Historical Jesus

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron

Re: Historical Jesus

#43421  Postby archibald » Jan 10, 2023 1:07 pm

dogsgod wrote:It was Doherty's book, The Jesus Puzzle, that convinced Carrier that the earliest Christians, the pre-gospel epistle writers, believed in a mythical Christ.


I know.

Doherty's thesis was very weak, imo. I read that book, and if memory serves me right, I actually joined a discussion with him about it on some forum or other a number of years back. To say that he did not impress me would be an understatement. I haven't been able to take his case particularly seriously since around that time.

Problem number 1 is that the epistles clearly refer to an actual man. I could go on, but I've been there done all that before.

I do accept that it's an open question, obviously. He may not have existed.
"It seems rather obvious that plants have free will. Don't know why that would be controversial."
(John Platko)
archibald
 
Posts: 10308
Male

Country: Northern Ireland
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43422  Postby dogsgod » Jan 11, 2023 12:50 am

archibald wrote:
dogsgod wrote:It was Doherty's book, The Jesus Puzzle, that convinced Carrier that the earliest Christians, the pre-gospel epistle writers, believed in a mythical Christ.


I know.

Doherty's thesis was very weak, imo. I read that book, and if memory serves me right, I actually joined a discussion with him about it on some forum or other a number of years back. To say that he did not impress me would be an understatement. I haven't been able to take his case particularly seriously since around that time.

Problem number 1 is that the epistles clearly refer to an actual man. I could go on, but I've been there done all that before.

I do accept that it's an open question, obviously. He may not have existed.


I read the epistles for myself and it appears to me that Paul's Christ figure is along the same lines as Muhammad's Gabriel, or Joseph Smith's Maroni. I do not know what man you speak of.
dogsgod
 
Posts: 2041

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43423  Postby darnwelling » Jan 11, 2023 11:03 pm

There's plenty of evidence of the historical existence of Jesus Christ our Lord.

For instance, early historical documents, such as the New Testament, mention Jesus and provide accounts of his life and teachings.

The Roman historian Tacitus wrote about Jesus and the early Christian movement in his Annals, published in the early second century.

The Jewish historian Josephus also wrote about Jesus in his Antiquities of the Jews, published in the late first century.
The early Christian church, which emerged shortly after Jesus's death, provided early and consistent testimony to his existence.

Paul, an early Christian leader, wrote about Jesus in his letters, which are some of the earliest Christian texts we have.
The existence of Jesus is also attested to by early Christian art and archaeology, such as the earliest Christian symbols and frescoes.

The early Christian creedal formulations in the New Testament, such as the Apostle's Creed, affirm the belief in Jesus as a historical figure.

Jesus's existence is also supported by the early development and spread of Christianity, which occurred within the lifetime of those who would have been able to witness Jesus.

The fact that early Christian writings were written in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, suggest that the authors were familiar with the details of his life.

The early Christian texts, such as the Gospels, were written within a generation of Jesus's life, indicating that the authors had access to information about him.

The accounts of Jesus's trial, death, and burial in the Gospels are consistent with the historical and cultural context of first-century Judea.

The opposition to Jesus and early Christianity by both Jewish and Roman authorities suggest that Jesus was a historical figure whose teachings and actions were perceived as a threat.

The fact that early Christian writings were copied and distributed widely suggests that they were considered to be based on historical facts.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels were translated into many languages suggest that they were considered historically accurate.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels contain several historical details about Palestine and Jerusalem, indicating that the authors were intimately familiar with the region.

Some of the early Christian converts, such as Paul, were initially skeptical of the claims made about Jesus, which suggest that they would not have accepted these claims without solid historical evidence.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels contain both teachings and miracles of Jesus, indicate that they were intended to present him as a real historical figure.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels present Jesus as fulfilling Jewish prophecies, indicate that they were intended to present him as a real historical figure in line with Jewish beliefs.

The existence of Jesus is also supported by non-Christian historical sources, such as the Jewish Talmud and the Roman historians Suetonius and Thallus.

The fact that early Christian communities developed around the figure of Jesus, indicate that the members of these communities believed Jesus to have existed as a real historical figure.
User avatar
darnwelling
Banned Sockpuppet
 
Posts: 58

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43424  Postby dogsgod » Jan 12, 2023 2:18 am

darnwelling wrote:There's plenty of evidence of the historical existence of Jesus Christ our Lord.

For instance, ...


Hi darnwelling,

If you care to make a case for one of your points at a time and present it, you may have better luck getting a response.
dogsgod
 
Posts: 2041

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43425  Postby dogsgod » Jan 12, 2023 5:22 pm

Serves me right for not knowing better, I should have darn well noticed.
dogsgod
 
Posts: 2041

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43426  Postby dogsgod » Jan 12, 2023 5:30 pm

The fact that early Christian writings were written in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, suggest that the authors were familiar with the details of his life.

This notion comes from Ehrmans book, and we should darn well know it that these hypothetical non-existing ancient texts prove Jesus' existence.
dogsgod
 
Posts: 2041

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43427  Postby proudfootz » Jan 12, 2023 6:39 pm

dogsgod wrote:The fact that early Christian writings were written in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, suggest that the authors were familiar with the details of his life.

This notion comes from Ehrmans book, and we should darn well know it that these hypothetical non-existing ancient texts prove Jesus' existence.


Someone better get writing these 'originals in Aramaic' to own the atheists. :coffee:
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11030

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43428  Postby proudfootz » Jan 12, 2023 6:41 pm

dogsgod wrote:
archibald wrote:
dogsgod wrote:It was Doherty's book, The Jesus Puzzle, that convinced Carrier that the earliest Christians, the pre-gospel epistle writers, believed in a mythical Christ.


I know.

Doherty's thesis was very weak, imo. I read that book, and if memory serves me right, I actually joined a discussion with him about it on some forum or other a number of years back. To say that he did not impress me would be an understatement. I haven't been able to take his case particularly seriously since around that time.

Problem number 1 is that the epistles clearly refer to an actual man. I could go on, but I've been there done all that before.

I do accept that it's an open question, obviously. He may not have existed.


I read the epistles for myself and it appears to me that Paul's Christ figure is along the same lines as Muhammad's Gabriel, or Joseph Smith's Maroni. I do not know what man you speak of.


...if indeed one ought to call him a man. :roll:
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11030

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43429  Postby proudfootz » Jan 12, 2023 6:43 pm

archibald wrote:

I do accept that it's an open question, obviously. He may not have existed.


It is indeed an open question, which extremists will deny. :cheers:
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 11030

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43430  Postby archibald » Jan 15, 2023 8:31 pm

dogsgod wrote: I do not know what man you speak of.


For instance, Galatians 5:14:

"For if through the offence of one* many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man**, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many".

* i.e. Adam
** Koine Greek: anthropou.

Apart from the references or allusions to Jesus as a human ( a jew in fact), there is the general emphasis on Jesus being the proof that (other) humans can cheat death also. In a way, it would make no sense to the core message and appeal to the superstitious human readers if Jesus was not the supposed proof, and the counterpoint to Adam, according to the writer.
Last edited by archibald on Jan 15, 2023 8:49 pm, edited 18 times in total.
"It seems rather obvious that plants have free will. Don't know why that would be controversial."
(John Platko)
archibald
 
Posts: 10308
Male

Country: Northern Ireland
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43431  Postby archibald » Jan 15, 2023 8:32 pm

proudfootz wrote:
archibald wrote:

I do accept that it's an open question, obviously. He may not have existed.


It is indeed an open question, which extremists will deny. :cheers:


It's very much possible either way, imo.
"It seems rather obvious that plants have free will. Don't know why that would be controversial."
(John Platko)
archibald
 
Posts: 10308
Male

Country: Northern Ireland
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43432  Postby RealityRules » Jan 15, 2023 10:34 pm

archibald wrote:
dogsgod wrote: I do not know what man you speak of.

For instance, Galatians 5:14:

    "For if through the offence of one* many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man**, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many".

    * i.e. Adam
    ** Koine Greek: anthropou.
Apart from the references or allusions to Jesus as a human...there is the general emphasis on Jesus being 'the proof' that (other) humans can cheat death also ... it would make no sense to the core message and appeal to the superstitious human readers if Jesus was not the supposed proof, and the counterpoint to Adam, according to the writer.

Exactly. Jesus being portrayed as a human was a key selling point.
User avatar
RealityRules
 
Name: GMak
Posts: 2933

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43433  Postby Leucius Charinus » Jan 16, 2023 10:53 am

darnwelling wrote:

The Roman historian Tacitus wrote about Jesus and the early Christian movement in his Annals, published in the early second century.


Not one author cites Tacitus until the 15th century when the Tacitus manuscript was suddenly and unexpectedly "discovered"in the archives of the utterly corrupt church industry.

http://mountainman.com.au/essenes/author_Tacitus.htm

The Jewish historian Josephus also wrote about Jesus in his Antiquities of the Jews, published in the late first century.


"A rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too", --- Bishop Warburton of Gloucester, 1762.

http://mountainman.com.au/essenes/Censure_of_the_TF.htm


The existence of Jesus is also supported by non-Christian historical sources, such as the Jewish Talmud and the Roman historians Suetonius and Thallus.


Jesus is not mentioned in the Talmud.

The earliest extant manuscript for Suetonius is from the 9th century.
http://mountainman.com.au/essenes/author_suetonius.htm

Thallus mentions a darkness.


There is arguably no extra-biblical evidence for the existence of either Jesus or the "nation of Christians" in the first three centuries of the common era.

Here is the full list:

Pagan witnesses to the historicity of "Christians"
Prior to the Christian Revolution of the 4th century
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/chris ... 54277.html
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 897

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43434  Postby Leucius Charinus » Jan 16, 2023 11:45 am

darnwelling wrote:There's plenty of evidence of the historical existence of Jesus Christ our Lord.


There are also mountains and mountains of piously forged manuscripts, such as Jesus' letter to King Abgar.

For instance, early historical documents, such as the New Testament, mention Jesus and provide accounts of his life and teachings.


The NT is not an historical document. It is a theological / historical fiction story book.

The early Christian church, which emerged shortly after Jesus's death, provided early and consistent testimony to his existence.


Everything waited until the 4th century when the one and only church "historian" Eusebius troubled himself to go back over the ground of the preceding 300 years and collect whatever documents he could find (or invent).

Paul, an early Christian leader, wrote about Jesus in his letters, which are some of the earliest Christian texts we have.


That Paul or his letters existed in the 1st century is a proposition and not a fact.

The existence of Jesus is also attested to by early Christian art and archaeology, such as the earliest Christian symbols and frescoes.


New Testament archeology is an oxymoron. The evidence explodes in the 4th century.

The early Christian creedal formulations in the New Testament, such as the Apostle's Creed, affirm the belief in Jesus as a historical figure.


The Apostles Creed did not appear until the 4th or 5th century.

Jesus's existence is also supported by the early development and spread of Christianity, which occurred within the lifetime of those who would have been able to witness Jesus.


The early development and spread of Christianity is reflected in the Acts of the Apostles which is a fiction. The fiction is expanded at great length by Eusebius in the 4th century in his "Ecclesiastical History" which again is fiction.

The fact that early Christian writings were written in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus, suggest that the authors were familiar with the details of his life.


All the earliest manuscripts are in Greek. Not one Aramaic NT fragment has been discovered.

The early Christian texts, such as the Gospels, were written within a generation of Jesus's life, indicating that the authors had access to information about him.


Nobody knows when the gospels were written or who wrote them. According to the paleographer Brent Nongbri the earliest fragments of the Christian texts may be as late as the 3rd or 4th century. The only radiocarbon C14 test results for Christian material are dated around the 4th century.

The accounts of Jesus's trial, death, and burial in the Gospels are consistent with the historical and cultural context of first-century Judea.


The Romans executed thousands and thousands. In the Acts of Pilate, Pilate tells the Jews that Jesus heals by the power of Asclepius.

The opposition to Jesus and early Christianity by both Jewish and Roman authorities suggest that Jesus was a historical figure whose teachings and actions were perceived as a threat.


The persecution of the Christians by pagan emperors is an invented ideological (and fictional) propaganda. The 4th Century Nicene "Church Industry" was Orwellian. "Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past."

http://mountainman.com.au/essenes/imper ... stians.htm

The fact that early Christian writings were copied and distributed widely suggests that they were considered to be based on historical facts.


The only reason that Christianity was successful is because Emperor Constantine decided to embrace it, to support it, to sponsor the publication and circulation of the NT bible Codex and to legislate on its behalf laws such as:

"At death people shall have the right to leave property to the church" [industry]

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels were translated into many languages suggest that they were considered historically accurate.


No it was good for business and trade with Constantine. For example the reason Ethiopia converted to Christianity (during the rule of Constantine) and an Ethiopian translation of the bible was made, was because the rulers of Ethiopia converted in order to get on the right side of Constantine.

The Bible was translated to Latin by Jerome in the later 4th century because his boss Damasus, Bishop of Rome and Pontifex Maximus, was super keen to start the Vatican tourism business featuring the catch-cry "PETER-WAS-HERE". Damasus renovated the Roman catacombs in the period 364-381 CE and that's the earliest archeology.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels contain several historical details about Palestine and Jerusalem, indicating that the authors were intimately familiar with the region.


Have you ever read an historical fiction novel?

Some of the early Christian converts, such as Paul, were initially skeptical of the claims made about Jesus, which suggest that they would not have accepted these claims without solid historical evidence.


The only extra-biblical attestation to the historical existence of Paul comes from Seneca. I'll leave it up to you to find out where Seneca attests to the existence of Paul. It's not a good ending.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels contain both teachings and miracles of Jesus, indicate that they were intended to present him as a real historical figure.


Gandalf the Grey fell from the Bridge of Kazadoom and into the Pit of Moriah while fighting the Balrog but was resurrected to become Gandalf the White. Harry Potter did some clever stuff. The Phantom was known as "the Ghost who walks".

Not all those who wander are lost.

The fact that early Christian writings such as the Gospels present Jesus as fulfilling Jewish prophecies, indicate that they were intended to present him as a real historical figure in line with Jewish beliefs.


This indicates the opposite. Whoever fabricated the gospels copy/pasted massive amounts of material from the Greek LXX (Old testament) into the Greek NT. The prophesies were reverse engineered by design. It's complete bullshit.

The existence of Jesus is also supported by non-Christian historical sources, such as the Jewish Talmud and the Roman historians Suetonius and Thallus.


I've dealt with the Pagan witnesses to the historicity of "Christians" Prior to the Christian Revolution of the 4th century in a separate post. There are arguably none. The utterly corrupt church industry engaged in fraud and forgery of manuscripts which were supposedly independent of the church. Why there are so many forgeries in this specific class of literature highlights the fact that the Christians probably did not exist until the Bible was published as a political instrument in the Roman empire. When this happened Christians appeared everywhere. Everyone wanted to be a part of the clergy. Why? Because it was tax exempt in an epoch in which land tax had tripled in living memory.

The fact that early Christian communities developed around the figure of Jesus, indicate that the members of these communities believed Jesus to have existed as a real historical figure.


Constantine managed to convince himself that the Jesus Story Book was a good business plan. His army looted the pagan temples of their gold and treasure an artwork and destroyed the major temples. In some cases the chief priests were publically executed. People got a little nervous but were heartened when he legislated that "Religious privileges are reserved for Christians". Constantine became one of the richest people on the planet virtually overnight. The Nicene Church industry which he commissioned is still running and the turnstiles are still clicking over.

In 381 CE the Emperor Theodosius decreed

'We authorise followers of this law to assume the title of orthodox Christians; but as for the others since, in our judgement, they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious names of heretics.'

Charles freeman writes:

In AD 381, Theodosius, emperor of the eastern Roman empire, issued a decree in which all his subjects were required to subscribe to a belief in the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This edict defined Christian orthodoxy and brought to an end a lively and wide-ranging debate about the nature of the Godhead; all other interpretations were now declared heretical.
Moreover, for the first time in a thousand years of Greco-Roman civilization free thought was unambiguously suppressed. Not since the attempt of the pharaoh Akhenaten to impose his god Aten on his Egyptian subjects in the fourteenth century BC had there been such a widesweeping programme of religious coercion.
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 897

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43435  Postby archibald » Jan 18, 2023 11:04 am

RealityRules wrote:
archibald wrote:
dogsgod wrote: I do not know what man you speak of.

For instance, Galatians 5:14:

    "For if through the offence of one* many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man**, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many".

    * i.e. Adam
    ** Koine Greek: anthropou.
Apart from the references or allusions to Jesus as a human...there is the general emphasis on Jesus being 'the proof' that (other) humans can cheat death also ... it would make no sense to the core message and appeal to the superstitious human readers if Jesus was not the supposed proof, and the counterpoint to Adam, according to the writer.

Exactly. Jesus being portrayed as a human was a key selling point.


And as being a jew, apparently, so maybe I should have said '...appeal to superstitious jewish readers....' in particular, (or listeners actually), or potential converts. Which again makes sense, Jesus being the supposed prime illustration of what the listeners could also attain (eternal life, and soon).

Without a Jesus figure who is said to have been human (or possibly just convincingly human-like in form and appearance, at least temporarily) and dying (or convincingly appearing to), the sales pitch would have been severely weakened, I think.

It is, arguably, more or less exactly the same sales pitch today. Incredibly, some of today's superstitious are still waiting, optimistically, way way past, arguably thousands of years past, the point of reasonable (and initially promised) timescales. Which I think shows what a really appealing sales pitch it is, even if bollocks.

Whatever about when the referred-to death was supposed to have happened (if it ever did at all) this supposed 'human death on earth' seems to me much more likely alleged scenario (for reasons given above to begin with), and not for instance a celestial-only entity who merely 'died' somewhere else other than on earth, which is probably the main reason I tend to be very skeptical about Earl Doherty's stuff.
"It seems rather obvious that plants have free will. Don't know why that would be controversial."
(John Platko)
archibald
 
Posts: 10308
Male

Country: Northern Ireland
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43436  Postby RealityRules » Jan 19, 2023 12:14 am

archibald wrote:Without a Jesus figure who is said to have been human (or possibly just convincingly human-like in form and appearance, at least temporarily) and dying (or convincingly appearing to), the sales pitch would have been severely weakened, I think.

    Yes.
As I said:
RealityRules wrote:Jesus being portrayed as a human was a key selling point.


archibald wrote: maybe I should have said '...appeal to superstitious jewish readers...' in particular, (or listeners actually), or potential converts.

    Well, the pitch was as much to 'Gentiles'; or soon as much to (though, at first, the accounts might have just been literature to meet what was said to have been high demand for such literature ie. in the 2nd century)

archibald wrote:Whatever about when the referred-to death was supposed to have happened (if it ever did at all) this supposed 'human death on earth' seems to me much more likely alleged scenario (for reasons given above to begin with), and not for instance a celestial-only entity who merely 'died' somewhere else other than on earth, which is probably the main reason I tend to be very skeptical about Earl Doherty's stuff.

    Well, it's not an either or scenario.

    ie. Doherty and his acolytes, eg. Richard Carrier, propose Paul was talking about a celestial crucifixion +/- a celestial only entity. But it's clear that the Gospel writers were not writing about a celestial entity or a celestial crucifixion (+/- the authors of the so-called catholic epistles)
Which brings us back to
archibald wrote:Without a Jesus figure who is said to have been human (or possibly just convincingly human-like in form and appearance, at least temporarily) and dying (or convincingly appearing to), the sales pitch would have been severely weakened, I think.

    And part of the sales pitch and its appeal is that what-is-said-to-have-happened-to-Jesus can and will happen to his devout followers
User avatar
RealityRules
 
Name: GMak
Posts: 2933

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43437  Postby dogsgod » Jan 19, 2023 9:38 pm

proudfootz wrote:

...if indeed one ought to call him a man. :roll:


touché
dogsgod
 
Posts: 2041

Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43438  Postby archibald » Jan 20, 2023 5:05 pm

RealityRules wrote: Well, the pitch was as much to 'Gentiles'; or soon as much to (though, at first, the accounts might have just been literature to meet what was said to have been high demand for such literature ie. in the 2nd century)"[/b]


My take on it is that it began to include gentiles at some point. Even then, it seemed to have been asking them to convert. But my guess is it (the cult) started, before 'Paul' in Judea. Hence, I tend to think of it as originally Jewish. Indeed, a rift between the epistle writer's apparent desire to proselytise gentiles, and an earlier/original, Judean, jewish cult who were not so inclined, is something which runs through the epistles and Acts, and as such, suggests to me that it's less likely to be an invention, if one is willing to guess. I think it's plausible. Rifts and split offs are part and parcel of cults.

RealityRules wrote:But it's clear that the Gospel writers were not writing about a celestial entity or a celestial crucifixion


No, they weren't, but I personally put the gospels as later. I'm saying the epistles (which I take as probably earlier, though we can't know) don't talk of a celestial-only Jesus either.
"It seems rather obvious that plants have free will. Don't know why that would be controversial."
(John Platko)
archibald
 
Posts: 10308
Male

Country: Northern Ireland
Print view this post

Re: Historical Jesus

#43439  Postby dogsgod » Jan 24, 2023 6:03 pm

.

Paul revealed his sources for his Christ figure:

1 He had visions of him,

2 he bragged about going to the third heaven to get information,

3 his ancient scriptures, what we call the OT, was a source for this figure of a man.

So there we have it.

ps, and he claimed to learn nothing from the Jerusalem group.
dogsgod
 
Posts: 2041

Print view this post

Previous

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 8 guests