How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
hakeem
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by hakeem » Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:00 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:36 am

These are no inventions and I showed corroboration from Philippians and Acts.
The Epistle to the Philippians and Acts do not corroborate that the supposed 1 Clement was written in the 1st century.

hakeem wrote:Christian writings it is claimed Clement was bishop of the entire city of Rome.
Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:36 am
That's not what the letter says.
I already told you that I take 1 Clement as written by a spokesman of the church of Rome, not necessarily Clement, not necessarily a bishop.
Actually, I don't care if Clement existed or not. And the letter never says that it was written by Clement or a bishop.
My dating is from the internal evidence, and not related to any Clement.
Again, there is no internal evidence that the so-called 1 Clement was written in the 1st century. You are making an argument form silence since the letter does not state that it was written by a spokesman of the Church of Rome. Logically, it is not necessary to be an actual spokesman to write a letter falsely claiming to be from the Church of Rome.
hakeem wrote:Well, based on my research, the so-called Ignatius letters are forgeries or false attribution and products of fiction. It is simply implausible that a person who was imprisoned for the crime of preaching and teaching about Christ would be allowed to continue the very same criminal activity while under arrest especially in the 1st century.

Where would this Ignatius get pen, paper and ink to carry out his crime in the presence of guards?

In the writings of Josephus, a character called Jesus, the son of Ananus, was beaten to a pulp and was not even imprisoned.

In effect, there was no bishop named Ignatius of any city who wrote letters to anyone while he was incarcerated.
Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:36 am
I totally agree. However, these letters were addressed to Christian communities. That's not fiction.
Well, once you agree that the so-called Ignatius letters are forgeries or false attribution and products of fiction then even if they are addressed to Christians they are not credible.`
hakeem wrote:In the time of Justin there were no such title of bishop and no bishops of entire cities like Rome or any other city.
Justin supposedly writing after c 130 CE did not acknowledge any bishop of any Church and knew nothing of letters by bishops.
Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:36 am
Irenaeus and Hegesippus, both 2nd century authors, relates of city-wide bishops.
The existing fragments of Hegesippus do not mention any letter from the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth in the 1st century.
"Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus is primary source of fiction and is a perfect example of corrupted writings. Virtually everything about the dating, chronology and authors of NT books in Against Heresies" have been rejected by Scholars and even Christians.

In "Against Heresies" it is claimed Jesus was crucified when he was an old man over forty years old which would destroy the claim in the NT that Paul preached Christ crucified since the time of Aretas.
Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:36 am

BTW, Justin wrote after 150 CE. And then again, these arguments from silence, with the (wrong) belief that Justin (or other) wrote about all he knew, and if he did not mention something, that was not existing.

Cordially, Bernard
If you assume Justin did not write all he knew about then the same thing applies to all writers. You use any ancient writings to support your arguments while admitting they did not write all that they knew.

BTW, the writings of Justin do not state that the so-called 1 Clement was written in the 1st century.

hakeem
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by hakeem » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:53 pm

gmx wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 3:06 pm
hakeem wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:16 am
[The teachings and beliefs of Christians are expounded by writers who were not known to have been bishops like Aristides, Justin Martyr, Origen, Athenagoras, Bardesanes, Tertullian, Hippolytus , Lactantius and Arnobius.

The title of Bishops appear to have commenced sometime in the 4th century when the Roman Government took control of the Christian religion.

It is easily seen on research that it was in the 4th century and later that Bishops shaped the teachings and beliefs of Christians.
What say you of Irenaeus?
Against Heresies attributed to Irenaeus is one of the most corrupted writings which was a product of more than one author.

neilgodfrey
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by neilgodfrey » Sat Feb 17, 2018 12:47 am

toejam wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:20 pm
neilgodfrey wrote:
Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:32 pm
I get the impression that some readers of OHJ have merely skimmed it only to find what they are expecting to see. The whole point of Carrier writing a prequel volume, and the whole point of those sections in each chapter that many readers seemed to have ignored or found too technical or philosophical is to point out that the the entire corpus of evidence and background knowledge needs to be considered over and above any specific argument.
I listened to the audiobook of 'Proving History'. I've also read his 'Not the Impossible Faith', have watched most of his online debates, and read a lot of his blog. Aparently this still isn't enough to understand Carrier's genius ;). I'm still not convinced that he is is onto something with his view that Paul thought Jesus hadn't been here on Earth. Doesn't seem like you are, either. And I feel I'm well versed enough on the evidence and background knowledge (see my reading list below) to make that call.
My point is simply that for a Jesus to be thought to have been on earth, esp for a period of suffering, death and resurrection, is neither here nor there for any argument for Christ mythicism. That Jesus was believed to have suffered and died in the flesh on earth has been a staple of many, possibly most, mythicist arguments. There are varieties of mythicist models just as there are many historicist ones. Ironically it is quite conceivable that early Christianity did consist of a variety of "mythicist" Christs, but of course a historical Jesus had to be of just one sort.

(Doherty's "success" appears to have led many to equate one of several views of mythicism with mythicism itself. Carrier acknowledges that his main arguments are in fact indebted to Doherty, by the way.)

hakeem
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by hakeem » Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:09 pm

I do not at all subscribe to the theory that the so-called Pauline writings are about a Jesus who was believed to have been never on earth.

If the supposed Paul was known for decades to be a heretic and documented his heresy that Jesus was never on earth which contradicted the teachings of Christian Church then it is simply implausible that the very Church would use multiple letters with the very heresies of Paul in their Canon.

The so-called Pauline letters are compatible with the teachings of the Church that Jesus was the Lord from heaven, God's own Son, God Creator, born of a woman, that he was killed by the Jews and then resurrected.

Writers who used the so-called Pauline letters claimed their Jesus was God's Son born of a Holy Ghost and a virgin and was killed or caused to be killed by the Jews, resurrected and ascended.

There is simply no writer of antiquity who claimed Paul wrote about a Jesus who was never on earth.

In effect, Doherty and Carrier have no supporting claim in any writing of antiquity [Christian or not] to support their never on earth Jesus.

neilgodfrey
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by neilgodfrey » Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:23 pm

hakeem wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:09 pm
I do not at all subscribe to the theory that the so-called Pauline writings are about a Jesus who was believed to have been never on earth.

. . . .

In effect, Doherty and Carrier have no supporting claim in any writing of antiquity [Christian or not] to support their never on earth Jesus.
You have missed the point of the comment I made and appear to be simply using it as a cue to enter and recite your well-known beliefs.

hakeem
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by hakeem » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:04 pm

neilgodfrey wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:23 pm
hakeem wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:09 pm
I do not at all subscribe to the theory that the so-called Pauline writings are about a Jesus who was believed to have been never on earth.

. . . .

In effect, Doherty and Carrier have no supporting claim in any writing of antiquity [Christian or not] to support their never on earth Jesus.
You have missed the point of the comment I made and appear to be simply using it as a cue to enter and recite your well-known beliefs.
You are wrong. My argument has nothing whatsoever to do with your comments.

I regard the myth theory that the Pauline Jesus was claimed to be never on earth as extremely weak since it is clearly claimed in a so-called Pauline letter that the Lord Jesus [God's own Son--the Lord from heaven--the Creator] was killed by the Jews.

1 Thessalonians 2. 14-15
For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.
Jesus was claimed to be the son of a myth God [the God of the Jews] who came down from to earth from heaven and became man after being born of a virgin/woman and was killed or caused to be killed by Jews in virtually all Christian writings which mentioned the birth and killing of Jesus.

Their Jesus was claimed to have a least a two-fold nature [God and man] by Christian writers which is the very reason they denied that their Jesus was only Spirit or only man.

neilgodfrey
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by neilgodfrey » Sat Feb 17, 2018 8:07 pm

hakeem wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:04 pm
1 Thessalonians 2. 14-15
For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.
Thanks for highlighting that passage for me. I didn't know it was there. I will have to change my mind now that you have quoted the Bible and I cannot argue with anything in the Bible. Maybe I should reconsider evolution, too, and the theory of the round earth orbiting the sun.

hakeem
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by hakeem » Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:55 pm

hakeem wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:04 pm
1 Thessalonians 2. 14-15
For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.
neilgodfrey wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 8:07 pm
Thanks for highlighting that passage for me. I didn't know it was there. I will have to change my mind now that you have quoted the Bible and I cannot argue with anything in the Bible. Maybe I should reconsider evolution, too, and the theory of the round earth orbiting the sun.
Thanks for your response.

So what happens to you, what do you change or reconsider when Doherty quotes the Bible for his " smoking gun" evidence to support his argument that Jesus Christ was never on earth?

Doherty's "Smoking Gun"
Hebrews 8:4
For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law
Maybe you should reconsider evolution, too, and the theory of the round earth orbiting the sun since you cannot argue with anything in the Bible.

neilgodfrey
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by neilgodfrey » Mon Feb 19, 2018 1:29 am

hakeem wrote:
Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:55 pm
hakeem wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:04 pm
1 Thessalonians 2. 14-15
For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.
neilgodfrey wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 8:07 pm
Thanks for highlighting that passage for me. I didn't know it was there. I will have to change my mind now that you have quoted the Bible and I cannot argue with anything in the Bible. Maybe I should reconsider evolution, too, and the theory of the round earth orbiting the sun.
Thanks for your response.

So what happens to you, what do you change or reconsider when Doherty quotes the Bible for his " smoking gun" evidence to support his argument that Jesus Christ was never on earth?

Doherty's "Smoking Gun"
Hebrews 8:4
For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law
Maybe you should reconsider evolution, too, and the theory of the round earth orbiting the sun since you cannot argue with anything in the Bible.
What happens to me when I read Doherty? I think about his arguments: some of them I find very interesting and others I disagree with strongly. Did you think I just follow Doherty the way a fundamentalist just mindlessly follows the bible and favourite teachers of the bible?

But you did not quote 1 Thess 2:14-15 as a "smoking gun". You posted it as prooftext argument to make your case. Doherty spends many pages discussing the background, context and meaning of Hebrews 8:4 to demonstrate that it supports (not makes) his case.

I have likewise written at length on the passage you quote and I explore in some depth the arguments from two schools of scholars: one side are critical scholars and the other are apologists. The critical scholars are by no means mythicists, but they do present a strong series of arguments -- evidence -- to demonstrate that the passage is a later insertion into Paul's letters. The apologists disagree and present their arguments.

So even if you disagree with the critical scholars because they question the very "word of God" as the Church has handed down to you, you cannot simply declare that the passage is without some reasonable doubt among well-meaning scholars.

Unless you think anyone who is critical of the holy word of God is a baleful sinner who deserves to die in hell.

My point is that I prefer to garner evidence and understand the foundations of various arguments. I don't believe I should just believe the world is a few thousand years old or that Jesus rose from the dead just because the Bible tells me so.

Just quoting bible texts to prove your case on any argument is not scholarly, it is not rational, it is merely soap-box preaching.

neilgodfrey
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: How does the mythical Jesus thing hang together?

Post by neilgodfrey » Mon Feb 19, 2018 1:41 am

hakeem wrote:
Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:55 pm

So what happens to you, what do you change or reconsider when Doherty quotes the Bible for his " smoking gun" evidence to support his argument that Jesus Christ was never on earth?

Doherty's "Smoking Gun"
Hebrews 8:4
For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law
I forgot to tell you what I think of Doherty's argument with respect to Hebrews 8:4. But then again, I don't see the relevance of your bringing it up. My point was that there are more mythicist arguments extant that place the "nonhistorical" Jesus on earth for his suffering, death and resurrection. That was my original point. It follows that 1 Thess 2:14-15 that you see as a prooftext for historicity can be just as easily embraced by a mythicist argument -- but to be honest it cannot be used as a bedrock writing of Paul himself.

So I don't know why you think somehow quoting Doherty citing a verse giving strong support for one particular mythicist argument has anything to do with the point of interest to me.

Post Reply