https://earlywritings.com/forum/
So the flesh and blood Jesus was not the one that was killed?toejam wrote:^Could that not mean (in the eyes of the author of Hebrews) mean that the flesh & blood Jesus here on Earth was the shadow?
Of the author of Hebrews, as you interpret him.toejam wrote:^Are you asking for my opinion, or that of the author of Hebrews?
I don't believe you.John T wrote:Ehrman in his book "Did Jesus Exist?", looked at the prevailing views of the leading mythicists. He picked them apart one by one and showed there was no there, there. Carrier, Doherty, Feke, Gandy, Price, and Wells all make statements of fact that are unguarded, undocumented or outright misstatements of fact.
Wrong.John T wrote:The common theme of most of these bizarre theories is that Jesus is a myth patterned after the dying and rising gods of ancient myths, e.g. Osiris, Hercules, Mithras, etc.. However, when you look at the history of these pagan myths, it turns out it is the mythicists who are simply imagining things.
Hebrews 8:1-7 (NRSV)stevencarrwork wrote:Hebrews is pretty clear about where this atonement took place. Hebrews 8:5 explains that the earthly place where sacrifices were offered was a shadow of the heavenly one, where Jesus was sacrificed.
Where does it say that the heavenly tent is where Jesus was sacrificed? To me, it's saying that is where he is now. Later on in Hebrews it says he suffered outside the city gate (13:11-12).1 Now the main point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent that the Lord, and not any mortal, has set up. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; hence it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. 4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. 5 They offer worship in a sanctuary that is a sketch and shadow of the heavenly one; for Moses, when he was about to erect the tent, was warned, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” 6 But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one.
John T wrote:<skip>
****************************
However, this is what Ehrman actually wrote: "Where do any of the ancient sources speak of a divine man who was crucified as an atonement for sin? So far as I know, there are no parallels to this central Christian claim....'
John T
toejam wrote:Hebrews 8:1-7 (NRSV)stevencarrwork wrote:Hebrews is pretty clear about where this atonement took place. Hebrews 8:5 explains that the earthly place where sacrifices were offered was a shadow of the heavenly one, where Jesus was sacrificed.Where does it say that the heavenly tent is where Jesus was sacrificed? To me, it's saying that is where he is now. Later on in Hebrews it says he suffered outside the city gate (13:11-12).1 Now the main point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent that the Lord, and not any mortal, has set up. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; hence it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. 4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. 5 They offer worship in a sanctuary that is a sketch and shadow of the heavenly one; for Moses, when he was about to erect the tent, was warned, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” 6 But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one.
I watched Craig's opening speech in that "crank" debate. The topic is whether Jesus Christ rose from the dead. The title trumpets that Craig "destroys" Carrier. It really shows that faith can work wonders in the perceptions of believers.John T wrote:As far as the apt comment that Carrier is a "crank exegesis" well, that comes from the Craig vs. Carrier debate. I agree with Craig. http://youtu.be/BaUd234Q3GU
The supposed crucifixion of Inanna was discussed here.Ulan wrote:
I mean, just to give an example, you probably know the Sumerian Inanna myth, where the goddess Inanna went to the underworld, was killed there and nailed to a wooden pole, where she was exhibited for three days and then resurrected by Enki. She returned as goddess and sent her lover Tammuz to the underworld instead (someone has to die for her), the same Tammuz the Israelites cried over on the steps of Salomo's Tempel in the book Ezekiel, or the same Tammuz (one of the dying/resurrecting gods of the area) who was venerated at Jesus' birth cave, or the same Tammuz one of the summer months of the Jewish calendar is named after. The Inanna myth doesn't contain any atonement for sins obviously, but I guess you can see that some of the elements are there and, often enough, well known to Jews of the time.