IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags historical jesus , jesus

Reply
Old 7th January 2021, 10:27 PM   #2841
dejudge
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,825
Originally Posted by searchengineguy View Post
Also ancient Jewish people would not use the phrase, King of The Jews" they would use the designation "King of Israel".
It would appear that the region was called Judea [Judaea] in the 1st century.

Philo in "On Embassy to Gaius" referred to Judea.

On Embasyy to Gaius
Quote:
Pilate was one of the emperor's lieutenants, having been appointed governor of Judaea....
Josephus in "Antiquities of the Jews" mentioned Judea as the nation of the Jews.

Antiquities of the Jews18.3
Quote:
1. BUT now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem..
Suetonius in "The Lives of the Twelve Caesars" mention the war in Judaea.

Life of Vespasian
Quote:
The war in Judaea, which had been commenced under the former reign, was continued in that of Vespasian; but he left the siege of Jerusalem to be conducted by his son Titus...
dejudge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2021, 12:10 AM   #2842
maximara
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,448
Originally Posted by searchengineguy View Post
But those references to CC didn't just stop after 1960! Sure people may have stopped calling him that to his face (who wouldn't!), but multiple sources continuously have been talking about the name changes. Not so for JoN. For a thousand years after his supposed death, there's not a single source. Not just from Jewish historians and theologians, but from ANYONE! IOW, a historical person's name change doesn't silence the old name from history.
Actually Jesus (supposedly) did have another name which goes back to at least the 4th century CE and perhaps earlier in the Talmud: Jesus ben Perachiah. But there are problems...huge problems.

From Evidence...:

erhaps surprisingly, some Christians use brief portions of the Talmud, a collection of Jewish civil and religious law, including commentaries on the Torah, as evidence for the existence of Jesus. They claim that a man called "Yeshu" in the Talmud refers to Jesus.

However, as documented by Gerald Massey, Christians themselves have claimed that this is actually a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia who lived at least a century before the alleged Christian Jesus. Epiphanius, in his 4th century Panarion 29, expressly states "For the rulers in succession from Judah came to an end with Christ's arrival. Until he came the rulers were anointed priests, but after his birth in Bethlehem of Judea the order ended and was altered in the time of Alexander [Jannaeus], a ruler of priestly and kingly stock."[93][94] Abraham ben Daud of the 12th century writes "The Jewish history-writers say that Joshua ben Perachiah was the teacher of Yeshu ha-Notzri [the Nazarene], according to which the latter lived in the day of King Janni [Jannaeus]; the history-writers of the other nations, however, say that he was born in the days of Herod and was hanged in the days of his son Archelaus. This is a great difference, a difference of more than 110 years."[95]

And regardless of how one interprets the name "Yeshu", the Palestinian Talmud was written between the 3rd and 5th century CE, and the Babylonian Talmud was written between the 3rd and 6th century CE, at least two centuries after the alleged crucifixion. In other words, even if it does refer to Jesus, it is even more recent than the gospels and even less useful as an eyewitness reference as is true of Epiphanius or the Toledot Yeshu and the second century gospel that Price cites as a third source that also put Jesus in this time frame is only slightly more useful.

A handful of people point to the Teacher of Righteousness of the Dead Sea Scrolls as the source for the Talmud Jesus but there is not much on the Teacher of Righteousness available to the non scholar to confirm such a connection. Furthermore Richard A. Freund writes "The difference of opinion over the positioning of the Teacher of Righteousness leads me to conclude that perhaps all of these researchers are correct. A Teacher of Righteousness did lead the group in the second century BCE when it was established. Another Teacher of Righteousness led the sect in the first century BCE and finally another Teacher emerged in the first century CE."[96]
maximara is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2021, 12:30 AM   #2843
maximara
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,448
Originally Posted by dejudge View Post
Your claim appears to be utterly false or mistaken.

The Greek words for "anointed" (Christus) (χριστόν) and "good " (Chrestos)(χρηστός) are found multiple times in the Septuagint ( the Greek version of Hebrew Scripture) written hundreds of years before the fables called the NT were composed.
The problem here is linguist drift. From Josephus on Rationalwiki:

"Christ": The term "Christ" only appears in the Testimonium Flavianum and in a later passage regarding James “brother of Jesus” (see below). But the purpose of the work was to promote Vespasian as the Jewish Messiah (i.e., 'Christ'), so why would Josephus, a messianic Jew, use the term only here? Moreover, the Greek word used here is the same as in the Old Testament, but to Josephus' Roman audience it would mean 'the ointment' rather than 'anointed one', resulting in many a Roman scratching their head in befuddlement.[24]

[24] The Anointed One, Or The Ointment? - Here, χριστος doesn't mean "anointed", it means the substance that does the anointing! Or something that is rubbed on. In other words, χριστος means something like "ointment", not "anointed one".
maximara is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2021, 11:09 AM   #2844
dejudge
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,825
Originally Posted by maximara View Post
The problem here is linguist drift. From Josephus on Rationalwiki:

"Christ": The term "Christ" only appears in the Testimonium Flavianum and in a later passage regarding James “brother of Jesus” (see below). But the purpose of the work was to promote Vespasian as the Jewish Messiah (i.e., 'Christ'), so why would Josephus, a messianic Jew, use the term only here? Moreover, the Greek word used here is the same as in the Old Testament, but to Josephus' Roman audience it would mean 'the ointment' rather than 'anointed one', resulting in many a Roman scratching their head in befuddlement.[24]

[24] The Anointed One, Or The Ointment? - Here, χριστος doesn't mean "anointed", it means the substance that does the anointing! Or something that is rubbed on. In other words, χριστος means something like "ointment", not "anointed one".
What you posted doesn't make sense. It is completely unsubstantiated.

It is already documented that χριστόν is transliterated as "anointed" and χρηστός as "good" in virtually all existing manuscripts and Codices in multiple passages of the OT.
dejudge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2021, 03:20 PM   #2845
maximara
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,448
Originally Posted by dejudge View Post
What you posted doesn't make sense. It is completely unsubstantiated.

It is already documented that χριστόν is transliterated as "anointed" and χρηστός as "good" in virtually all existing manuscripts and Codices in multiple passages of the OT.
The reference was provided. Here is the text:

"The Greek word Χριστος (Christos) is how "anointed one" is rendered in the LXX and the NT. But is it an actual translation of the Hebrew "messiah" (מְשִׁיח :: anointed)?

The verb "to anoint" is χρίω (chrio) in Greek. I made an earlier post that listed all of the times that Josephus uses that word. It is about 10 times. Many times, Josephus uses "anointed" but he never uses the word χριστος to describe this. Some varieties he uses are χρισαμενος (part sg aor mid masc nom), χρίει (verb 3rd sg pres ind act), χρισατες (part sg aor act masc nom attic epic ionic). Granted, these are all varieties of verb forms of the word. So what would "one who is anointed" be like in Greek? Would it be χριστος?

Euripides, "Hippolytus" 486:
Φαίδρα
πότερα δὲ χριστὸν ἢ ποτὸν τὸ φάρμακον;
Phaedra
This drug, is it an ointment or a potion?

Aeschylus, "Prometheus Bound" 479-480:
Προμηθεύς
...οὔτε βρώσιμον, οὐ χριστόν, οὐδὲ πιστόν, ἀλλὰ φαρμάκων χρεία...
Prometheus
...no healing food, no ointment, nor any drink—but for lack of medicine...

Here, χριστος doesn't mean "anointed", it means the substance that does the anointing! Or something that is rubbed on. In other words, χριστος means something like "ointment", not "anointed one".

So why would the translators of the LXX confuse "one who is anointed" with "that which is used to anoint"? This had to have been done multiple times, since χριστος is written all throughout the LXX. This adds more confusion to the two mentions of "christ" in Josephus. Why would Josephus mention - to his Greek and Roman audience - that some guy was called "the ointment" without explanation?

This, also, is why people laughed at the nonsensical name "Christian". This would probably be translated as "those who are like ointment"."
maximara is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2021, 11:26 PM   #2846
dejudge
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,825
Originally Posted by maximara View Post
The reference was provided. Here is the text:

"The Greek word Χριστος (Christos) is how "anointed one" is rendered in the LXX and the NT. But is it an actual translation of the Hebrew "messiah" (מְשִׁיח :: anointed)?

The verb "to anoint" is χρίω (chrio) in Greek. I made an earlier post that listed all of the times that Josephus uses that word. It is about 10 times. Many times, Josephus uses "anointed" but he never uses the word χριστος to describe this. Some varieties he uses are χρισαμενος (part sg aor mid masc nom), χρίει (verb 3rd sg pres ind act), χρισατες (part sg aor act masc nom attic epic ionic). Granted, these are all varieties of verb forms of the word. So what would "one who is anointed" be like in Greek? Would it be χριστος?

Euripides, "Hippolytus" 486:
Φαίδρα
πότερα δὲ χριστὸν ἢ ποτὸν τὸ φάρμακον;
Phaedra
This drug, is it an ointment or a potion?

Aeschylus, "Prometheus Bound" 479-480:
Προμηθεύς
...οὔτε βρώσιμον, οὐ χριστόν, οὐδὲ πιστόν, ἀλλὰ φαρμάκων χρεία...
Prometheus
...no healing food, no ointment, nor any drink—but for lack of medicine...

Here, χριστος doesn't mean "anointed", it means the substance that does the anointing! Or something that is rubbed on. In other words, χριστος means something like "ointment", not "anointed one".

So why would the translators of the LXX confuse "one who is anointed" with "that which is used to anoint"? This had to have been done multiple times, since χριστος is written all throughout the LXX. This adds more confusion to the two mentions of "christ" in Josephus. Why would Josephus mention - to his Greek and Roman audience - that some guy was called "the ointment" without explanation?

This, also, is why people laughed at the nonsensical name "Christian". This would probably be translated as "those who are like ointment"."
It is simply absurd to suggest that every translator of the Greek word χριστὸς were confused for hundreds of years.

Examine 1 Samuel in Greek Septuagint where there are multiple references to χριστὸς which is translated as anointed.

https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/gree...book=9&page=26

1 Sam. 16.6
Quote:
καὶ ἐγενήθη ἐν τῷ εἰσιέναι αὐτοὺς καὶ εἶδε τὸν ᾿Ελιὰβ καὶ εἶπεν· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐνώπιον Κυρίου χριστὸς αὐτοῦ.
English translation 1 Sam. 16.6
Quote:
And it came to pass when they came in, that he saw Eliab, and said, Surely the Lord’s anointed [is] before him.
Greek Septuagint 1 Sam. 24.67
Quote:
καὶ εἶπε Δαυὶδ πρὸς τοὺς ἄνδρας αὐτοῦ· μηδαμῶς μοι παρὰ Κυρίου, εἰ ποιήσω τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο τῷ κυρίῳ μου τῷ χριστῷ Κυρίου ἐπενέγκαι χεῖρά μου ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν, ὅτι χριστὸς Κυρίου ἐστὶν οὗτος
English translation 1 Sam.24.6
Quote:
7 And David said to his men, The Lord forbid it me, that I should do this thing to my lord the anointed of the Lord, to lift my hand against him; for he is the anointed of the Lord.
Septuagint 1 Sam.24.11
Quote:
ἰδοὺ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ ἑωράκασιν οἱ ὀφθαλμοί σου ὡς παρέδωκέ σε Κύριος σήμερον εἰς χεῖράς μου ἐν τῷ σπηλαίῳ, καὶ οὐκ ἠβουλήθην ἀποκτεῖναί σε καὶ ἐφεισάμην σου καὶ εἶπα· οὐκ ἐποίσω χεῖρά μου ἐπὶ κύριόν μου, ὅτι χριστὸς Κυρίου οὗτός ἐστι.
English translation 1 Sam. 24.11
Quote:
Behold, thine eyes have seen this day how that the Lord has delivered thee this day into my hands in the cave; and I would not slay thee, but spared thee, and said, I will not lift up my hand against my lord, for he is the Lord’s anointed.
Septuagint 1 Sam. 26.9
Quote:
9 καὶ εἶπε Δαυὶδ πρὸς ᾿Αβεσσά· μὴ ταπεινώσῃς αὐτόν, ὅτι τίς ἐποίσει χεῖρα αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ χριστὸν Κυρίου καὶ ἀθωωθήσεται..
English translation- 1 Sam. 26. 9
Quote:
And David said to Abessa, Do not lay him low, for who shall lift up his hand against the anointed of the Lord, and be guiltless?
Septuagint 1 Sam. 26.11
Quote:
μηδαμῶς μοι παρὰ Κυρίου ἐπενεγκεῖν χεῖρά μου ἐπὶ χριστὸν Κυρίου...
English translation- 1 Sam.26.11
Quote:
The Lord forbid it me that I should lift up my hand against the anointed of the Lord...

Septuagint 1 Sam. 26.16
Quote:
καὶ οὐκ ἀγαθὸν τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο, ὃ πεποίηκας· ζῇ Κύριος, ὅτι υἱοὶ θανατώσεως ὑμεῖς οἱ φυλάσσοντες τὸν βασιλέα τὸν κύριον ὑμῶν τὸν χριστὸν Κυρίου...
English translation 1 Sam. 26.16
Quote:
And this thing [is] not good which thou hast done. [As] the Lord lives, ye are worthy of death, ye who guard your lord the king, the anointed of the Lord...
Septuagint 1 Sam. 26.23
Quote:
καὶ Κύριος ἐπιστρέψει ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰς δικαιοσύνας αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν πίστιν αὐτοῦ, ὡς παρέδωκέ σε Κύριος σήμερον εἰς χεῖράς μου καὶ οὐκ ἠθέλησα ἐπενεγκεῖν χεῖρά μου ἐπὶ χριστὸν Κυρίου......
English translation 1 Sam.26.23
Quote:
And the Lord shall recompense each according to his righteousness and his truth, since the Lord delivered thee this day into my hands, and I would not lift my hand against the Lord’s anointed.
dejudge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.