If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 10744
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Secret Alias » Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:48 am

But Paul was interpolated and forged. No reasonable person can believe that the orthodox Pauline corpus was immaculate. Believing our Pauline canon wasn't interpolated is no more or less irrational than the virgin birth. The canon says Jesus was born from a virgin; the canon has evidence Paul thought Jesus was historical. The canon was interpolated to have a gospel which said Jesus born from a virgin. The canon was interpolated to have Paul say things other than Jesus was a fully divine being. Originally the gospel didn't say Jesus was born from a virgin, originally Paul only said Jesus was divine.
Last edited by Secret Alias on Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Charles Wilson » Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:49 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:53 pm
My argument is that if the outsider Josephus noted a so little thing as the Christian hearsay about a HJ, then the silence of the insider Paul becomes virtually stronger (=more unexpected) against the HJ.
Giuseppe (and PK) --

Consider:

Acts 28: 3 - 6 (RSV):

[3] Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks and put them on the fire, when a viper came out because of the heat and fastened on his hand.
[4] When the natives saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, "No doubt this man is a murderer. Though he has escaped from the sea, justice has not allowed him to live."
[5] He, however, shook off the creature into the fire and suffered no harm.
[6] They waited, expecting him to swell up or suddenly fall down dead; but when they had waited a long time and saw no misfortune come to him, they changed their minds and said that he was a god.

AND

Acts 14: 8 - 12 (RSV):

[8] Now at Lystra there was a man sitting, who could not use his feet; he was a cripple from birth, who had never walked.
[9] He listened to Paul speaking; and Paul, looking intently at him and seeing that he had faith to be made well,
[10] said in a loud voice, "Stand upright on your feet." And he sprang up and walked.
[11] And when the crowds saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in Lycao'nian, "The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!"
[12] Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul, because he was the chief speaker, they called Hermes.

Existence is not a Predicate. If I state, "Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks...", the existence of a "Paul" is assumed, awaiting further verification. What then, is the purpose of giving a History to Paul? What does it mean to state, "... justice has not allowed him to live."?

1 Samuel 5: 1 - 8 (RSV):

[1] When the Philistines captured the ark of God, they carried it from Ebene'zer to Ashdod;
[2] then the Philistines took the ark of God and brought it into the house of Dagon and set it up beside Dagon.
[3] And when the people of Ashdod rose early the next day, behold, Dagon had fallen face downward on the ground before the ark of the LORD. So they took Dagon and put him back in his place.
[4] But when they rose early on the next morning, behold, Dagon had fallen face downward on the ground before the ark of the LORD, and the head of Dagon and both his hands were lying cut off upon the threshold; only the trunk of Dagon was left to him.
[5] This is why the priests of Dagon and all who enter the house of Dagon do not tread on the threshold of Dagon in Ashdod to this day.
[6] The hand of the LORD was heavy upon the people of Ashdod, and he terrified and afflicted them with tumors, both Ashdod and its territory.
[7] And when the men of Ashdod saw how things were, they said, "The ark of the God of Israel must not remain with us; for his hand is heavy upon us and upon Dagon our god."
[8] So they sent and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines, and said, "What shall we do with the ark of the God of Israel?" They answered, "Let the ark of the God of Israel be brought around to Gath." So they brought the ark of the God of Israel there.

In all 3 passages, there are direct witnesses who see events. In the first 2, Paul is, after given Miracles, seen as a god. "No, no...You have misinterpreted what you have seen. This Paul is not a god nor is he the embodiment of Hermes. Based on what they have seen, the people have no other explanation for a man bitten by a viper who does not die. Raising a man who has been crippled for life is something that "only the gods could do".

The purpose of the history lesson is to point the Novice in the proper direction. The Philistines do not understand that theirs is an inferior god: a "no-god" to the pious Jew. The lessons will come from the hands of men. You must see the Hand of God in the events of men. This leads to problems - BIG problems -in the NT:

Numbers 19: 11 (RSV):

[11] "He who touches the dead body of any person shall be unclean seven days;

Uh-oh...

John 12: 1 - 2 (RSV):

[1] Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Laz'arus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead.
[2] There they made him a supper; Martha served, and Laz'arus was one of those at table with him.

It gets worse:

[12] he shall cleanse himself with the water on the third day and on the seventh day, and so be clean; but if he does not cleanse himself on the third day and on the seventh day, he will not become clean.
[13] Whoever touches a dead person, the body of any man who has died, and does not cleanse himself, defiles the tabernacle of the LORD, and that person shall be cut off from Israel; because the water for impurity was not thrown upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is still on him.
[14] "This is the law when a man dies in a tent: every one who comes into the tent, and every one who is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days.
[15] And every open vessel, which has no cover fastened upon it, is unclean.
[16] Whoever in the open field touches one who is slain with a sword, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.

This is a Biblical Lesson on the fly. On the face of it, "Jesus" is Unclean - or is he?

If "Jesus" is the son of God and, by John 1 a Preexistent Almighty God, then any given Set of Descriptors may or may not attach to "Jesus". We know more about the history of Paul within Paul's writings than we learn about Crucified Jesus.

Should we accept the given history and use Paul's given history as a stepping stone to believe in HJ? There are no guarantees. The Negative Fact may be recast Epistemologically into a Positive Statement. "No one in Dresden survived the firebombing in World War 2."

Kurt Vonnegut did.

Joseph Heller inverted Ecclesiastes:

"It was easy to read the message in his [Snowden's] entrails. Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Drop him out a window and he'll fall. Set fire to him and he'll burn. Bury him and he'll rot, like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage. That was Snowden's secret. Ripeness was all..."

Ecclesiastes 9:3 - 6 (RSV):

[3] This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that one fate comes to all; also the hearts of men are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead.
[4] But he who is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
[5] For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost.
[6] Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and they have no more for ever any share in all that is done under the sun.

If existence is not a predicate what is evidence of existence? Here, Giuseppe, I sympathize. "Paul", if he existed, gives little support for existence of HJ. The support given for HJ cannot be in any way conclusive to its Goal. There is a line from the Procol Harum song, "The Devil came from Kansas":

"There's a dark cloud hanging over us, don't tell me 'cause I know..."

What is veridical here? "If I am wrong, my beliefs are wrong. There's a dark cloud..." You are correct in worrying about this Giuseppe but there will be no satisfying conclusions...

Best,

CW

Giuseppe
Posts: 5785
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Giuseppe » Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:50 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:42 am
But Paul often mentioned a fully human Jesus.
Ok, but he mentioned a man in celestial form. That is equivalent to say: a god in human form. And only during the short interval of the his passion.

If this Jesus was exalted in virtue of the his obedience to creator god, who can be compared with him is only an being who was debased in virtue of the his rebellion against the creator god.
Who was this being?

1) Adam, the Primal Man
2) Satan
3) Yaldabaoth

My vote is for Yaldabaoth. The pauline Jesus is simply the his son Sabaoth with a new name. (this answers partially to Secret Alias's observation about the possible not-authenticity of Paul)
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3242
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Bernard Muller » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:20 am

to Giuseppe,

"Ok, but he mentioned a man in celestial form. That is equivalent to say: a god in human form. And only during the short interval of the his passion."
Paul mentioned a Jesus to be (allegedly) pre-existent in heaven and (allegedly) in heaven during Paul's preaching. That does not prevent a Jesus/Christ to have been existent as a normal human (as testified by Paul - See my earlier post) between the two (alleged) heavenly existences.

"My vote is for Yaldabaoth. The pauline Jesus is simply the his son Sabaoth with a new name. (this answers partially to Secret Alias's observation about the possible not-authenticity of Paul)"
Aren't you clinging to some possibilities to satisfy your faith in a totally invented mythical Jesus (never as a human on earth)?

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Giuseppe
Posts: 5785
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Giuseppe » Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:03 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:20 am
to Giuseppe,

"Ok, but he mentioned a man in celestial form. That is equivalent to say: a god in human form. And only during the short interval of the his passion."
Paul mentioned a Jesus to be (allegedly) pre-existent in heaven and (allegedly) in heaven during Paul's preaching. That does not prevent a Jesus/Christ to have been existent as a normal human (as testified by Paul - See my earlier post) between the two (alleged) heavenly existences.

"My vote is for Yaldabaoth. The pauline Jesus is simply the his son Sabaoth with a new name. (this answers partially to Secret Alias's observation about the possible not-authenticity of Paul)"
Aren't you clinging to some possibilities to satisfy your faith in a totally invented mythical Jesus (never as a human on earth)?

Cordially, Bernard
I have only listed the class of entities where the pauline Jesus has to be counted. Entities who were tempted by their intrinsic power ("being equal to god") and failed, differently from Jesus. Entities never existed historically.

Do you have a better class of reference where to place the pauline Jesus?

I doubt ypu can.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3242
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Bernard Muller » Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:05 pm

to Giuseppe,
I have only listed the class of entities where the pauline Jesus has to be counted. Entities who were tempted by their intrinsic power ("being equal to god") and failed, differently from Jesus. Entities never existed historically.

Do you have a better class of reference where to place the pauline Jesus?
Why should the Pauline Jesus be counted in that class of entities?
Why should the Pauline Jesus be in a class of reference about entities?

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Giuseppe
Posts: 5785
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Giuseppe » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:15 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:05 pm
to Giuseppe,
I have only listed the class of entities where the pauline Jesus has to be counted. Entities who were tempted by their intrinsic power ("being equal to god") and failed, differently from Jesus. Entities never existed historically.

Do you have a better class of reference where to place the pauline Jesus?
Why should the Pauline Jesus be counted in that class of entities?
Why should the Pauline Jesus be in a class of reference about entities?
I have written in precedence:

If this Jesus was exalted in virtue of the his obedience to creator god, who can be compared with him is only an being who was debased in virtue of the his rebellion against the creator god.
Who was this being?

1) Adam, the Primal Man
2) Satan
3) Yaldabaoth

That is the correct class of reference where to place the Jesus of Paul. Note that the obedience of Jesus is the only independent active act of the his will, since any other act by him is simply passive. I think that that class of reference is even better than the class of the dying and rising gods.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3242
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Bernard Muller » Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:05 am

to Giuseppe,
By putting the Jesus of Paul in the same class as Yaldabaoth (and Satan, etc.), about entities who never existed historically, you have to assume first that Jesus never existed historically (as a human on earth). By reading the Pauline epistles you just cannot assume that.
I have only listed the class of entities where the pauline Jesus has to be counted.
NO, the pauline Jesus does not have to be counted in your class of entities, or any other class of entities. Or, to put it in a different way, the pauline Jesus belongs to the same class of entity as the pauline Jesus.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Giuseppe
Posts: 5785
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:57 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:05 am
to Giuseppe,
By putting the Jesus of Paul in the same class as Yaldabaoth (and Satan, etc.), about entities who never existed historically, you have to assume first that Jesus never existed historically (as a human on earth). By reading the Pauline epistles you just cannot assume that.
Paul is silent about Jesus. The his silence about Jesus is so intrinsic to it, and any your presumed historicist proof text is neutralized by (or even better explained by) a mythicist interpretation of the same, that the only logical conclusion is that Jesus didn't exist.

What does it mean that the silence about Jesus is intrinsic to it? That the mythical Jesus has as his basic feature not only the obedience (see above), but also the his short apparition in the place where he was crucified by the demons. So the silence itself is intrinsic part of the pauline description of him. It is not only a mere collateral effect of the not-existence of Jesus. It is also a basic feature of the (DNA of the) mythical Jesus. His being unknown, enigmatic, a new deity, “new” as only now revealed. This is the reason why the witness of Pliny the Younger (''Christo quasi deo'') is relatively closer to mythicism than historicity.
I have only listed the class of entities where the pauline Jesus has to be counted.
NO, the pauline Jesus does not have to be counted in your class of entities, or any other class of entities. Or, to put it in a different way, the pauline Jesus belongs to the same class of entity as the pauline Jesus.
[/quote]Why should you have the right to put the Gospel Jesus in the class of the apocalyptic prophets, while I can't have the right to put the pauline Jesus in a class of reference?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 5785
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: If the Testimonium Flavianum is partially genuine, then Jesus didn't exist

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:01 am

If a Pagan (who is contemporary of Paul) mentioned the earthly Jesus, then the silence of Paul requires even more explanation.


If the dogs (Josephus mentioning the earthly Jesus) can eat the crumbs (=to know mere hearsay about Jesus), then why not the same sons could eat the bread?? (=why didn't the readers of Paul know something about the earthly Jesus from Paul himself?)

This is the argument not still confuted by Peter above.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply