit: "Christopher Columbus sailing west to prove the Earth was round is a myth; it just happens to be a myth with a firm historical foundation."

 

[maximara]

There was not stated to be a factual and an unfactual part. Simply a well founded historical part, to wit: "Christopher Columbus sailing west to prove the Earth was round is a myth; it just happens to be a myth with a firm historical foundation."

Sorry Craig but you are are trying to extract yourself out of the tab baby you just grabbed.

I have referenced historical myth ala Resmburg enough times that is should be clear what is going on: "The event may be but slightly colored and the narrative essentially true, or it may be distorted and numberless legends attached until but a small residuum of truth remains and the narrative is essentially false."

 

[Fellow Traveler]

The NT claims Jesus is of virgin birth but yet claims he is descended from the house of David thru Joseph. Or could it mean God comes from the house of David?
The OT has considerable difficulty explaining the first family; where or how Cain could have found a wife given their place as first.

 

[dejudge]

The NT claims Jesus is of virgin birth but yet claims he is descended from the house of David thru Joseph. Or could it mean God comes from the house of David?
The OT has considerable difficulty explaining the first family; where or how Cain could have found a wife given their place as first.

Surprise!! Surprise!!

The character called Jesus of Nazareth asked a similar question in the fiction/myth fables called Gospels.

Matthew 22

45 If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?”

46 No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.

No-one could answer that question.

How could Jesus could be Fathered by a Ghost and still be the son of David?

That question is extremely easy to answer today in the 21st century.

In fiction/myth fables called the Gospels those things can happen.

How could Satan and Angels be in the company of Jesus when he was TEMPTED for forty days??

How could Jesus TRANSFIGURE??

Jesus can do anything in the Christian Bible.

Mark 10:27

Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”

The myth God Creator called Jesus could be born of a Ghost and still be the son of David because he could TRANSFIGURE like "Superman" in comic books.

 

[Craig B]

Sorry Craig but you are are trying to extract yourself out of the tab baby you just grabbed.

I have referenced historical myth ala Resmburg enough times that is should be clear what is going on: "The event may be but slightly colored and the narrative essentially true, or it may be distorted and numberless legends attached until but a small residuum of truth remains and the narrative is essentially false."

You write something that is ambiguous and I ask for clarification. So you tell me I've grabbed a tar baby (I presume you mean) because elsewhere you've referenced Remsberg enough times. Eh?

If it comes to that, you've referenced Carrier more than enough times so I think you're stuck to him permanently in the Briar Patch while Brer Fox prowls around its edges.

 

[maximara]

You write something that is ambiguous and I ask for clarification.

It is not "ambiguous" if you pay attention and think about what is being said. Trying to salvage through convoluted hoop jumping what is a inconceivable position to beginning with doesn't cut it. It is exactly the same kind of song and dance Joseph Wheless engages in to claim Bishop Irenaeus was saying Jesus lived to the time of Trajan.

Well ... if the best that you have is the bible, then you are not going to convince anyone who was not already convinced of Jesus in the first place. Or at least, you are unlikely to convince educated people who understand the necessity for genuine reliable evidence of things.

As I said before the Bible is about all anyone has to work with regarding the life of Jesus and if the Gospels don't tell you anything historical then you have literally no where to go as everything else is either a forgery or is simply repeating what the Christians were claiming was history.

 

[Craig B]

It is not "ambiguous" if you pay attention and think about what is being said. Trying to salvage through convoluted hoop jumping what is a inconceivable position to beginning with doesn't cut it.

What nonsense. What am I trying to "salvage"? I simply asked you what you meant. You told me, and that was that. What all this is about is beyond me.

 

[maximara]

The NT claims Jesus is of virgin birth but yet claims he is descended from the house of David thru Joseph. Or could it mean God comes from the house of David?

As I have said before this need not bother us as 'born of a virgin' seems to have been that time's equivalent of being born with a silver spoon in one mouth. It was a way to signify the "extraordinary personal qualities exhibited by an individual".

Known historical people like Caesar Augustus, Alexander the Great, and Plato were also said to have born of virgin.

The Kings of England have from time to time claimed lineage to King Arthur as a way to bolster the idea that they and not some other side of the family are the rightful rulers of England

The OT has considerable difficulty explaining the first family; where or how Cain could have found a wife given their place as first.

That point even plays a role in the fictionalization of the Scope Trial known as Inherent the Wind

 

[dejudge]

...Known historical people like Caesar Augustus, Alexander the Great, and Plato were also said to have born of virgin.

Mythological characters were born of virgins like Romulus, Remus and Perseus.

Characters of antiquity are considered figures of history when there is credible historical data.

There is no credible historical data for Jesus of Nazareth, the Ascending, Resurrecting, Transfiguring, Water Walking Son of a God born of a Ghost, the Lord from heaven.

Jesus of Nazareth is an absolute myth from conception to ascension.