Historical Jesus

Ricardo · 15th August 2019, 04:17 PM

You must believe that Jesus existed!

Thor 2 · 15th August 2019, 04:20 PM

Sure thing but the same can be said of Dionysus. A wine maker as well.

Lothian · 15th August 2019, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

You must believe that Jesus existed!

Of course, he scored the first goal against West Ham last weekend.

Brainache · 15th August 2019, 04:28 PM

Here we go again...

Here's a song to cheer us all up:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Oystein · 15th August 2019, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

You must believe that Jesus existed!

And his best friend's name was Biff. It's written in the book, so it must be true.

Oystein · 15th August 2019, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Lothian

Of course, he scored the first goal against West Ham last weekend.

I am convinced!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuEb0SzUNaI&t=14

Ricardo · 15th August 2019, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Oystein

And his best friend's name was Biff. It's written in the book, so it must be true.

Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed?

Ricardo · 15th August 2019, 04:36 PM

love the enemies?

Oystein · 15th August 2019, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed?

Yep. I personally need to go nowhere to be near - very near! - such a person.

I love you, Ricardo!

Lothian · 15th August 2019, 04:37 PM

Jesus is real................ real real.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Lothian · 15th August 2019, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

love the enemies?

And hate your family
Matty
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
10:35 I have come to set a father against his son, the daughter against her mother, and a daughter in law against her mother in law.
10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Could anyone really be that much of a twat?

Ricardo · 15th August 2019, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by Oystein

Yep. I personally need to go nowhere to be near - very near! - such a person.

I love you, Ricardo!

I did not understand

acbytesla · 15th August 2019, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

You must believe that Jesus existed!

Why must I? The evidence is flimsy at best. But even if a Yeshua existed and preached in the first century does not mean that what was written about him 30 to 100 years later is remotely accurate.

What makes you believe based on the ANONYMOUS Gospels that this person was divine? That is the important question.

Was it the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that were clearly copied from each other or another source that convinced you? Or the radically different book of John?

Or was it Paul who never met Jesus?

Do you think any of this is good evidence? If so, why is it good evidence?

Lothian · 15th August 2019, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

I did not understand

Psalms 17:43 Verily, I say, those hit hardest with the stupid stick will be joyous in their ignorance.

Jim_MDP · 15th August 2019, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Lothian

Of course, he scored the first goal against West Ham last weekend.

I thought he played hockey. I quote...
"Jesus saves... Gretzky scores!!"

I'll get my coat.

winter salt · 15th August 2019, 06:11 PM

I don't have a reason to think about Jesus.
Be it real or just a story doesn't matter to me.
If he existed he didn't know of the workings of the nature as much as an 8-year-old-today knows. Would you say he'd have known how rain comes about?
So I wouldn't worry about anything else he may have said then.

Brainache · 15th August 2019, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Why must I? The evidence is flimsy at best. But even if a Yeshua existed and preached in the first century does not mean that what was written about him 30 to 100 years later is remotely accurate.

I agree.

Quote:

What makes you believe based on the ANONYMOUS Gospels that this person was divine? That is the important question.

It certainly is a stumper. I have no idea why anyone would think that.

Quote:

Was it the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that were clearly copied from each other or another source that convinced you? Or the radically different book of John?

Or was it Paul who never met Jesus?

Do you think any of this is good evidence? If so, why is it good evidence?

I think the fact that Paul joined an already existing Jesus cult and set about challenging their belief system is evidence that Jesus and his followers (brothers and all) probably did exist.

I suspect that very soon we will hear about Richard Carrier and his, er, research...

Loss Leader · 15th August 2019, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

You must believe that Jesus existed!

And therefore ...

<crickets>

arthwollipot · 15th August 2019, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed?

Lots of people have said that.

TragicMonkey · 15th August 2019, 06:57 PM

Jesus existed, sure, but the stories about her became very garbled over time and retelling and mistranslations and mistakes. The historical Jesus was a hardboiled detective using her wits, guts, and fists to solve crimes in ancient Persia while also being a single mother of two. And this was this one time she was staying at an elegant country house party weekend and the duchess was strangled to death but only Jesus was clever enough to figure out the duchess strangled herself to throw off suspicion that it was the duchess who stole the duchess's emerald necklace from herself because she was being blackmailed by the duchess under the threat that she would reveal her own involvement in the crime of blackmailing herself to steal the emeralds! What a tangled web the duchess weaved when first she practiced to redundantly fractal-recursive plot against herself redundantly also again! But trust St Luke to screw up the story and change it to shepherds or fishermen or whatever the hell instead.

acbytesla · 15th August 2019, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Brainache

I think the fact that Paul joined an already existing Jesus cult and set about challenging their belief system is evidence that Jesus and his followers (brothers and all) probably did exist.

I suspect that very soon we will hear about Richard Carrier and his, er, research...

It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter!

Cause all the really good looking girls would still go out with the guys from Camp Mohawk because they have all the money!

Venom · 15th August 2019, 07:27 PM

Don't forget his trusty apostles fanning out in all directions to North Africa, to Syria, Greece, Palestine to dispell rumors and urban legends about Jesus and preserve his true story.

As Robert M. Price says "It's blessed are the peacemakers, not blessed are the cheesemakers, now you got that straight Simon?"

pgwenthold · 15th August 2019, 07:59 PM

Define Jesus?

Is Jesus the son of God who performed miracles and rose from the dead? Didn't exist.

Was Jesus a wandering rabbi who pissed off the Roman authorities and got strung up for it? Possibly. But, if so, meh.

So, my usual view: to the extent he was remarkable, he didn't exist. To the extent he existed, he was unremarkable.

Venom · 15th August 2019, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

Define Jesus?

Is Jesus the son of God who performed miracles and rose from the dead? Didn't exist.

There are miracle workers today.

Cheetah · 15th August 2019, 09:43 PM

I think he was a real person and must have been quite remarkable to have left such an impact on history, like Gandhi or Hitler.
Probably an intelligent and handsome, but misguided chap, with son-of-god-like charisma and oratory instincts, lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time in history to start something that took on a social life of it's own beyond his wildest dreams. But I'm just speculating.
What does science say, was he a real person?

Chanakya · 15th August 2019, 09:55 PM

Jesus was real, and the evidence of his having lived can be found in his works, which were so profound that their effects are commonplace today, full two millenia after he died.

God saw that humankind was plagued with a dearth of imagination when it came to invective, tending to focus on genitalia, incest and doubtful parentage. And so He sent down His son to do something about this. And His son did not disappoint Him, his name lives on today on our lips.

arthwollipot · 15th August 2019, 10:12 PM

Originally Posted by Cheetah

I think he was a real person and must have been quite remarkable to have left such an impact on history, like Gandhi or Hitler.
Probably an intelligent and handsome, but misguided chap, with son-of-god-like charisma and oratory instincts, lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time in history to start something that took on a social life of it's own beyond his wildest dreams. But I'm just speculating.
What does science say, was he a real person?

No-one really knows. And honestly, it would be very difficult indeed to know for sure. There is equal vehemence on both sides.

The Great Zaganza · 15th August 2019, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

No-one really knows. And honestly, it would be very difficult indeed to know for sure. There is equal vehemence on both sides.

There is also a vehement debate about whether there is a teacup in orbit around Mars.

arthwollipot · 15th August 2019, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

There is also a vehement debate about whether there is a teacup in orbit around Mars.

No, there really isn't.

Brainache · 16th August 2019, 12:10 AM

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

No-one really knows. And honestly, it would be very difficult indeed to know for sure. There is equal vehemence on both sides.

But not equal numbers. The Academic consensus is that there was a historical Jesus (HJ). That consensus is based on textual analysis and an understanding of the cultural context of 1st century Roman Palestine, amongst other things.

There are a few people who argue against the HJ, but they haven't come anywhere near convincing the majority of experts.

arthwollipot · 16th August 2019, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by Brainache

But not equal numbers. The Academic consensus is that there was a historical Jesus (HJ). That consensus is based on textual analysis and an understanding of the cultural context of 1st century Roman Palestine, amongst other things.

There are a few people who argue against the HJ, but they haven't come anywhere near convincing the majority of experts.

That's not what I hear, but I'll defer to you as I am far from being an expert on the subject.

HansMustermann · 16th August 2019, 01:29 AM

The "academic consensus" also is that Homeopathy works, if you only ask the academics from that field.

HansMustermann · 16th August 2019, 01:44 AM

Also, textual analysis really only says that about 30% of the sayings and stuff in the gospels are compatible with each other enough to have possibly been said by the same person. No more, no less.

The first and most obvious problem is, almost nobody agrees WHICH 30%, which is a problem. Different people have cherrypicked radically different and mutually incompatible Jesuseseseses. Which of them is the real one? Is any of them, actually? How many different persons have been mashed up into the one we got?

The second, is that the same kind of analysis actually says that the gospel writers didn't really know what was happening there. So insisting that one can still cherrypick what totally really happened there takes a bit of a leap of faith.

The third is that any analysis will also show that it's structured like an ancient novel, with structures like the chiasm and inclusio that tend not to happen like that in any given person's life. So whatever information the gospel writers had about Jesus, has been severely edited to fit that structure. At the VERY LEAST its chronology was rearranged.

The even bigger problem is: you can do the same for the myth of Cthulhu, as I've actually shown in another thread, a long time ago, in a galaxy far away. Or for Superman, Luke Skywalker, or count Pierre Bezukhov, or indeed Count Dracula, or your favourite Game Of Thrones character. If your only criterion is what the book says and what is compatible enough to be possible to have been said by the same person, then almost any character ever qualifies.

And I mean, 30% self-compatible is actually piss poor even for known fiction characters. Any author worth his salt will have his characters have consistent world views, until events in the novel warrant changing them, and then he/she actually shows that happening. If you wrote a character that is all over the place like Jesus in a modern novel, unless the whole POINT is that he's a big lying hypocrite, you wouldn't get it past any publisher.

Brainache · 16th August 2019, 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

The "academic consensus" also is that Homeopathy works, if you only ask the academics from that field.

Historians studying the Ancient Near East are somehow equivalent to Homeopaths now?

Dave Rogers · 16th August 2019, 01:56 AM

Originally Posted by Ricardo

Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed?

Well, whoever wrote those passages of the New Testament clearly existed, so, yes. Whether those passages related to an actual carpenter's son from Nazareth who believed himself to be the son of God is of less importance, in the sense that, even though I know David Icke exists, the fact of his existence really makes very little difference to me.

Dave

IanS · 16th August 2019, 01:57 AM

Originally Posted by Brainache

But not equal numbers. The Academic consensus is that there was a historical Jesus (HJ). That consensus is based on textual analysis and an understanding of the cultural context of 1st century Roman Palestine, amongst other things.

There are a few people who argue against the HJ, but they haven't come anywhere near convincing the majority of experts.

You mention “experts” who's opinion we should all apparently accept and agree with.

So, who are these experts?

We have had this exact conversation here before, over literally tens of thousands of posts.

By “experts” you mean Bible Studies Scholars and New Testament Scholars.

But out of all the tens of thousands of such Biblical Scholars, how many entered that profession as devout Christian believers? The answer as far as we can honestly tell is … all of them!

How many have since lost their Christian faith? The answer is that we know of only a tiny handful. In fact the only two who are well known are Bart Ehrman and Hector Avalos. But as both of them have explained themselves, the were also both originally highly devout evangelising street preachers.

So how neutral and unbiased is a profession of “experts” like that?

Also what are these “experts” using as their evidence to conclude that the Jesus they all already believed in, did in fact exist? The answer is that their only source of evidence is the biblical writing itself.

In what other field of academia would something like anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural count as reliable or credible evidence?

Brainache · 16th August 2019, 01:57 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Also, textual analysis really only says that about 30% of the sayings and stuff in the gospels are compatible with each other enough to have possibly been said by the same person. No more, no less.

The first and most obvious problem is, almost nobody agrees WHICH 30%, which is a problem. Different people have cherrypicked radically different and mutually incompatible Jesuseseseses. Which of them is the real one? Is any of them, actually? How many different persons have been mashed up into the one we got?

The second, is that the same kind of analysis actually says that the gospel writers didn't really know what was happening there. So insisting that one can still cherrypick what totally really happened there takes a bit of a leap of faith.

The third is that any analysis will also show that it's structured like an ancient novel, with structures like the chiasm and inclusio that tend not to happen like that in any given person's life. So whatever information the gospel writers had about Jesus, has been severely edited to fit that structure. At the VERY LEAST its chronology was rearranged.

The even bigger problem is: you can do the same for the myth of Cthulhu, as I've actually shown in another thread, a long time ago, in a galaxy far away. Or for Superman, Luke Skywalker, or count Pierre Bezukhov, or indeed Count Dracula, or your favourite Game Of Thrones character. If your only criterion is what the book says and what is compatible enough to be possible to have been said by the same person, then almost any character ever qualifies.

And I mean, 30% self-compatible is actually piss poor even for known fiction characters. Any author worth his salt will have his characters have consistent world views, until events in the novel warrant changing them, and then he/she actually shows that happening. If you wrote a character that is all over the place like Jesus in a modern novel, unless the whole POINT is that he's a big lying hypocrite, you wouldn't get it past any publisher.

Nevertheless, no one has come up with a better explanation for the texts we have than an actual religious leader who was killed by the Romans.

The idea that he was a pure invention raises more questions than it answers.

No serious Scholar has a problem with the fact that the gospels aren't accurate records of his life. It's the same problem Historians deal with all the time regarding individuals in antiquity.

Maybe one day someone will prove that he never existed, but that hasn't happened yet.

Brainache · 16th August 2019, 02:02 AM

Originally Posted by IanS

You mention “experts” who's opinion we should all apparently accept and agree with.

So, who are these experts?

We have had this exact conversation here before, over literally tens of thousands of posts.

By “experts” you mean Bible Studies Scholars and New Testament Scholars.

But out of all the tens of thousands of such Biblical Scholars, how many entered that profession as devout Christian believers? The answer as far as we can honestly tell is … all of them!

How many have since lost their Christian faith? The answer is that we know of only a tiny handful. In fact the only two who are well known are Bart Ehrman and Hector Avalos. But as both of them have explained themselves, the were also both originally highly devout evangelising street preachers.

So how neutral and unbiased is a profession of “experts” like that?

Also what are these “experts” using as their evidence to conclude that the Jesus they all already believed in, did in fact exist? The answer is that their only source of evidence is the biblical writing itself.

In what other field of academia would something like anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural count as reliable or credible evidence?

Try talking to a Historian and leave the bible thumpers alone. You might learn about how Historians research these questions and (spoiler) it doesn't involve accepting "anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural" as reliable evidence.

It has been years, you could have looked it up by now...

HansMustermann · 16th August 2019, 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by Brainache

Nevertheless, no one has come up with a better explanation for the texts we have than an actual religious leader who was killed by the Romans.

No. You just keep decreeing that there can't be a better explanation, but that's no more supported than when a completely different gang insists that there is no better explanation than controlled demolition in 9/11

HansMustermann · 16th August 2019, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by Brainache

Try talking to a Historian and leave the bible thumpers alone. You might learn about how Historians research these questions and (spoiler) it doesn't involve accepting "anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural" as reliable evidence.

It has been years, you could have looked it up by now...

No, you could have looked it up by now. Because actually you'd find that there are virtually no real historians actually claiming the HJ. What you have are some THEOLOGIANS pretending to be historians, while applying a "historical method" that's actually several iterations out of date compared to what actual historians use.

15th August 2019, 04:17 PM	#1
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484	Historical Jesus You must believe that Jesus existed!
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484

15th August 2019, 04:20 PM	#2
Thor 2 Philosopher Join Date: May 2016 Location: Brisbane, Aust. Posts: 6,611	Sure thing but the same can be said of Dionysus. A wine maker as well.
	__________________ Thinking is a faith hazard.

15th August 2019, 04:28 PM	#5
Oystein Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 17,001	Originally Posted by Ricardo You must believe that Jesus existed! And his best friend's name was Biff. It's written in the book, so it must be true.
	__________________ Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

15th August 2019, 04:34 PM	#6
Oystein Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 17,001	Originally Posted by Lothian Of course, he scored the first goal against West Ham last weekend. I am convinced! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuEb0SzUNaI&t=14
	__________________ Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

15th August 2019, 04:34 PM	#7
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484	Originally Posted by Oystein And his best friend's name was Biff. It's written in the book, so it must be true. Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed?
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484

15th August 2019, 04:27 PM	#3
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,133	Originally Posted by Ricardo You must believe that Jesus existed! Of course, he scored the first goal against West Ham last weekend.

15th August 2019, 04:36 PM	#8
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484	love the enemies?
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484

15th August 2019, 04:37 PM	#9
Oystein Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 17,001	Originally Posted by Ricardo Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed? Yep. I personally need to go nowhere to be near - very near! - such a person. I love you, Ricardo!
	__________________ Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

15th August 2019, 04:46 PM	#11
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,133	Originally Posted by Ricardo love the enemies? And hate your family Matty 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 10:35 I have come to set a father against his son, the daughter against her mother, and a daughter in law against her mother in law. 10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Could anyone really be that much of a twat?
	Last edited by Lothian; 15th August 2019 at 04:48 PM.

15th August 2019, 04:49 PM	#12
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484	Originally Posted by Oystein Yep. I personally need to go nowhere to be near - very near! - such a person. I love you, Ricardo! I did not understand
Ricardo Guest Join Date: Aug 2019 Posts: 484

15th August 2019, 05:00 PM	#13
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,323	Originally Posted by Ricardo You must believe that Jesus existed! Why must I? The evidence is flimsy at best. But even if a Yeshua existed and preached in the first century does not mean that what was written about him 30 to 100 years later is remotely accurate. What makes you believe based on the ANONYMOUS Gospels that this person was divine? That is the important question. Was it the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that were clearly copied from each other or another source that convinced you? Or the radically different book of John? Or was it Paul who never met Jesus? Do you think any of this is good evidence? If so, why is it good evidence?
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. . Last edited by acbytesla; 15th August 2019 at 05:03 PM.

15th August 2019, 05:03 PM	#14
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,133	Originally Posted by Ricardo I did not understand Psalms 17:43 Verily, I say, those hit hardest with the stupid stick will be joyous in their ignorance.

15th August 2019, 05:51 PM	#15
Jim_MDP Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: N.Cal/S.Or Posts: 8,025	Originally Posted by Lothian Of course, he scored the first goal against West Ham last weekend. I thought he played hockey. I quote... "Jesus saves... Gretzky scores!!" I'll get my coat.
	__________________ ---------------------- Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything. "Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust. "Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

15th August 2019, 06:11 PM	#16
winter salt Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2017 Posts: 372	I don't have a reason to think about Jesus. Be it real or just a story doesn't matter to me. If he existed he didn't know of the workings of the nature as much as an 8-year-old-today knows. Would you say he'd have known how rain comes about? So I wouldn't worry about anything else he may have said then.

15th August 2019, 06:16 PM	#17
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Canberra Posts: 17,460	Originally Posted by acbytesla Why must I? The evidence is flimsy at best. But even if a Yeshua existed and preached in the first century does not mean that what was written about him 30 to 100 years later is remotely accurate. I agree. Quote: What makes you believe based on the ANONYMOUS Gospels that this person was divine? That is the important question. It certainly is a stumper. I have no idea why anyone would think that. Quote: Was it the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that were clearly copied from each other or another source that convinced you? Or the radically different book of John? Or was it Paul who never met Jesus? Do you think any of this is good evidence? If so, why is it good evidence? I think the fact that Paul joined an already existing Jesus cult and set about challenging their belief system is evidence that Jesus and his followers (brothers and all) probably did exist. I suspect that very soon we will hear about Richard Carrier and his, er, research...

15th August 2019, 06:19 PM	#18
Loss Leader I would save the receptionist. Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 27,723	Originally Posted by Ricardo You must believe that Jesus existed! And therefore ... <crickets>
	__________________ I have the honor to be Your Obdt. S^t L. Leader

15th August 2019, 06:20 PM	#19
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 70,317	Originally Posted by Ricardo Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed? Lots of people have said that.
	__________________ Please scream inside your heart.

15th August 2019, 06:57 PM	#20
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,522	Jesus existed, sure, but the stories about her became very garbled over time and retelling and mistranslations and mistakes. The historical Jesus was a hardboiled detective using her wits, guts, and fists to solve crimes in ancient Persia while also being a single mother of two. And this was this one time she was staying at an elegant country house party weekend and the duchess was strangled to death but only Jesus was clever enough to figure out the duchess strangled herself to throw off suspicion that it was the duchess who stole the duchess's emerald necklace from herself because she was being blackmailed by the duchess under the threat that she would reveal her own involvement in the crime of blackmailing herself to steal the emeralds! What a tangled web the duchess weaved when first she practiced to redundantly fractal-recursive plot against herself redundantly also again! But trust St Luke to screw up the story and change it to shepherds or fishermen or whatever the hell instead.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

15th August 2019, 07:00 PM	#21
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,323	Originally Posted by Brainache I think the fact that Paul joined an already existing Jesus cult and set about challenging their belief system is evidence that Jesus and his followers (brothers and all) probably did exist. I suspect that very soon we will hear about Richard Carrier and his, er, research... It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter! Cause all the really good looking girls would still go out with the guys from Camp Mohawk because they have all the money!
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

15th August 2019, 07:27 PM	#22
Venom Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 4,905	Don't forget his trusty apostles fanning out in all directions to North Africa, to Syria, Greece, Palestine to dispell rumors and urban legends about Jesus and preserve his true story. As Robert M. Price says "It's blessed are the peacemakers, not blessed are the cheesemakers, now you got that straight Simon?"

15th August 2019, 07:59 PM	#23
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 20,134	Define Jesus? Is Jesus the son of God who performed miracles and rose from the dead? Didn't exist. Was Jesus a wandering rabbi who pissed off the Roman authorities and got strung up for it? Possibly. But, if so, meh. So, my usual view: to the extent he was remarkable, he didn't exist. To the extent he existed, he was unremarkable.
	__________________ "As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets

15th August 2019, 08:30 PM	#24
Venom Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 4,905	Originally Posted by pgwenthold Define Jesus? Is Jesus the son of God who performed miracles and rose from the dead? Didn't exist. There are miracle workers today.

15th August 2019, 09:43 PM	#25
Cheetah Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: South Africa Posts: 2,690	I think he was a real person and must have been quite remarkable to have left such an impact on history, like Gandhi or Hitler. Probably an intelligent and handsome, but misguided chap, with son-of-god-like charisma and oratory instincts, lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time in history to start something that took on a social life of it's own beyond his wildest dreams. But I'm just speculating. What does science say, was he a real person?
	__________________ "... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB Last edited by Cheetah; 15th August 2019 at 10:02 PM.

15th August 2019, 09:55 PM	#26
Chanakya Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 2,603	Jesus was real, and the evidence of his having lived can be found in his works, which were so profound that their effects are commonplace today, full two millenia after he died. God saw that humankind was plagued with a dearth of imagination when it came to invective, tending to focus on genitalia, incest and doubtful parentage. And so He sent down His son to do something about this. And His son did not disappoint Him, his name lives on today on our lips.
Chanakya Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 2,603

15th August 2019, 10:12 PM	#27
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 70,317	Originally Posted by Cheetah I think he was a real person and must have been quite remarkable to have left such an impact on history, like Gandhi or Hitler. Probably an intelligent and handsome, but misguided chap, with son-of-god-like charisma and oratory instincts, lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time in history to start something that took on a social life of it's own beyond his wildest dreams. But I'm just speculating. What does science say, was he a real person? No-one really knows. And honestly, it would be very difficult indeed to know for sure. There is equal vehemence on both sides.
	__________________ Please scream inside your heart.

15th August 2019, 11:46 PM	#28
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 14,686	Originally Posted by arthwollipot No-one really knows. And honestly, it would be very difficult indeed to know for sure. There is equal vehemence on both sides. There is also a vehement debate about whether there is a teacup in orbit around Mars.
	__________________ So what are you going to do about it, huh? What would an intellectual do? What would Plato do?

15th August 2019, 11:49 PM	#29
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 70,317	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza There is also a vehement debate about whether there is a teacup in orbit around Mars. No, there really isn't.
	__________________ Please scream inside your heart.

16th August 2019, 12:10 AM	#30
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Canberra Posts: 17,460	Originally Posted by arthwollipot No-one really knows. And honestly, it would be very difficult indeed to know for sure. There is equal vehemence on both sides. But not equal numbers. The Academic consensus is that there was a historical Jesus (HJ). That consensus is based on textual analysis and an understanding of the cultural context of 1st century Roman Palestine, amongst other things. There are a few people who argue against the HJ, but they haven't come anywhere near convincing the majority of experts.

16th August 2019, 12:27 AM	#31
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 70,317	Originally Posted by Brainache But not equal numbers. The Academic consensus is that there was a historical Jesus (HJ). That consensus is based on textual analysis and an understanding of the cultural context of 1st century Roman Palestine, amongst other things. There are a few people who argue against the HJ, but they haven't come anywhere near convincing the majority of experts. That's not what I hear, but I'll defer to you as I am far from being an expert on the subject.
	__________________ Please scream inside your heart.

16th August 2019, 01:29 AM	#32
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,031	The "academic consensus" also is that Homeopathy works, if you only ask the academics from that field.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

16th August 2019, 01:44 AM	#33
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 18,031	Also, textual analysis really only says that about 30% of the sayings and stuff in the gospels are compatible with each other enough to have possibly been said by the same person. No more, no less. The first and most obvious problem is, almost nobody agrees WHICH 30%, which is a problem. Different people have cherrypicked radically different and mutually incompatible Jesuseseseses. Which of them is the real one? Is any of them, actually? How many different persons have been mashed up into the one we got? The second, is that the same kind of analysis actually says that the gospel writers didn't really know what was happening there. So insisting that one can still cherrypick what totally really happened there takes a bit of a leap of faith. The third is that any analysis will also show that it's structured like an ancient novel, with structures like the chiasm and inclusio that tend not to happen like that in any given person's life. So whatever information the gospel writers had about Jesus, has been severely edited to fit that structure. At the VERY LEAST its chronology was rearranged. The even bigger problem is: you can do the same for the myth of Cthulhu, as I've actually shown in another thread, a long time ago, in a galaxy far away. Or for Superman, Luke Skywalker, or count Pierre Bezukhov, or indeed Count Dracula, or your favourite Game Of Thrones character. If your only criterion is what the book says and what is compatible enough to be possible to have been said by the same person, then almost any character ever qualifies. And I mean, 30% self-compatible is actually piss poor even for known fiction characters. Any author worth his salt will have his characters have consistent world views, until events in the novel warrant changing them, and then he/she actually shows that happening. If you wrote a character that is all over the place like Jesus in a modern novel, unless the whole POINT is that he's a big lying hypocrite, you wouldn't get it past any publisher.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand? Last edited by HansMustermann; 16th August 2019 at 01:46 AM.

16th August 2019, 01:47 AM	#34
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Canberra Posts: 17,460	Originally Posted by HansMustermann The "academic consensus" also is that Homeopathy works, if you only ask the academics from that field. Historians studying the Ancient Near East are somehow equivalent to Homeopaths now?

16th August 2019, 01:56 AM	#35
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 32,368	Originally Posted by Ricardo Has anyone who recommends loving enemies existed? Well, whoever wrote those passages of the New Testament clearly existed, so, yes. Whether those passages related to an actual carpenter's son from Nazareth who believed himself to be the son of God is of less importance, in the sense that, even though I know David Icke exists, the fact of his existence really makes very little difference to me. Dave
	__________________ There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

16th August 2019, 01:57 AM	#36
IanS Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 5,142	Originally Posted by Brainache But not equal numbers. The Academic consensus is that there was a historical Jesus (HJ). That consensus is based on textual analysis and an understanding of the cultural context of 1st century Roman Palestine, amongst other things. There are a few people who argue against the HJ, but they haven't come anywhere near convincing the majority of experts. You mention “experts” who's opinion we should all apparently accept and agree with. So, who are these experts? We have had this exact conversation here before, over literally tens of thousands of posts. By “experts” you mean Bible Studies Scholars and New Testament Scholars. But out of all the tens of thousands of such Biblical Scholars, how many entered that profession as devout Christian believers? The answer as far as we can honestly tell is … all of them! How many have since lost their Christian faith? The answer is that we know of only a tiny handful. In fact the only two who are well known are Bart Ehrman and Hector Avalos. But as both of them have explained themselves, the were also both originally highly devout evangelising street preachers. So how neutral and unbiased is a profession of “experts” like that? Also what are these “experts” using as their evidence to conclude that the Jesus they all already believed in, did in fact exist? The answer is that their only source of evidence is the biblical writing itself. In what other field of academia would something like anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural count as reliable or credible evidence?
IanS Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 5,142	Last edited by IanS; 16th August 2019 at 01:58 AM.

16th August 2019, 02:02 AM	#38
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Canberra Posts: 17,460	Originally Posted by IanS You mention “experts” who's opinion we should all apparently accept and agree with. So, who are these experts? We have had this exact conversation here before, over literally tens of thousands of posts. By “experts” you mean Bible Studies Scholars and New Testament Scholars. But out of all the tens of thousands of such Biblical Scholars, how many entered that profession as devout Christian believers? The answer as far as we can honestly tell is … all of them! How many have since lost their Christian faith? The answer is that we know of only a tiny handful. In fact the only two who are well known are Bart Ehrman and Hector Avalos. But as both of them have explained themselves, the were also both originally highly devout evangelising street preachers. So how neutral and unbiased is a profession of “experts” like that? Also what are these “experts” using as their evidence to conclude that the Jesus they all already believed in, did in fact exist? The answer is that their only source of evidence is the biblical writing itself. In what other field of academia would something like anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural count as reliable or credible evidence? Try talking to a Historian and leave the bible thumpers alone. You might learn about how Historians research these questions and (spoiler) it doesn't involve accepting "anonymous 2000 year-old written claims of miracles and the supernatural" as reliable evidence. It has been years, you could have looked it up by now...