Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-06-2016, 10:28 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 10:24 AM)Doddia Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The Testimonium Flavianum Josephus, Chapter 18
"Testimonium Flavianum
Γίνεται δὲ κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον Ἰησοῦς σοφὸς ἀνήρ, εἴγε ἄνδρα αὐτὸν λέγειν χρή: ἦν γὰρ παραδόξων ἔργων ποιητής, διδάσκαλος ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἡδονῇ τἀληθῆ δεχομένων, καὶ πολλοὺς μὲν Ἰουδαίους, πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ τοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ ἐπηγάγετο: ὁ χριστὸς οὗτος ἦν. καὶ αὐτὸν ἐνδείξει τῶν πρώτων ἀνδρῶν παρ᾽ ἡμῖν σταυρῷ ἐπιτετιμηκότος Πιλάτου οὐκ ἐπαύσαντο οἱ τὸ πρῶτον ἀγαπήσαντες: ἐφάνη γὰρ αὐτοῖς τρίτην ἔχων ἡμέραν πάλιν ζῶν τῶν θείων προφητῶν ταῦτά τε καὶ ἄλλα μυρία περὶ αὐτοῦ θαυμάσια εἰρηκότων. εἰς ἔτι τε νῦν τῶν Χριστιανῶν ἀπὸ τοῦδε ὠνομασμένον οὐκ ἐπέλιπε τὸ φῦλον.

"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared."

("the Christ" ..... IS "the messiah") ... the Greek translation of the Hebrew "anointed one".
So yeah.
IF he wrote the text in Chapter 18, (which makes NO sense), he called Jesus the "messiah".
The earliest known copy of it is in the Museo ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblioteca_Ambrosiana ) Ambrosiano in Milan. The text above is in different handwriting, and in different ink than the surrounding text. It's clearly a forgery.

Wow, amazing, thanks for that! You've corrected me. Smile

What did Philemon say and your opinion on that?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 10:40 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 10:28 AM)Doddia Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:24 AM)Doddia Wrote:  Wow, amazing, thanks for that! You've corrected me. Smile

What did Philemon say and your opinion on that?

We're not sure just who "Philemon" is. Do you mean Philo? Paul mentions a Philemon, but we have no writings by this person.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 10:53 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 10:40 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:28 AM)Doddia Wrote:  What did Philemon say and your opinion on that?

We're not sure just who "Philemon" is. Do you mean Philo? Paul mentions a Philemon, but we have no writings by this person.

Yup I'm getting mixed up. I thought Philo wrote something about Jesus but I just googled it and I can't find any evidence of that. I think some theologians have mentioned Philo though; I just don't remember what they said! Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 10:57 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 10:53 AM)Doddia Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:40 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  We're not sure just who "Philemon" is. Do you mean Philo? Paul mentions a Philemon, but we have no writings by this person.

Yup I'm getting mixed up. I thought Philo wrote something about Jesus but I just googled it and I can't find any evidence of that. I think some theologians have mentioned Philo though; I just don't remember what they said! Big Grin

The thing about Philo is that he never mentions Jesus. That strikes many of us as curious, since if Jesus existed and did all the wonderful things that the Gospels say he did, we would expect Philo to have heard about it and written about it. But not a word. That's why he's in this discussion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 11:00 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 09:08 AM)Doddia Wrote:  I forgot to say no I haven't heard of the mythicist theory but it sounds fascinating; I'll look it up. Are you interested in Jung's theories of archetypes?

I've vaguely heard of them, but I've not read anything of his directly.

I did a quick Wikipedia and ironically I'm more familiar with the archetype tropes in fiction/games/etc. Shows my level of culture... Big Grin

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 11:08 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 10:57 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:53 AM)Doddia Wrote:  Yup I'm getting mixed up. I thought Philo wrote something about Jesus but I just googled it and I can't find any evidence of that. I think some theologians have mentioned Philo though; I just don't remember what they said! Big Grin

The thing about Philo is that he never mentions Jesus. That strikes many of us as curious, since if Jesus existed and did all the wonderful things that the Gospels say he did, we would expect Philo to have heard about it and written about it. But not a word. That's why he's in this discussion.

Oh I see; good point! Sometimes people aren't mentioned because they don't validate the points we're trying to make and if we did mention them it could perhaps undermine our assumptions?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 11:09 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 10:28 AM)Doddia Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:24 AM)Doddia Wrote:  Wow, amazing, thanks for that! You've corrected me. Smile

What did Philemon say and your opinion on that?

I don't know much about Philemon.

I used to think Jungian archetypes were woo, but now with epigenetics as a possible mechanism, I'm not so sure they are woo ... there seems to be an actual mechanism for the "collective unconscious".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 11:12 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 11:09 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:28 AM)Doddia Wrote:  What did Philemon say and your opinion on that?

I don't know much about Philemon.

I used to think Jungian archetypes were woo, but now with epigenetics as a possible mechanism, I'm not so sure they are woo ... there seems to be an actual mechanism for the "collective unconscious".

I find it a bit hard to understand but it ties in with the idea of the Holographic Universe, which I'm quite fascinated with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 11:19 AM (This post was last modified: 29-06-2016 11:29 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  He traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the Jewish Festival, it wasn't a stop on a trip somewhere else, if you read the passage. In fact the only reason he even mentioned he traveled to Jerusalem, is to say that he visited Syria, while traveling to Jerusalem for the purpose of the Festival, so not when he was traveling for his Embassy to Gaius, which was in a different writing of his, and if it were the case, he'd be telling us that he visited Syria, on his way to meet Gaius, but that's not the case.

Since you continue to accuse me of not reading the passage (for some reason), I'll just quote it here:

"There is a city of Syria, on the sea shore, Ascalon by name: when I was there, at the time when I was on my journey towards the temple of my native land for the purpose of offering up prayers and sacrifices therein" ...

All he says is that he stopped through Ascalon "on [his] journey towards the temple" to go pray and offer sacrifices. It does not say he stopped there and returned immediately home. It does not say he was only journeying for the purpose of offering sacrifices, only that he was journying towards the temple for that purpose.

So yes, it is a stop one would take if on a trip somewhere else. I certainly would, if I had a journey to make for official purposes, but not a hard-pressed timeline, and got a chance to swing by Jerusalem (and I'm not even Jewish!). It is directly on the path from Alexandria to Jerusalem, but also the major road to the cities of the coast and, eventually, up to Rome (unless one took the shortcut and went by boat, which could be more dangerous). Even more importantly, Ascalon is where one would land (as I'm sure you know, most boats of that day hugged the coast, rather than venturing straight across the open waters, especially when it was near the dangerous storm season, as he indicates in Embassy) if returning from a sea-voyage to Rome toward Alexandria, but wishing to take the opportunity while abroad to visit the Temple.

[Image: first_crusade.jpg]

(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  At best we'd have to speculate at what reasonable age would a wealthy Jew in Alexandria, have made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. 20s? 30s? 40s? 50s? And even more effort to try and squeeze the period in which he made that trip, into the 3-4 years of Jesus significance, or after his death. But as far I can see there's little to no reason, to believe he was more likely to have been there during that short window, than other periods of his life.

Well, any time after this "wonderman" was beginning to make a name for himself, as the Gospels claim, would have sufficed... so any time in the last 20 years of his life, a period in which we know he was traveling, as opposed to a period before then, when we have no evidence he traveled at all.

Since you seem to keep letting it slip your mind that we're dealing with a guy who was both socially and geographically suited to hearing the tales of Wonder Jesus™, and that the real argument here isn't whether or not Jesus was a real apocalyptic preacher but whether or not the Gospel accounts (and those of Paul) are trustworthy accounts, I'll just take a break to remind you.

Keep in mind that we don't need him to physically travel in order to be in contact with the people of Jerusalem and the Levant on matters of religious significance-- he was wealthy, known in religious writer circles, and recorded things about religion as insignificant as birds and crocodiles. What he did not record were religious crazy-people making wild claims, so we wouldn't expect him to write about Yeshua ben Yosef... but we would expect him to write about anyone who made such a stir that they were followed by multitudes and were known throughout the land, as the gospels claim. By even asserting a guy who was so prominent in Alexandria's Jewish community and had contacts in Jerusalem (early in his life, if I believe your verson!) hadn't heard of Jesus, you're making our case for us.

(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The entire portion of my post that you copied and responded to, was based on your suggestion that it was another James, than the James the brother of Jesus, as indicated in Matthew, in Mark, and the first hand account of Paul. It wasn't implying that you claimed it was an interpolation, just that it was another James. And I highlighted the variety of coincidences we'd have to believe to assume it was another James, than this one.

Straw man argument.

I am not responding to an argument that is not mine. People with far more insight into ancient texts than I possess have, and do, make that argument. I simply pointed out that it should be considered strongly, for that reason.



(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yes, and lets see that good and careful thinking put to work, in addressing what I wrote about your suggestion that it was another James.

[Image: strawmanillustration.png]

(Edit: Found a better strawman image.)

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
29-06-2016, 11:25 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(29-06-2016 11:19 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  He traveled to Jerusalem to participate in the Jewish Festival, it wasn't a stop on a trip somewhere else, if you read the passage. In fact the only reason he even mentioned he traveled to Jerusalem, is to say that he visited Syria, while traveling to Jerusalem for the purpose of the Festival, so not when he was traveling for his Embassy to Gaius, which was in a different writing of his, and if it were the case, he'd be telling us that he visited Syria, on his way to meet Gaius, but that's not the case.

Since you continue to accuse me of not reading the passage (for some reason), I'll just quote it here:

"There is a city of Syria, on the sea shore, Ascalon by name: when I was there, at the time when I was on my journey towards the temple of my native land for the purpose of offering up prayers and sacrifices therein" ...

All he says is that he stopped through Ascalon "on [his] journey towards the temple" to go pray and offer sacrifices. It does not say he stopped there and returned immediately home. It does not say he was only journeying for the purpose of offering sacrifices, only that he was journying towards the temple for that purpose.

So yes, it is a stop one would take if on a trip somewhere else. I certainly would, if I had a journey to make for official purposes, but not a hard-pressed timeline, and got a chance to swing by Jerusalem (and I'm not even Jewish!). It is directly on the path from Alexandria to Jerusalem, but also the major road to the cities of the coast and, eventually, up to Rome (unless one took the shortcut and went by boat, which could be more dangerous). Even more importantly, Ascalon is where one would land (as I'm sure you know, most boats of that day hugged the coast, rather than venturing straight across the open waters, especially when it was near the dangerous storm season, as he indicates in Embassy) if returning from a sea-voyage to Rome toward Alexandria, but wishing to take the opportunity while abroad to visit the Temple.

[Image: first_crusade.jpg]

(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  At best we'd have to speculate at what reasonable age would a wealthy Jew in Alexandria, have made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. 20s? 30s? 40s? 50s? And even more effort to try and squeeze the period in which he made that trip, into the 3-4 years of Jesus significance, or after his death. But as far I can see there's little to no reason, to believe he was more likely to have been there during that short window, than other periods of his life.

Well, any time after this "wonderman" was beginning to make a name for himself, as the Gospels claim, would have sufficed... so any time in the last 20 years of his life, a period in which we know he was traveling, as opposed to a period before then, when we have no evidence he traveled at all.

Since you seem to keep letting it slip your mind that we're dealing with a guy who was both socially and geographically suited to hearing the tales of Wonder Jesus™, and that the real argument here isn't whether or not Jesus was a real apocalyptic preacher but whether or not the Gospel accounts (and those of Paul) are trustworthy accounts, I'll just take a break to remind you.

Keep in mind that we don't need him to physically travel in order to be in contact with the people of Jerusalem and the Levant on matters of religious significance-- he was wealthy, known in religious writer circles, and recorded things about religion as insignificant as birds and crocodiles. What he did not record were religious crazy-people making wild claims, so we wouldn't expect him to write about Yeshua ben Yosef... but we would expect him to write about anyone who made such a stir that they were followed by multitudes and were known throughout the land, as the gospels claim. By even asserting a guy who was so prominent in Alexandria's Jewish community and had contacts in Jerusalem (early in his life, if I believe your verson!) hadn't heard of Jesus, you're making our case for us.

(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The entire portion of my post that you copied and responded to, was based on your suggestion that it was another James, than the James the brother of Jesus, as indicated in Matthew, in Mark, and the first hand account of Paul. It wasn't implying that you claimed it was an interpolation, just that it was another James. And I highlighted the variety of coincidences we'd have to believe to assume it was another James, than this one.

Straw man argument.

I am not responding to an argument that is not mine. People with far more insight into ancient texts than I possess have, and do, make that argument. I simply pointed out that it should be considered strongly, for that reason.



(29-06-2016 09:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yes, and lets see that good and careful thinking put to work, in addressing what I wrote about your suggestion that it was another James.

[Image: StrawMan.jpg]

I'm less interested in whether the gospels are trustworthy, because they're clearly not. There are too many inconsistencies, such as one ass in one gospel and two in another; normal for accounts written by different people.

I'm more interested in whether Jesus was a historical man. They say there's no smoke without fire and we're here discussing him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: