Historical Jesus

proudfootz · **#40721** by **proudfootz** » Jul 25, 2015 2:38 am

james1v wrote:
iskander wrote:Thank you.
I see that the name of Jesus is mentioned with other names , such as Socrates, Confucius and so on.

But what did Jesus teach?

Mark 1
12 And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. 13He was in the wilderness for forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him.
14 Now after John was arrested, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news* of God,* 15and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near;* repent, and believe in the good news.’*

Jesus was baptised by a mysterious weirdo. Lived in the wilderness with Satan , Angels, and wild beasts,
Later he proclaimed the need to repent because the kingdom of god is near. Repent and believe.
He is teaching nothing so far.

Well, that is one of the conundrums of the 'historical Jesus was a teacher' hypothesis - no one seems to have recalled what he taught.

If we 'believe' in the Q hypothesis, the earliest strata is the pedestrian 'wisdom' sayings similar to those attributed to Solomon.
Nothing particularly earthshaking or anything someone couldn't figure out on their own.

Now some 'real Jesus' believers think the later 'apocalyptic' stuff is the real teachings of Jesus., which entails quite a bit of work to make it jibe with current 'progressive' christianity.

The sad fact is, that the character Jesus is a blank slate upon which any nutjob can write a 'message from God'.

This fully accounts for the umty-nine versions of Jesus's 'teachings'.

dejuror · **#40722** by **dejuror** » Jul 25, 2015 5:12 am

The Jesus character, if he did exist, taught fiction.

Within 72 hours [3 days] Jesus if he did exist, would have been known to be an Idiotic Crazy Liar or a STUPID False prophet if he was killed.

Jesus of Nazareth was too DUMB to be real.

Mark 8.31--- And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must........ be killed, and after three days rise again.

Mark 9:31--- For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.

Only IDIOTS teach people that when they are dead they rise on the THIRD day.

An IDIOT like Jesus, if he did exist, would be of NO use as a leader of a competing new religion.

An historical IDIOT like Jesus would be a disgrace.

Essentially, Jesus if he did exist was KILLED because he TAUGHT STUPID Fiction or was killed to confirm his stupidity.

Stein · **#40723** by **Stein** » Jul 25, 2015 5:20 am

iskander wrote:
Stein wrote:
iskander wrote:Mark 1 end
45But he went out and began to proclaim it freely, and to spread the word, so that Jesus* could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country; and people came to him from every quarter.

It was the miracle that made him popular, not the quality of his teaching.
Saints, and relics also perform miracles on his name and huge crowds come to religious leaders like the rats followed the Pied Piper of Hamelin

You're not paying any attention to any of the modern scholarship, something which we already went over in this thread dozens of times before. Many here who are conversant with the most recent scholarship and reject all the magic woo entirely, just like many a modern scholar today does, have already addressed who and what this mundane human rabbi most likely was and did right here in this years'-long discussion countless times. The most recent analysis of what Jesus the mundane rabbi said and did is not based on idle preferences for what professionals "wish" he said and did. It's based, among other things, on textual, philological and bibliographical analysis of the different idioms of Koine Greek found in the different textual strata of the Synoptics and the parallel pericopes in Matt./Luke.

Just this past May, I already explained what the current state of play in the field is -- and the frequency with which HJ-ers have had to repeat all this stuff again and again and again in this thread is eloquent testimony to the laziness of myther newbies here who with every new wave of newcomers never bother to use the Search function in this humongous thread at all.

I know that even though I am now referring you to the latest posting where I spelled all this out --

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... n#p2224439

-- there will still be at least one or two in this very exchange who will pretend, not long from now, that no such stuff was spelled out here at all. For tricksters and bots like them, this stuff is a perennial exercise in futility. But for lurkers, it may occasionally discourage them from the inevitable trolling typical of far too many mythers.

Stein

Mark 1
38He answered, ‘Let us go on to the neighbouring towns, so that I may proclaim the message there also; for that is what I came out to do.’ 39And he went throughout Galilee, proclaiming the message in their synagogues and casting out demons.

He had a message to proclaim. The gospel of Mark is this message .

Rewriting the message is now a lucrative field for ultramodern wise scholars of the esoteric, but Tyndale and many others died for translating into English the message in Mark's, and the Holy Office of the Inquisition was a criminal organisation created to protect the integrity of the message.

I see. So when you write in that your question to me is a genuine question, you're just lying. You obviously haven't read word one of my previous, where I specifically link to a posting specifying that the parallel material in Matt./Luke, NOT the gMark, is professionally viewed as the closest approximation to the kind of teaching Jesus the rabbi would offer. You're just wasting my time by wallowing in Mark and by not going to the posting I linked to and by dodging any look at the parallel Matt./Luke material -- which I also link to in the linked posting -- that the most recent scholarship now singles out as most likely closest to the human Jesus voiceprint.

Until you look at that linked posting and the linked Matt./Luke material, you are just wasting my time. Don't expect me to address any more questions from you until you show that you're reading my answers. So far, you aren't. But this is typical of my encounters with most mythers across the web. And some here actually wonder why I view most mythers as poorly disguised trolls! :roll:

Stein

dejuror · **#40724** by **dejuror** » Jul 25, 2015 5:31 am

The HJ argument is a farce.

If we take away the mythology from the Jesus story we are left with either NOTHING or Fiction.

RealityRules · **#40725** by **RealityRules** » Jul 25, 2015 6:10 am

Stein wrote: ... Don't expect me to address any more questions from you until you show that you're reading my answers ...

lol

Scot Dutchy · **#40726** by **Scot Dutchy** » Jul 25, 2015 9:59 am

Stein wrote:You obviously haven't read word one of my previous

Who does?

Ducktown · **#40727** by **Ducktown** » Jul 25, 2015 11:12 am

Stein wrote:... the closest approximation to the kind of teaching Jesus the rabbi would offer ...

While we're on the subject I've been wondering what Superman would teach us about truth, justice and the American way.

Scot Dutchy · **#40728** by **Scot Dutchy** » Jul 25, 2015 11:21 am

Rabbi offering teaching? Since when? Indoctrination more like it. Priests never teach.

RealityRules · **#40729** by **RealityRules** » Jul 25, 2015 12:20 pm

Ducktown wrote:
Stein wrote:... the closest approximation to the kind of teaching Jesus the rabbi would offer ...

While we're on the subject I've been wondering what Superman would teach us about truth, justice and the American way.

More than an approximation?

proudfootz · **#40730** by **proudfootz** » Jul 25, 2015 12:47 pm

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Stein wrote:You obviously haven't read word one of my previous

Who does?

I've read quite a few of them, and given detailed and rational responses to many of them over the past thousand or so pages.

Sadly, there's no reply other than anti-'myther' ranting and in a few pages the same debunked claims pop up again.

Now I know how Sisyphus feels...

dejuror · **#40731** by **dejuror** » Jul 25, 2015 12:48 pm

Amazingly, the Jesus character in the Synoptic Gospels [the Transfiguring Water walking Son of a Ghost] taught in Parables so that the populace would NOT understand him and remain in sin.

Matthew 13

10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.

The Jesus story is IDIOTIC.

The Jesus character did NOT want the people to understand him.

How stupid!!!

The Jesus character was NOT a Teacher but an IDIOT.

Mark 4

10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!

The Jesus character, if he did exist, was either an IDIOT or a DECEIVER--Not a TEACHER.

Such an IDIOT or DECEIVER would be of no use to start a new religion to COMPETE with those of the Jews, Greeks and Roman.

Essentially, an historical Jesus makes no sense.

iskander · **#40732** by **iskander** » Jul 25, 2015 1:19 pm

proudfootz wrote:The sad fact is, that the character Jesus is a blank slate upon which any nutjob can write a 'message from God'.

Yes. They treat God like the genie imprisoned in the lamp was treated. They rub the lamp and ...

Did the message of Mark say this?:
Denial of any part of these doctrines constitutes heresy. References are to numbers in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

~ Christological dogmas [21]: Catechism 430-682
~ Marian dogmas [22]: Catechism 484-511; 717-726; 963-975; 1477; 2162; 2617-2619; 2673-2682
~ the doctrine of the institution of the sacraments by Christ and their ......efficacy with regard to grace [23]: Catechism 1113-1689
~ the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist [24]: 1373-1381
~ the sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic celebration [25]: Catechism 606-611; 1356-1372
~ the foundation of the Church by the will of Christ [26]: Catechism 760-780
~ the doctrine on the primacy and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff [27]: Catechism 880-892
~ the doctrine on the existence of original sin [28]: Catechism 388-421
~ the doctrine on the immortality of the spiritual soul... Catechism 362-368
~ ...and on the immediate recompense after death [29]: Catechism 1020-1041
~ the absence of error in the inspired sacred texts [30]: Catechism 101-141

Denial of any part of these doctrines makes anybody a heretic. In the past that meant big trouble for any heretic while alive and eternal hellfire after death , for the God Jesus does what the Church commands.(as in the heretic gospel of Matthew : The Abdication of God Verse.)

Stein · **#40733** by **Stein** » Jul 25, 2015 1:38 pm

proudfootz wrote:
Scot Dutchy wrote:
Stein wrote:You obviously haven't read word one of my previous

Who does?

I've read quite a few of them, and given detailed and rational responses to many of them over the past thousand or so pages.

Sadly, there's no reply other than anti-'myther' ranting and in a few pages the same debunked claims pop up again.

Now I know how Sisyphus feels...

Excuse me: Iskander starts out this exchange by asking a "genuine question" on the "historical importance" of a figure like Jesus, and then Owdhat and I respond by answering his "genuine question" to which Iskander goes off on a wild goose chase through GMark. When I follow up by referencing a posting that spotlights the parallel sayings material in Matt./Luke as more pertinent to the "historical importance" of Jesus as a normal historical human being, ISKANDER GOES RIGHT ON SPOUTING ABOUT GMark instead. Obviously, his was NOT a "genuine question" at all. His is the behavior of a troll.

Most likely, one big reason why mythers on this page now feel they can get away with these outrageous lies about this Iskander exchange is because there are no other HJ-ers around right now who can call their BULLSHIT. Well, there have been circle-jerk phases in this thread before, and I've survived them handily, and I'll survive many more after this, thank you.

Stein

RealityRules · **#40734** by **RealityRules** » Jul 25, 2015 2:15 pm

iskander wrote:
~ Christological dogmas [21]: Catechism 430-682

~ the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist [24]: 1373-1381

~ the foundation of the Church by the will of Christ [26]: Catechism 760-780

~ the doctrine on the existence of original sin [28]: Catechism 388-421

~ the absence of error in the inspired sacred texts [30]: Catechism 101-141

Denial of any part of these doctrines makes anybody a heretic. In the past that meant big trouble for any heretic while alive and eternal hell-fire after death , for the God Jesus does what the Church commands.

(as in the heretic gospel of Matthew : The Abdication of God Verse.)

They're extensive.

iskander · **#40735** by **iskander** » Jul 25, 2015 2:17 pm

iskander wrote:
proudfootz wrote:The sad fact is, that the character Jesus is a blank slate upon which any nutjob can write a 'message from God'.

Yes. They treat God like the genie imprisoned in the lamp was treated. They rub the lamp and ...

Did the message of Mark say this?:
Denial of any part of these doctrines constitutes heresy. References are to numbers in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

~ Christological dogmas [21]: Catechism 430-682
~ Marian dogmas [22]: Catechism 484-511; 717-726; 963-975; 1477; 2162; 2617-2619; 2673-2682
~ the doctrine of the institution of the sacraments by Christ and their ......efficacy with regard to grace [23]: Catechism 1113-1689
~ the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist [24]: 1373-1381
~ the sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic celebration [25]: Catechism 606-611; 1356-1372
~ the foundation of the Church by the will of Christ [26]: Catechism 760-780
~ the doctrine on the primacy and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff [27]: Catechism 880-892
~ the doctrine on the existence of original sin [28]: Catechism 388-421
~ the doctrine on the immortality of the spiritual soul... Catechism 362-368
~ ...and on the immediate recompense after death [29]: Catechism 1020-1041
~ the absence of error in the inspired sacred texts [30]: Catechism 101-141

Denial of any part of these doctrines makes anybody a heretic. In the past that meant big trouble for any heretic while alive and eternal hellfire after death , for the God Jesus does what the Church commands.(as in the heretic gospel of Matthew : The Abdication of God Verse.)

Historical salvation.

Catechism Catholic Church

JESUS
430 Jesus means in Hebrew: "God saves." At the annunciation, the angel Gabriel gave him the name Jesus as his proper name, which expresses both his identity and his mission.18 Since God alone can forgive sins, it is God who, in Jesus his eternal Son made man, "will save his people from their sins".19 in Jesus, God recapitulates all of his history of salvation on behalf of men.
431 In the history of salvation God was not content to deliver Israel "out of the house of bondage"20 by bringing them out of Egypt. He also saves them from their sin. Because sin is always an offence against God, only he can forgive it.21 For this reason Israel, becoming more and more aware of the universality of sin, will no longer be able to seek salvation except by invoking the name of the Redeemer God.22
432 The name "Jesus" signifies that the very name of God is present in the person of his Son, made man for the universal and definitive redemption from sins. It is the divine name that alone brings salvation, and henceforth all can invoke his name, for Jesus united himself to all men through his Incarnation,23 so that "there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."24

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... s2c2a2.htm

dejuror · **#40736** by **dejuror** » Jul 25, 2015 2:23 pm

The Jesus story is just too idiotic to be historical accounts.

Read the words of the supposed Rabbi, God Creator, the Logos in gJohn.

1. John 14---26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

2. John 16:7--- Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

What IDIOTIC Ghost stories!!!

The supposed RABBI will send a Ghost to TEACH and Comfort his disciples.

It is obvious that if Jesus existed that he was a complete IDIOT--a flagship of stupidity.

The Jesus character was just too IDIOTIC to be a figure of history.

iskander · **#40737** by **iskander** » Jul 25, 2015 2:46 pm

Poor Joan of Arc being mocked by her tormentors in such an august document.

The Jewish high priest sprinkled blood, but humans have gallons of it. Amen.
Anything you can do, I can do better!
I can do anything better than you!

433 The name of the Savior God was invoked only once in the year by the high priest in atonement for the sins of Israel, after he had sprinkled the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies with the sacrificial blood. The mercy seat was the place of God's presence.25 When St. Paul speaks of Jesus whom "God put forward as an expiation by his blood", he means that in Christ's humanity "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself."26

434 Jesus' Resurrection glorifies the name of the Savior God, for from that time on it is the name of Jesus that fully manifests the supreme power of the "name which is above every name".27 The evil spirits fear his name; in his name his disciples perform miracles, for the Father grants all they ask in this name.28

435 The name of Jesus is at the heart of Christian prayer. All liturgical prayers conclude with the words "through our Lord Jesus Christ". The Hail Mary reaches its high point in the words "blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus." The Eastern prayer of the heart, the Jesus Prayer, says: "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner." Many Christians, such as St. Joan of Arc, have died with the one word "Jesus" on their lips.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... s2c2a2.htm

iskander · **#40738** by **iskander** » Jul 25, 2015 7:17 pm

Stein wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Scot Dutchy wrote:
Stein wrote:You obviously haven't read word one of my previous

Who does?

I've read quite a few of them, and given detailed and rational responses to many of them over the past thousand or so pages.

Sadly, there's no reply other than anti-'myther' ranting and in a few pages the same debunked claims pop up again.

Now I know how Sisyphus feels...

Excuse me: Iskander starts out this exchange by asking a "genuine question" on the "historical importance" of a figure like Jesus, and then Owdhat and I respond by answering his "genuine question" to which Iskander goes off on a wild goose chase through GMark. When I follow up by referencing a posting that spotlights the parallel sayings material in Matt./Luke as more pertinent to the "historical importance" of Jesus as a normal historical human being, ISKANDER GOES RIGHT ON SPOUTING ABOUT GMark instead. Obviously, his was NOT a "genuine question" at all. His is the behavior of a troll.

Most likely, one big reason why mythers on this page now feel they can get away with these outrageous lies about this Iskander exchange is because there are no other HJ-ers around right now who can call their BULLSHIT. Well, there have been circle-jerk phases in this thread before, and I've survived them handily, and I'll survive many more after this, thank you.

Stein

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... n#p2224439
Page 1945,
#38890 by Stein » May 01, 2015 10:53 pm
#38892 by iskander » May 01, 2015 11:23 pm

Stein, I read your post on the day you posted it. I have nothing good to say about it.

The other links you posted for me, I acknowledged them in my direct reply to you,. I am not interested in dropping names-Socrates et al. What did Jesus teach?.

I replied to Owdhat giving my reason for remembering William Tyndale. Was Jesus really the founder of the Catholic Church and hence responsible for the conversion of Constantine?

My question was genuine and not specifically directed to you.

You have made talking to you a very disagreeable experience for me .
Will part as friends.
Bye

page 2035
#40697 by iskander » Jul 23, 2015 3:54 pm
#40699 by iskander » Jul 23, 2015 7:37 pm
#40700 by Owdhat » Jul 23, 2015 8:57 pm
Page 2036
#40719 by iskander » Jul 24, 2015 11:23 pm

proudfootz · **#40739** by **proudfootz** » Jul 25, 2015 8:01 pm

Stein wrote:
proudfootz wrote:
Scot Dutchy wrote:
Stein wrote:You obviously haven't read word one of my previous

Who does?

I've read quite a few of them, and given detailed and rational responses to many of them over the past thousand or so pages.

Sadly, there's no reply other than anti-'myther' ranting and in a few pages the same debunked claims pop up again.

Now I know how Sisyphus feels...

Excuse me: Iskander starts out this exchange by asking a "genuine question" on the "historical importance" of a figure like Jesus, and then Owdhat and I respond by answering his "genuine question" to which Iskander goes off on a wild goose chase through GMark. When I follow up by referencing a posting that spotlights the parallel sayings material in Matt./Luke as more pertinent to the "historical importance" of Jesus as a normal historical human being, ISKANDER GOES RIGHT ON SPOUTING ABOUT GMark instead. Obviously, his was NOT a "genuine question" at all. His is the behavior of a troll.

Most likely, one big reason why mythers on this page now feel they can get away with these outrageous lies about this Iskander exchange is because there are no other HJ-ers around right now who can call their BULLSHIT. Well, there have been circle-jerk phases in this thread before, and I've survived them handily, and I'll survive many more after this, thank you.

Stein

I also responded to the question. :cheers:

As many feel gMark is the original gospel story, I'd be inclined to think that if Jesus had any teachings they'd likely show up in that story.

So, I don't think it's totally out of line to look in gMark for some of the things Jesus might have taught.

Just my two cents.

Ducktown · **#40740** by **Ducktown** » Jul 25, 2015 9:10 pm

dejuror wrote:Amazingly, the Jesus character in the Synoptic Gospels [the Transfiguring Water walking Son of a Ghost] taught in Parables so that the populace would NOT understand him and remain in sin.

Matthew 13
10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.

The Jesus story is IDIOTIC.

The Jesus character did NOT want the people to understand him.

How stupid!!!

The Jesus character was NOT a Teacher but an IDIOT.

Mark 4
10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!

The Jesus character, if he did exist, was either an IDIOT or a DECEIVER--Not a TEACHER.

Such an IDIOT or DECEIVER would be of no use to start a new religion to COMPETE with those of the Jews, Greeks and Roman.

Essentially, an historical Jesus makes no sense.

That's precisely how you know that the narrative in its entirety is an invention. It's so canned.

Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Re: Historical Jesus

Who is online