The Historical Jesus III

[Craig B]

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.

Clearly the two irreconcilable statements come from different sources. The Virgin story is only in Matthew and Luke - nowhere else at all - and the stories given in these gospels are quite different. Moreover, whoever composed the genealogies given in these gospels, traced Jesus from Joseph. These genealogies also conflict with each other.

The Virgin story was bolted on by Greek speakers who were influenced by two things

- the notorious Greek mistranslation of Isaiah 7:14 in LXX
- the propensity to attribute divine and Virgin parentage to extraordinary people, as noted by maximara.

Where I think I disagree with maximara is that I regard this development as a later one, and I don't think Jesus' companions or first followers had any such ideas about his origin. Neither, very significantly, had Paul, or Mark, or the author(s) of the Synoptic Sayings Source; "Q" in Matthew and Luke.

John knows nothing of any Virgin, twice calls Jesus "son of Joseph", and seems even to reject the idea that he was born in Bethlehem.

 

[Fellow Traveler]

I suppose these Biblical texts give us a sample of what it was like living in a vassal state so long ago. If you could talk with the actual writers of the Bible where would you start? Imagine a world where the most learned believed in stuff like flat earth and sun revolving earth. To me the bible is sort of like a chain letter that if you don't do such and such horrible things will happen to you at some point. All those people believing ardently that the end of time was eminent and troubled by this for thousands of years. A very harmful chain letter!

 

[maximara]

I suppose these Biblical texts give us a sample of what it was like living in a vassal state so long ago. If you could talk with the actual writers of the Bible where would you start? Imagine a world where the most learned believed in stuff like flat earth and sun revolving earth. To me the bible is sort of like a chain letter that if you don't do such and such horrible things will happen to you at some point. All those people believing ardently that the end of time was eminent and troubled by this for thousands of years. A very harmful chain letter!

The majority of people believed in a flat earth is one of those myths that the Enlightenment cooked up.

Pythagoras (6th century BC) is credited with saying the Earth was round and this was taught by Plato and Aristotle.

Aristotle gave two actual observations that the Earth was round:

* Travelers going south see southern constellations rise higher above the horizon

* The shadow of Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round.


By the time of Jesus very few to none of the most learned in the Roman Empire believed in a flat earth.

In fact, Pliny the Elder in his Natural History 2.64 stated "Every one agrees that it [the Earth] has the most perfect figure . We always speak of the ball of the earth, and we admit it to be a globe bounded by the poles."



As for the sun revolving around the Earth thing Aristarchus of Samos (c. 310 – c. 230 BC) is the first one recorded as saying the Earth revolved around the Sun with Seleucus of Seleucia (c. 190 BC) as one of his last named supporters.

Plutarch (46 – 120 CE) wrote of "the followers of Aristarchus" so the possible validity of a Heliocentric system was still a thing in his day and some fragments suggest that Seleucus had actual "proved" the Heliocentric system.

Martianus Capella (5th century CE) came up with a bizarre hybred where Mercury and Venus circled the sun but the sun circled the Earth.



If we are to be critical of the people that lived in the time Jesus supposedly lived let's at least be accurate about what they believed.

 

[Fellow Traveler]

Let's see if I understand the gist of various posts re Old World knowledge and beliefs: Granted learneds believed in earth orbit etc but still the writer of the OT book of Joshua thought otherwise. Ol Josh with the help of God made the sun stand still in it's orb around the earth so they could slaughter more villagers. The old jawbone of an ass was his weapon of ohoice. I think that became a point of defense for the early church.

 

[maximara]

Let's see if I understand the gist of various posts re Old World knowledge and beliefs: Granted learneds believed in earth orbit etc but still the writer of the OT book of Joshua thought otherwise. Ol Josh with the help of God made the sun stand still in it's orb around the earth so they could slaughter more villagers. The old jawbone of an ass was his weapon of ohoice. I think that became a point of defense for the early church.

Well while the early Church did adopt a fragmented Aristotle cosmology as its go to for science it was willing to question things clear until the Renaissance.

In fact, one of the little forgotten truths about Copernicus was the Church had used his sun center system for calendar reform in the "Inter gravissimas" bull decreed by pope Gregory XIII.

The way the Church got around the theological implication was to say it was a mathematical convenience.

 

[dejudge]

Well while the early Church did adopt a fragmented Aristotle cosmology as its go to for science it was willing to question things clear until the Renaissance.

In fact, one of the little forgotten truths about Copernicus was the Church had used his sun center system for calendar reform in the "Inter gravissimas" bull decreed by pope Gregory XIII.

The way the Church got around the theological implication was to say it was a mathematical convenience.

I think you should start a new thread because the flat or round FIXED earth championed by the Church of Rome has nothing whatsoever to do with the HJ argument.

Examine "Divine Institutes" attributed to Lactantius, "CITY of GOD" attributed to Augustine of Hippo and "Christian Topography " attributed to Cosmas writing up to at least the 5th century.

The round earth with Antipodes was utter SENSELESS NONSENSE according to Church writers.

Lactantius Divine Institutes 3

How is it with those who imagine that there are antipodes opposite to our footsteps?

Do they say anything to the purpose? Or is there any one so senseless as to believe that there are men whose footsteps are higher than their heads? or that the things which with us are in a recumbent position, with them hang in an inverted direction?

that the crops and trees grow downwards? that the rains, and snow, and hail fall upwards to the earth?

And does any one wonder that hanging gardens are mentioned among the seven wonders of the world, when philosophers make hanging fields, and seas, and cities, and mountains? The origin of this error must also be set forth by us. For they are always deceived in the same manner.

City of God XVI.9

..But as to the fable that there are Antipodes, that is to say, men on the opposite side of the earth, where the sun rises when it sets to us, men who walk with their feet opposite ours, that is on no ground credible.

Cosmas' Christian Topography 4

....let him say whether the Antipodes can be all standing upright in the same sense of the expression. But this they will not show even should they speak unrestrained by shame.

Such then is our reply to your fictitious and false theories and to the conclusions of your reasonings which are capricious, self-contradictory, inconsistent, doomed to be utterly confounded, and to be whirled round and round even more than that unstable and revolving mythical sphere of yours.

It is clear than that Christians and Christian Church of antiquity did NOT accept the theory of the spherical earth and regarded the spherical earth as contrary to the teachings of the Christian Bible.

 

[maximara]

I think you should start a new thread because the flat or round FIXED earth championed by the Church of Rome has nothing whatsoever to do with the HJ argument.

I think the logic (if one can call it that) is they were so ignorant of how the world "really" worked that they would accept any idea that came down the pike.

To be fair to them as I have mentioned before the way dates were figured and how history recounted was not conducive to forming a coherent timeline.

As I said some time ago it would be as if someone wrote US history of the Depression and start of WWII like this:

Around this time a great economic calamity occurred the United States occurred in the first year of Hoover... (ie 1929)

Around this time the forces under Hirohito did invade the lands of China and took the land Manchuria and renamed it Manchukuo...(ie 1931 but there is no real year reference making you think it occurred in 1929) In Europe a man named Mussolini waged war against the country of Ethiopia (events in 1935-6 but again no reference to show you this)

The public of the United States then replaced Hoover with a man named Roosevelt in the fourth year of Hoover. Roosevelt then created a great many public works projects to raise the spirits of the people... (1933...and per Mussolini above you already have problems with the chronology as those events were after Roosevelt but this passage implies they were before.)

Around this time a man named Hitler did come to power in the nation of Germany... and raised an army that he planned to wage war on the rest of Europe with.... (based on its position you would assume this in its entirety is in reference to 'the fourth year of Hoover' year above when in reality this is a over summation of events of 1933-1939)

Roosevelt protested the actions of Hitler but the public was not with him until the forces of forces under Hirohito attacked the territory of Hawaii and the great nation went to war... (1941)

[several paragraphs outlining the war]

As was related by the supporters of Roosevelt the war they were engaged in might have been prevented if action had been taken against the forces under Hirohito in the third year of Hoover (now you get a year for Manchuria) or those of Mussolini (but not for this part)...

---

Small wonder trying to figure what happened when is such a mess.

 

[IanS]

Let's see if I understand the gist of various posts re Old World knowledge and beliefs: Granted learneds believed in earth orbit etc but still the writer of the OT book of Joshua thought otherwise. Ol Josh with the help of God made the sun stand still in it's orb around the earth so they could slaughter more villagers. The old jawbone of an ass was his weapon of ohoice. I think that became a point of defense for the early church.

I think there was probably a big difference between how much education a few elite people had, and how educated the vast mass of 99.9% of the rest of the populous were.

And even then, "education" at that time did not include any knowledge or understanding of what we now think of as science. And in current day societies science has become hugely influential in how we all understand things and determine what is likely to be right vs. what is probably wrong.

If we look back now to the ideas of even very early philosophers (long before Jesus), then of course we can see that some ideas (e.g. "atoms") appear to be quite modern or scientific ... but afaik, when they described such ideas as "atoms" they were not really imagining atoms as we think of such things today. And as I say, unless someone knows better, I'd be surprised if 99.9% of the goat herding farming population knew anything at all about ideas such as atoms. How many ordinary people knew that the planet was supposed to be "round" and/or that it might revolve around the Sun, I don't know, but I doubt if it would be very many.

An obvious stumbling block would be whether people could read or write. I mentioned that a few pages back, where it was said that people were apparently better educated than we might think as a result of Roman rule. But again I doubt very much that would apply to the vast mass of the population in a region like Judea, because for one thing iirc (and without specifically checking) even in Europe as late as about (rough guess) 1400-1500 less than around 50% of the general population could read or write fluently ... they might be able to write their name, or recite a famous part of the bible or a recite a local law, but they could not sit down and read a book, or write a proper letter afaik.

In biblical times, even the most educated people did not know what caused famine and disease, life and death, the day turning to night, what the stars were, what thunder & lightning were, what brought rain or drought to control their crops. And everyone "certainly" believed that gods, spirits, demons, angels and devils controlled all of those things. Because they did not know any better (whatever a tiny number of earlier philosophers had said about a round earth or about atoms or about an infinite universe or stars as "suns" etc.) ... at the time gods, spirits and miracles seemed to everyone to be the only possible explanation.

So I think it probably is true to say that if any of us could travel back to the time when Paul and others were preaching their messiah beliefs, we would find almost unimaginable levels of ignorance and superstition amongst almost all of the people almost all of the time.

 

[dejudge]

....So I think it probably is true to say that if any of us could travel back to the time when Paul and others were preaching their messiah beliefs, we would find almost unimaginable levels of ignorance and superstition amongst almost all of the people almost all of the time.

Paul??? Which Paul are you talking about?? The Paul who WITNESSED that God raised Jesus from the dead?? The Paul who wrote the Pastorals to Timothy??

The Pauline Corpus contains unimaginable levels of forgeries or false attribution, fiction, mythology, ignorance and superstition.

The Pauline Corpus was composed by a GROUP of persons or a Church Falsely claiming to be a single character called "Paul"

The Pauline Corpus is NOT history.

If any of us could travel back in time we would not find any characters called Jesus of Nazareth, Paul of Tarsus and the twelve disciples of Galilee.

We would probably find Valentinus, Cerinthus, Basilides, Marcion, Carpocrates, Menander, Simon Magus and other so-called Heretics.

 

[Fellow Traveler]

I ask politely why the Pauline Christianity wasn't thrown out at the Council of Bigs?

 

[IanS]

Paul??? Which Paul are you talking about?? The Paul who WITNESSED that God raised Jesus from the dead?? The Paul who wrote the Pastorals to Timothy??

Which "Paul" am I talking about? I am of course talking about whoever it was that wrote what are now called "Paul's letters".

The sentence you refer to, was of course talking about an era. A period of time ... when people like "Paul" were supposed to have written things in "Paul's letters" ... the letters that all HJ posters in this thread and in all other HJ threads name as "Paul" ... it's that era that I described in the above post ... the post is commenting upon a "time/era" of biblical writing, preaching and belief.

I think we can all agree that "the time" did exist. The "time" is not a myth. There was a time dated as circa (say) 100BC to 400AD.

And I expect we can all agree that some unknown people did write biblical gospels & letters around that date. The gospels and letters are not mythical, they actually did exist from that time.

Exactly who those writers were, exactly what they originally wrote, or what their names really were, I don't suppose anyone really has much idea.

 

[dejudge]

Paul??? Which Paul are you talking about?? The Paul who WITNESSED that God raised Jesus from the dead?? The Paul who wrote the Pastorals to Timothy??

Which "Paul" am I talking about? I am of course talking about whoever it was that wrote what are now called "Paul's letters".

Who was "whoever"?

When did "whoever" actually live?

When did "whoever" actually preach?

We have writings under the name of Paul and writings called gLuke and gJohn but they are dated to a time period in the 2nd century or later.


The time period for Papyri 4 [gLuke], Papyri 75 [gLuke and gJohn] , Papyri 46 [the Pauline Corpus] is c175-225 CE---not 100 BCE.

There is simply no corroborative evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate.

 

[IanS]

Who was "whoever"?

"Whoever" was, "whoever it was that wrote the letters".

Did you think the letters were not written by whoever wrote them?

When did "whoever" actually live?

I think the people who wrote those letters lived at the time when they were writing.

Did you think they lived at some other time?

We have writings under the name of Paul and writings called gLuke and gJohn but they are dated to a time period in the 2nd century or later.

Can you quote where I said they were not written "in the 2nd century or later". Just quote where I ever said that please.

There is simply no corroborative evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate.

Can you quote where I ever said there was "evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate"?

Please quote where I ever said any such thing.

 

[dejudge]

"Whoever" was, "whoever it was that wrote the letters".

Did you think the letters were not written by whoever wrote them?

You mean if we could go back in time "whoever" was "Paul"?

I think the people who wrote those letters lived at the time when they were writing.

Did you think they lived at some other time?

What is a forgery or false attribution?

Can you quote where I said they were not written "in the 2nd century or later". Just quote where I ever said that please.

I SAID "We have writings under the name of Paul and writings called gLuke and gJohn but they are dated to a time period in the 2nd century or later."

Can you quote where I ever said there was "evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate"?

Please quote where I ever said any such thing.

I SAID "There is simply no corroborative evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate.

I SAID, "If any of us could travel back in time we would not find any characters called Jesus of Nazareth, Paul of Tarsus and the twelve disciples of Galilee.

We would probably find Valentinus, Cerinthus, Basilides, Marcion, Carpocrates, Menander, Simon Magus and other so-called Heretics.

If we could go back in time we would find that the Pauline Corpus is historical garbage.

 

[IanS]

I SAID ...

I SAID ...

I SAID ...

You have said a great many things here, including a lot of untrue accusations about what others here have posted. And I am now asking you to justify your latest accusations by quoting where my above post #228 ever said what you just accused me of ... so here are those same two questions again -


1.Please quote where my post ever said the letters were not written "in the 2nd century or later". Just quote where I ever said that please.

2. Please quote where my post said there was "evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate". Please quote where my post ever said any such thing.

 

[dejudge]

You have said a great many things here, including a lot of untrue accusations about what others here have posted. And I am now asking you to justify your latest accusations by quoting where my above post #228 ever said what you just accused me of ... so here are those same two questions again -


1.Please quote where my post ever said the letters were not written "in the 2nd century or later". Just quote where I ever said that please.

2. Please quote where my post said there was "evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate". Please quote where my post ever said any such thing.

Your strawman accusations are baseless.

I responded DIRECTLY to an EXCERPT of your post #228.

I NEVER ACCUSED you of anything.

Examine my post #229. Please Identify your STRAWMAN accusations.

....So I think it probably is true to say that if any of us could travel back to the time when Paul and others were preaching their messiah beliefs, we would find almost unimaginable levels of ignorance and superstition amongst almost all of the people almost all of the time.

Paul??? Which Paul are you talking about?? The Paul who WITNESSED that God raised Jesus from the dead?? The Paul who wrote the Pastorals to Timothy??

The Pauline Corpus contains unimaginable levels of forgeries or false attribution, fiction, mythology, ignorance and superstition.

The Pauline Corpus was composed by a GROUP of persons or a Church Falsely claiming to be a single character called "Paul"

The Pauline Corpus is NOT history.

If any of us could travel back in time we would not find any characters called Jesus of Nazareth, Paul of Tarsus and the twelve disciples of Galilee.

We would probably find Valentinus, Cerinthus, Basilides, Marcion, Carpocrates, Menander, Simon Magus and other so-called Heretics.

There is ZERO ACCUSATION in my response to the excerpt of post #228.


Now, Again, if any of us could go back in time we would find the Pauline Corpus is historical garbage.

In effect, we would NOT find Paul preaching but find MULTIPLE persons under the name of Paul LYING about Jesus and their activities in the 2nd century or later.

 

[Craig B]

In effect, we would NOT find Paul preaching but find MULTIPLE persons under the name of Paul LYING about Jesus and their activities in the 2nd century or later.

Some of the images your posts conjure UP are very striking, dejudge. Hordes of liars (madmen and PERJURERS too, you forgot to add) all wandering ABOUT later than the second century, EACH one claiming to be Paul, and all SPOUTING monstrous blatant fiction.

 

[dejudge]

In effect, we would NOT find Paul preaching but find MULTIPLE persons under the name of Paul LYING about Jesus and their activities in the 2nd century or later.

Some of the images your posts conjure UP are very striking, dejudge. Hordes of liars (madmen and PERJURERS too, you forgot to add) all wandering ABOUT later than the second century, EACH one claiming to be Paul, and all SPOUTING monstrous blatant fiction.

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rule 12 & Rule 0

I have merely shown the statements of ANTIQUITY attributed to Irenaeus, Hierocles, Julian and Macarius Magnes.

The claim that Jesus had a human father is a LIE according to Irenaeus in "Against Heresies".

The Jesus story was written by men who were LIARS [ Paul and Peter] according Hierocles in "Against Hierocles".

Paul was a LIAR according to Macarius Magnes in the "Apocritus".

The story of the Galileans is a FICTION of men according to Julian in "Against the Galileans"


"Against Heresies"

1. Inasmuch as certain men have set the truth aside, and bring in lying words and vain genealogies, which, as the apostle says, minister questions rather than godly edifying which is in faith, and by means of their craftily-constructed plausibilities draw away the minds of the inexperienced and take them captive, [I have felt constrained, my dear friend, to compose the following treatise in order to expose and counteract their machinations.] These men falsify the oracles of God, and prove themselves evil interpreters of the good word of revelation.

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.

The claim that Jesus had a human father is a Falsehood based on the abundance of evidence from antiquity.

Jesus of the NT is a Fiction character invented by a pack of LIARS.

I have not been induced to believe the Childish, Foolish Fiction stories of Jesus and Paul is truth.

I am fully convinced that the fabrication of the Galileans is a Fiction of Men who were LIARS

 

[IanS]

I NEVER ACCUSED you of anything.

OK, so in fact you cannot quote any of my posts where I ever said anything remotely like the things your were just criticising as if they cane from my posts? You cannot quote me ever saying -


1. the letters (of "Paul") were not written "in the 2nd century or later".
2. there is "evidence from antiquity to show that Jesus and Paul were figures of history in the time of Pilate".


You absolutely cannot quote me ever saying either of those things, even though you replied directly to my post criticising me as if I had said that.


And as far as the little exchange quoted below is concerned -

So I think it probably is true to say that if any of us could travel back to the time when Paul and others were preaching their messiah beliefs, we would find almost unimaginable levels of ignorance and superstition amongst almost all of the people almost all of the time.

Paul??? Which Paul are you talking about?? The Paul who WITNESSED that God raised Jesus from the dead?? The Paul who wrote the Pastorals to Timothy??

The Pauline Corpus contains unimaginable levels of forgeries or false attribution, fiction, mythology, ignorance and superstition.

The Pauline Corpus was composed by a GROUP of persons or a Church Falsely claiming to be a single character called "Paul"

The Pauline Corpus is NOT history.

If any of us could travel back in time we would not find any characters called Jesus of Nazareth, Paul of Tarsus and the twelve disciples of Galilee.

We would probably find Valentinus, Cerinthus, Basilides, Marcion, Carpocrates, Menander, Simon Magus and other so-called Heretics.

Why are you asking incredulously with three question marks ("Paul???") who I meant by saying "at the time when Paul and others were preaching their messiah beliefs...", when you very well know that I have stressed here at least 50 times that when I say "Paul" I am only talking about whoever it was that wrote the letters under his name and whoever preached those beliefs at the time ... as you very well know I have never said that Paul was a real person named "Paul", in fact - why don't you just quote where any of my posts here have ever said that Paul was a real person named "Paul"?...

Just quote that please -

3. Please quote where any post of mine has ever said that Paul was a real figure named "Paul" who wrote the so-called "Pauline Letters"?


You will not of course be able to find any such quote from me anywhere on this entire website. So please stop replying to my posts as if I had ever said that.


In fact -

1. I have actually said here long, long ago in this thread (probably even several years back), and several times, that afaik we are not even sure that Paul was ever a real person. If you are looking for quotes in my posts then that is one quote you will be able to find, i.e. me saying that Paul might not have been a real person. And you can probably find me saying that before you even started to say it here!


2. You know very well that even over just the last 10 pages or so, I have repeatedly stressed that whenever I say "Paul's letters said x, y,z" or whenever I say "Paul was preaching about x,y,z ..." I have repeatedly qualified that by adding that I mean whoever it was that wrote any such letters under the name of "Paul" and/or whoever HJ posters here and bible scholars like Bart Ehrman mean when they refer to the biblical figure of "Paul" and his letters.

You will certainly be able to quote that from my pasts over the past 10 pages or so alone (even without bothering to look any further back), i.e. me saying exactly the opposite of what you are accusing me of, i.e. you can repeatedly quote me where I have constantly said that whenever I say "Paul", I am not saying that "Paul" was a real individual of that name who ever wrote those letters.

 

[dejudge]

....You will certainly be able to quote that from my pasts over the past 10 pages or so alone (even without bothering to look any further back), i.e. me saying exactly the opposite of what you are accusing me of, i.e. you can repeatedly quote me where I have constantly said that whenever I say "Paul", I am not saying that "Paul" was a real individual of that name who ever wrote those letters.

Again, you repeat STRAWMAN accusations.

You have UTTERLY FAILED to show that I have accused you of anything in post #229 which was a RESPONSE to an excerpt of your post #228.

I ASKED you QUESTIONS and made statements about Paul and the Pauline Corpus.

Please, identify what I accused you of.

....So I think it probably is true to say that if any of us could travel back to the time when Paul and others were preaching their messiah beliefs, we would find almost unimaginable levels of ignorance and superstition amongst almost all of the people almost all of the time.

Paul???

Which Paul are you talking about??

The Paul who WITNESSED that God raised Jesus from the dead??

The Paul who wrote the Pastorals to Timothy??

The Pauline Corpus contains unimaginable levels of forgeries or false attribution, fiction, mythology, ignorance and superstition.

The Pauline Corpus was composed by a GROUP of persons or a Church Falsely claiming to be a single character called "Paul"

The Pauline Corpus is NOT history.

If any of us could travel back in time we would not find any characters called Jesus of Nazareth, Paul of Tarsus and the twelve disciples of Galilee.

We would probably find Valentinus, Cerinthus, Basilides, Marcion, Carpocrates, Menander, Simon Magus and other so-called Heretics.