James, Jesus' brother
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-05-2015, 04:39 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 12:54 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Mark, you don't have a single contemporary source. We all know that jesus freaks made up stories with fictional heros.... not the least of which was the godboy himself.
Why assume that this is anything but more of the same?

Just curious here but what does it matter if he was a real ir imagined person? If he never existed, the stuff about him is made up. If a historical jesus did exist, he was a man and the stuff about him is made up. Who cares? The claims made about him are just as unlikely whether he was real or made up.

Assume for a second that he existed, does that make you believe the stories more than if he was made up? To me, it makes no difference because the claims made about any person are false until supported.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
20-05-2015, 05:25 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 03:16 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(20-05-2015 01:48 PM)Free Wrote:  But the atheists who support Jesus Mythicism rank as some of the most intellectually deprived people I have ever met, and are a total fuucking disgrace to logic and reasoning.

Get over it already, for fuck sakes.

Drinking Beverage
Garbage as usual from you free.

When you've discussed this topic as much as I have over the past 20 years or so, then there is nothing "garbage" about it.

The Jesus Mythicist argument is such a joke that most historians ignore it due to its sheer fucking lunacy. It's nothing but one logical fallacy after another, with not one good solid argument EVER being presented.

Go ahead, provide an argument for Mythicism, and watch how easily your logically fallacious ass is exposed. Go on, it will only take me all of 2 minutes to point it out.

Get cracking ...

Drinking Beverage

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 05:34 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 05:25 PM)Free Wrote:  
(20-05-2015 03:16 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Garbage as usual from you free.

When you've discussed this topic as much as I have over the past 20 years or so, then there is nothing "garbage" about it.

I thought Stevil was joking, I didn't know he's actually a part of the ahistoricist camp?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 06:01 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
Quote:James died in 62CE. We do have Josephus writing about him in the 70's or 80's (see post 48).

It's a stretch to use those Josephan passages for much of anything. We simply can never know how much of them were interpolated. Just because some later xtian wet his pants when he saw the word "christos" in Josephus' writings does not mean that he was talking about the godboy. Virtually everyone in that Book XX passage (except the two Romans) was a "christos" ( to a jew - "anointed" at one time or another. Sorry but Yakov was far too common a name to fall for any of this xtian crapola.

Quote:There is the mention of James in the gospel of Thomas (?maybe second century).

No contemporary.

Quote:Also some authors, including Robert Eisenman, (who wrote a 1000 page tome about James) think that there are some writings from James in the dead sea scrolls.

Xtians have been trying to work up something with the DSS since 1947.. So far, nada.

Quote:Then there is the epistle of James in the bible, which admittedly mail may not have been written by "James," but it was obviously written by a Jew, not a Christian.

The earliest extant manuscript is from the 3d century. There is a significant school of thought that it is pseudonymous.

Quote:I admit that the other sources are not contemporary. Yet I'll make the point again that there was no evangelical need to admit the existence of James, so why would they fabricate his existence?

Apologetics are not my game. Let them make up their own excuses for the bullshit.

Quote:The book of Acts, probably written in the early second century, does mention James and does indirectly admit that James was in charge of the community of Jesus followers. The book attacks also mentions the Nazarenes, who it refers to as pests who stir up trouble.

Not contemporary.


Mark, I won't give the fuckers an inch because they will take a mile. I don't give a damn about their beliefs, traditions, or phony gospel stories.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 06:39 PM (This post was last modified: 20-05-2015 08:13 PM by Free.)
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 06:01 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
Quote:James died in 62CE. We do have Josephus writing about him in the 70's or 80's (see post 48).

It's a stretch to use those Josephan passages for much of anything. We simply can never know how much of them were interpolated. Just because some later xtian wet his pants when he saw the word "christos" in Josephus' writings does not mean that he was talking about the godboy. Virtually everyone in that Book XX passage (except the two Romans) was a "christos" ( to a jew - "anointed" at one time or another. Sorry but Yakov was far too common a name to fall for any of this xtian crapola.

And exactly what evidence can a mythicist such as yourself provide to demonstrate even the possibility of interpolation?

Absolutely fucking NONE.

All baseless assertion, with not a shred of evidence to support ANY of it.

For you to qualify interpolation, it is required that you provide a basis for the possibility. You are absolutely required to provide evidence to support the possibility, or else your assertions are baseless, pointless, and absolutely worthless.

So on what do you base this assertion upon? What tangible and falsifiable evidence can you provide that will support your positive claim of even the possibility of interpolation?

You got squat. You know it, I know it, so fuck off amateur.

Smartass

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 06:45 PM (This post was last modified: 21-05-2015 03:36 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 03:04 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I have a question for you Mark, I believe you suggested that James and the Nazarenes didn't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, if so why did Paul omit this fact, when speaking about his disputes with jewish Christian community?

Your question is very pertinent, because it raises a very important issue.

I do not think Paul's Christ was Yeshua.

If so, therefore, the Nazarenes did not think Paul's Christ was Yeshua either.

I have discussed this many times in other parts of this forum, so apologies to anyone who was read it before, but it is worth repeating, because this idea is an integral part of understanding the essence of Christianity...

Paul Knew Almost Nothing of Jesus

“Paul created a theology of which none but the vaguest warrants can be found in the words of Christ...Through these interpretations Paul could neglect the actual life and sayings of Jesus, which he had not directly known...Paul replaced conduct with creed as the test of virtue. It was a tragic change.”
(Will Durant)

Most Christians incorrectly assume Paul was restating Jesus’ teachings. Yet Paul never claimed he was inspired or influenced by Jesus or Jesus’ disciples. Paul held his messages came from God and were about his Christ. They were not from the Jesus in the Gospels, who was someone else.

Paul’s Christ was not the wise teacher full of parables and anecdotes the modern reader knows from the Gospels. Amazingly, today’s Gospel reader seems to know more about “Jesus” than Paul did!

Paul wrote,

“Even if we did once know Christ in the flesh, that is not how we know him now” (2 Cor. 5:16, NJB.)

What an extraordinary statement! It only begins to make sense if we realize that Paul was only interested in the idea of a resurrected spirit, his Christ figurehead. A “once human” Jesus, someone with a personality and ideas, was never a topic Paul was comfortable discussing.

Someone passing himself off as Paul wrote that “Christ” was a mystery, one that he had a particularly good understanding of:

“Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ” (Eph. 3:4, KJV,) and

“Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds” (Col. 4:3, KJV.)

Paul did not give a fig tree about the details of Jesus’ life, family, miracles or Jesus’ teachings. ( http://www.sonofman.org/paul1.htm
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamin...-did-paul-
know-about-jesus-not-much/ ) The only facts about Christ that mattered to Paul were that a Christ was crucified and resurrected. Paul rambled on and on about the supposed significance of Christ’s death and resurrection, not about the details of Jesus’ life.

Consider Galatians:

“Then god who had specially chosen me while I was still in my mother’s womb, called me through his grace and chose to reveal his son in me, so that I might preach the Good News about him to the pagans. I did not stop to discuss this with any human being nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were already apostles before me, but I went off to Arabia at once and later went straight back from there to Damascus. Even when after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him for fifteen days, I did not see any of the other apostles; I only saw James, the brother of the Lord, and I swear before God that what I have just written is the literal truth” (Gal. 1:15–20, NJB.)

After God “called” Paul, Paul more or less snubbed Yeshua’s family and supporters by shooting off to Arabia for three years. If Paul had thought Yeshua was the Son of God, surely he would have jolted to Jerusalem to meet James, Jesus’ brother, and Peter and Mary, two of Jesus’ close associates. Should not Paul have been anxious to meet the other Mary, Yeshua’s mum, the mother of God? Yet Paul very obviously was not. Something more important enticed him to Arabia. Three years later, Paul visited Jerusalem again, and there is definitely something very odd about the way Paul casually down- plays the fact that he met James, Yeshua’s brother and Cephas, who was one of Yeshua’s disciples.

In all his writings Paul did not express any pleasure or awe in asso- ciating with Yeshua’s family or followers. Nor did Paul ever document what they had to say about Jesus. This is strong circumstantial evidence that Yeshua never was Paul’s Christ.

The Gospel stories are sadly short of genuine historical facts about Jesus, as they were written by no one is sure whom, by people who had no known connection to Yeshua Things could have been different. Paul, who was educated and literate, could have saved much of the painstaking guesswork of historians over the last three hundred years (Jesus’ historicity has only been seriously studied in this time) by jotting down some facts about Jesus as related by Yeshua’s family and disciples. Paul should have outshone the Gospels and made them redundant. He did not. Instead, Paul wrote about things he thought were important: his own Christ, and his own ethics.

This was not a deliberate omission on Paul’s part; he was obviously totally unaware that people in the future might care to know about Yeshua. Interestingly, the author of the epistle of James, who may have been Jesus’ brother, also neglected to document a single fact about Jesus in his letter. Neither Paul nor James knew Jesus was going to become a hero-figure - because the Gospels had not been written yet, so Jesus’ status as a legendary character had not yet been created.

Who then, was Paul’s Christ? It was someone who Paul thought had existed in heaven since the beginning of time, yet revealed to the world via Paul’s own peculiar interpretation of Jewish Scripture. In the Gentile world of the time there was competition from many dying and rising gods such as Mithras. Those gods often did not have a mortal life that was remembered, just like Paul’s Christ. It was only the myth of them dying and ris- ing again that gave them significance, just like Paul’s Christ. Paul’s Christ, real identity uncertain, appears to have been a Judaic myth invented to compete with these other cults. The idea that Paul’s Christ would one day be equated with Yeshua was probably never on Paul’s radar.

It is true that “Paul” mentions “Jesus” many times, yet “Jesus” may have been edited into Paul’s writings, where he had written only “Christ.” I cannot prove this happened, yet it is a distinct possibility given that there was a culture that encouraged “pious fraud” amongst Christians in the second, third and fourth centuries. Or, it could be that Paul was using the (very common) name to represent a spirit, not a person.

The author of 1 Tim 6; 13 wrote that Pontius Pilate crucified Jesus, yet this was not written by Paul, but by someone writing many years later in his name.

“Paul” does talk about what Christ allegedly said on the night he was betrayed, in the first letter to the Corinthians, but this whole passage is unique in that regard and therefore it too is suspiciously “unPauline.”

Most Christians who become aware of Paul’s lack of commentary on Jesus are perplexed, and with good reason. The almost complete absence of descriptions of Jesus in Paul’s writing undermines the account about Jesus’ activities in the Gospels. If Yeshua had been an inspiring, miracle working individual, someone with real feelings, empathy for his fellows, and charisma, who preached wise anec- dotes that had so impressed his disciples and the crowds, Paul would have documented it, and he did not.

Outside of Jewish scripture Paul only ever acknowledged one source of wisdom—himself.

Just who Paul thought his Christ was is a difficult concept to grasp, and maybe it is not worth spending too much time on. It is worth remembering that the sources of Paul’s ideas are obscure; that Paul’s writings have been tampered with, and that original meaning is often lost in translations. Further complications are introduced by realizing that the Jesus stories we know so well only finished being cobbled together in the fourth century, and that Paul had never read them.

see http://www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/parttwo.htm
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
20-05-2015, 07:16 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 06:45 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(20-05-2015 03:04 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I have a question for you Mark, I believe you suggested that James and the Nazarenes didn't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, if so why did Paul omit this fact, when speaking about his disputes with jewish Christian community?

Your question is very pertinent, because it raises a very important issue.

I do not think Paul's Christ was Yeshua.

If so, therefore, the Nazarenes did not think Paul's Christ was Yeshua either.


So Paul knew the Nazarenes, and James and Yeshua's other disciples, but knew next to nothing about their Yeshua? I mean he wrote of their disagreements about circumcisions and the jewish ritual laws, but nothing about any other disagreements with them. You believe he did this deliberately, that it was a calculated move on his part to avoid even mentioning any other disputes, so that the readers of his letters would believe he believed in the same Jesus as them?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 07:40 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 06:45 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(20-05-2015 03:04 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I have a question for you Mark, I believe you suggested that James and the Nazarenes didn't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, if so why did Paul omit this fact, when speaking about his disputes with jewish Christian community?

Your question is very pertinent, because it raises a very important issue.

I do not think Paul's Christ was Yeshua.

Mark, consider the following:

1Co 2:1 - 2:2 And I, brothers, when I came to you, did not come with excellency of speech or of wisdom declaring to you the testimony of God, for I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

1Ti_6:13 I charge you before God who makes all things alive, and in the sight of Jesus Christ who witnessed the good confession to Pontius Pilate,

Gal_1:19 But I saw no other of the apostles, except James the Lord's brother.


Then ask yourself this one question:

Can any of the above quotes be corroborated with other accounts?

a) If Paul says that James was the "Lord's" brother," then Paul's extraordinary version of Jesus is an embellishment of Jesus/Yeshua of Nazareth, no different than the Gospel accounts.

b) Like all other known accounts, this Jesus/Yeshua of Nazareth was crucified.

c) And finally, Paul has this same Jesus/Yeshua in front of Pontius Pilate, confessing.

None of this is extraordinary, and all of it is consistent with other non extraordinary accounts.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 08:50 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
(20-05-2015 05:34 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-05-2015 05:25 PM)Free Wrote:  When you've discussed this topic as much as I have over the past 20 years or so, then there is nothing "garbage" about it.

I thought Stevil was joking, I didn't know he's actually a part of the ahistoricist camp?
I'm not a study of the bible or history.
I've had a past discussion with Free and his claims were outrageous as they are here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 09:09 PM
RE: James, Jesus' brother
Free, correct me if I'm wrong, but to my understanding Paul didn't write Timothy (or at least parts) and therefore is it possible that this part about Pilate was written after the gospels were written and therefore it was an established story (whether fact or fiction) in circulation? Kind of like how Daniel "prophecized" events that occured before it was written.

Additionally, if we take the gospels as an accurate depiction of the trial, no one who would have had an interest was there as a witness to what was said before Pilate. Shoot, John 18 neglects to even mention a crowd. So how can we then say that any of these accounts is accurate enough to compare to each other?

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: