Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Post by **Peter Kirby** » Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:13 pm

Rick Sumner · Post by **Rick Sumner** » Sat Jan 04, 2014 4:22 pm

Just a preliminary thought, I've only skimmed it thus far, but I take issue with his conflation of "real" with "historical." For an example I've used in the past, there was a "real" Alice Pleasance Liddell. That does not mean there was an "historical" Alice in Wonderland. It's not as though you can break out your copy of "Through the Looking Glass" and, through careful exegetical analysis, reconstruct the life of Alice Liddell through the character. Or know anything about Alice Liddell at all (where reality does intersect, such as her birthday, our knowledge comes from other sources). I don't think it is knowable whether there was a "real" Jesus or not, but I feel considerably more confident suggesting that the historical Jesus is a modern construct that has never existed outside the minds of modern exegetes.

outhouse · Post by **outhouse** » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:27 pm

Peter Kirby wrote:He gives the idea that Jesus did not exist about 10% odds.

I would hate to apply a number or percentage, I think that is a mistake in itself.

I see no reason to discount a martyred man at Passover that generated legends and mythology in the Diaspora.

Too date, there is no replacement that even comes close to overturning this that looks like a natural progression. They all look clumsy and out of place.

Post by **Peter Kirby** » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:29 pm

What's so natural about a martyred man at Passover generating all the legends and mythology that are on display?

Tenorikuma · Post by **Tenorikuma** » Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:57 pm

I can see how a martyred rebel or sage might generate legends and a following among Palestinian Jews. It's harder to see how that would lead to different Christs (plural, as Paul puts it) being taught in diaspora synagogues and venerated by Greek god-fearers with no attachment to Palestine or Jewish history. Perhaps Burton Mack is correct, and Christianity was a syncretistic merging of disparate religious movements with little in common besides a basis in Judaism.

90% of what we call Christianity consists of doctrine and ritual with no connection to any historical Jesus that simply evolved from early practices and beliefs. There could have been such a person, but it's hard to see him as essential to the religion.

Blood · Post by **Blood** » Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:30 am

The problem when philosophy students try to address this issue is that they don't understand modern theology, much less ancient; they don't understand folklore; they don't understand the Bible; they don't understand the theosobei phenomenon in antiquity; and a lot of other things crucial to this question. They therefore fall victim to the apologist's snare that NT documents are basically historical with legendary embellishments, and we can locate the historical Jesus within them if we just sift through the non-legendary stuff and rationalize what remains. They don't know that Strauss destroyed this naive methodology 170 years ago.

Rick Sumner · Post by **Rick Sumner** » Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:36 am

Peter Kirby wrote:What's so natural about a martyred man at Passover generating all the legends and mythology that are on display?

What's more, it's also not really a progression, natural or otherwise, except by selective consideration. Where would Hebrews or the doxology in Rom.11 fit into such a curve?

PhilosopherJay · Post by **PhilosopherJay** » Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:28 am

Hi Peter,

Yes, "A Martyred Man at Passover" sounds more like a fantastic plot device than an historical event.The description of the three or four trials of Jesus when tens of thousands of Jews and God-fearers are visiting Jerusalem and celebrating Passover each sounds absurd. The Jewish High priests, Pilate, and Herod would have been busy greeting hundreds of important Jewish guests from around the Roman World. None of them would have had time to put a foreign magician on trial for allegedly claiming he was a messiah. When all these trials are put together into a single night-morning period, it sounds like a story about an athlete who wins the World Series, the Superbowl and the Olympic Decathlon on the same day. One can imagine a bizarre and fantastic set of circumstances where this could happen, but it is highly unlikely to be historically true.

Warmly,
Jay Raskin

Peter Kirby wrote:What's so natural about a martyred man at Passover generating all the legends and mythology that are on display?

PhilosopherJay · Post by **PhilosopherJay** » Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:35 am

Hi Rick,

Excellent example of Alice Liddell and Alice in Wonderland. Fiction writers often use names and traits of real and historical people to write their characters. They often refer to real historical events when producing their narratives. This does not make the characters or the stories historical.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Rick Sumner wrote:Just a preliminary thought, I've only skimmed it thus far, but I take issue with his conflation of "real" with "historical." For an example I've used in the past, there was a "real" Alice Pleasance Liddell. That does not mean there was an "historical" Alice in Wonderland. It's not as though you can break out your copy of "Through the Looking Glass" and, through careful exegetical analysis, reconstruct the life of Alice Liddell through the character. Or know anything about Alice Liddell at all (where reality does intersect, such as her birthday, our knowledge comes from other sources). I don't think it is knowable whether there was a "real" Jesus or not, but I feel considerably more confident suggesting that the historical Jesus is a modern construct that has never existed outside the minds of modern exegetes.

outhouse · Post by **outhouse** » Sun Jan 05, 2014 12:02 pm

PhilosopherJay wrote:Hi Peter,

Yes, "A Martyred Man at Passover" sounds more like a fantastic plot device than an historical event.The description of the three or four trials of Jesus when tens of thousands of Jews and God-fearers are visiting Jerusalem and celebrating Passover each sounds absurd. The Jewish High priests, Pilate, and Herod would have been busy greeting hundreds of important Jewish guests from around the Roman World. None of them would have had time to put a foreign magician on trial for allegedly claiming he was a messiah. When all these trials are put together into a single night-morning period, it sounds like a story about an athlete who wins the World Series, the Superbowl and the Olympic Decathlon on the same day. One can imagine a bizarre and fantastic set of circumstances where this could happen, but it is highly unlikely to be historically true.

Warmly,
Jay Raskin

Peter Kirby wrote:What's so natural about a martyred man at Passover generating all the legends and mythology that are on display?

The trial was a creation to build divinity, to make the Galilean seem more important then he actually was.

A peasant Galilean would have never had a trial with such people, but a teacher of teachers, a magically divine person would.

Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?

Re: Blog series: Did Jesus Exi[s]t?