What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-05-2016, 04:00 PM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(23-05-2016 10:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(22-05-2016 09:08 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  It's possible to read the New Testament fairly factually as the story ofo a leader of a revolt who had converted to a peaceful religion and challenged the Abrahamic leaders and Rome.

"Render unto Caesar" is a revolt ?

There is nothing in the gospels that leads anyone to think he intended to change anything : "For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.' Matthew 5:18

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2456-baptism

dot ........... dot ........... dot

This is what I've read:

Supposedly jesus came into Jerusalem on the eve of Passover, when the city was a veritable powderkeg. The powers in charge were worried about rebelling Jews.

By trashing the Jewish temple, he pissed off the priesthood. They grabbed him and sent him to the Romans.

By claiming to be King of the Jews, he was subverting Roman authority. The Romans had installed Herod(?) Or whoever, as the Jewish king. Fucking with the Romans was not a good idea.

That's my understanding.

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
23-05-2016, 07:10 PM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(23-05-2016 04:00 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 10:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "Render unto Caesar" is a revolt ?

There is nothing in the gospels that leads anyone to think he intended to change anything : "For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.' Matthew 5:18

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2456-baptism

dot ........... dot ........... dot

This is what I've read:

Supposedly jesus came into Jerusalem on the eve of Passover, when the city was a veritable powderkeg. The powers in charge were worried about rebelling Jews.

By trashing the Jewish temple, he pissed off the priesthood. They grabbed him and sent him to the Romans.

By claiming to be King of the Jews, he was subverting Roman authority. The Romans had installed Herod(?) Or whoever, as the Jewish king. Fucking with the Romans was not a good idea.

That's my understanding.

If he existed, he may have caused a ruckus in the temple, and that alone was reason to execute someone during the Pax Romana. The temple was huge, and "trashing" it was not possible. His preaching never indicated a wish to "trash" it ... they were apocalyptics. The end-times were thought to be immanent. You are right about the priests. But the parables and preaching never claimed he was a king.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
23-05-2016, 07:21 PM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(23-05-2016 07:10 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  If he existed, he may have caused a ruckus in the temple, and that alone was reason to execute someone during the Pax Romana. The temple was huge, and "trashing" it was not possible. His preaching never indicated a wish to "trash" it ... they were apocalyptics. The end-times were thought to be immanent. You are right about the priests. But the parables and preaching never claimed he was a king.

Yes, by trashing it, I meant causing a ruckus and pissing people off. (I was typing on a nook earlier. Each word was a chore. Big Grin)

I agree though that we will never know exactly what happened. The events could be somewhat true, a compilation of several figures, or even all completely fictional.

In any event, I am convinced that vicarious redemption is unethical. Thus it's all kind of moot anyway.

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
[+] 2 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
24-05-2016, 03:57 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
At this point I'm hoping this entire thread derails into more pictures and videos of spam, also add some more Christian rock...

   
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:18 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(23-05-2016 02:16 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  WTF ?
Clearly the opposite is true.
He got NONE of the jobs of a messiah done.
So they made him up.
The messiah was to get the kingdom restored, even the apostles thought so, and asked him about it in Acts.
Facepalm


If they made him up, then he got all of the jobs of the messiah done. If there were band of early jews, or quasi-jews who believed in some non-existing messiah, metaphorical messiah, as opposed to a literal historical one, derived from their understanding of scripture, and messianic expectations, clearly he would have fit the bill, I mean since they made him up, based on those expectations.

You couldn't particularly use arguments that appeal to historicity to dismiss the messiahship of Jesus, like his death at the hands of Romans. Or imagine that this was interpreted into messianic expectations after the fact, of his humiliating defeat.

Historical jesus constructions, understanding of the NT writings, passages, messianic expectations at the time (if those expectations would have allowed for a non-historical messiah, christian theology etc... would all have to viewed through an entirely different lens if we are to assume Jesus didn't exist. It would be a complete paradigm shift for the entire enterprise. And the plot holes of a mythicist position would start to reveal itself in such endeavors, but such explanations would stretch a considerable degree of credulity. It's why folks like you prefer to fence sit on the question, as opposed to align yourself with it.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:31 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(23-05-2016 02:06 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Except that the messiah would of had to have been a historical person.
Why?
(23-05-2016 02:06 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  It would be quite difficult to understand the NT, early christianity, absent of a historical messiah.
Not really.
(23-05-2016 02:06 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  his followers already had to deal with his humiliating death, now we have to deal with non-existing one too? In that case perhaps it wasn't a humiliating death, perhaps the creators of this Jesus, clearly saw all the events that transpired as part OT scripture, built their story on these expectations.
Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:33 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(24-05-2016 06:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 02:16 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  WTF ?
Clearly the opposite is true.
He got NONE of the jobs of a messiah done.
So they made him up.
The messiah was to get the kingdom restored, even the apostles thought so, and asked him about it in Acts.
Facepalm


If they made him up, then he got all of the jobs of the messiah done. If there were band of early jews, or quasi-jews who believed in some non-existing messiah, metaphorical messiah, as opposed to a literal historical one, derived from their understanding of scripture, and messianic expectations, clearly he would have fit the bill, I mean since they made him up, based on those expectations.

You couldn't particularly use arguments that appeal to historicity to dismiss the messiahship of Jesus, like his death at the hands of Romans. Or imagine that this was interpreted into messianic expectations after the fact, of his humiliating defeat.

Historical jesus constructions, understanding of the NT writings, passages, messianic expectations at the time (if those expectations would have allowed for a non-historical messiah, christian theology etc... would all have to viewed through an entirely different lens if we are to assume Jesus didn't exist. It would be a complete paradigm shift for the entire enterprise. And the plot holes of a mythicist position would start to reveal itself in such endeavors, but such explanations would stretch a considerable degree of credulity. It's why folks like you prefer to fence sit on the question, as opposed to align yourself with it.

lol @ fence sit
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:40 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(24-05-2016 06:31 AM)ohio_drg Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 02:06 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  his followers already had to deal with his humiliating death, now we have to deal with non-existing one too? In that case perhaps it wasn't a humiliating death, perhaps the creators of this Jesus, clearly saw all the events that transpired as part OT scripture, built their story on these expectations.
Consider

Yes, I like that argument, that Jesus was part of messianic expectations of time, that he fulfilled the OT scriptures regarding what the messiah was suppose to be and do, according to the interpretations of these scriptures by jews at the time.

Perhaps here mythicist and conservative evangelicals will share a common cause.

Now, we might have to just hear more about all this, a more expansive explanations, an alternative construction better woven and more compelling than any historical one, rather than one's that stretch credulity more so than 9.11 truthers.

I mean you have the mother of all conspiracy theories in the making here, so I can't wait to hear more about it.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:54 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(24-05-2016 06:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(24-05-2016 06:31 AM)ohio_drg Wrote:  Consider
Yes, I like that argument, that Jesus was part of messianic expectations of time, that he fulfilled the OT scriptures regarding what the messiah was suppose to be and do,
according to the interpretations of these scriptures by jews at the time.

For anyone who actually reads what the messaih was supposed to do he certainly didn't fulfill shit. Set up a kingdom where the Jews would rule the world? Oops that part is still to come, they will tell you, but still pretend that it was fulfilled! What a crock!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-05-2016, 06:56 AM
RE: What is the general opinion on the existence of Jesus?
(24-05-2016 06:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yes, I like that argument, that Jesus was part of messianic expectations of time, that he fulfilled the OT scriptures regarding what the messiah was suppose to be and do, according to the interpretations of these scriptures by jews at the time.

Except that according to the Jews, both historically and today, the jesus character did not fulfill any of the requirements attributed to the messiah.

What were the requirements that were expected of the messiah by the Jews and in what way did jesus fulfill those requirements?

(24-05-2016 06:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Perhaps here mythicist and conservative evangelicals will share a common cause.

In what way?

(24-05-2016 06:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Now, we might have to just hear more about all this, a more expansive explanations, an alternative construction better woven and more compelling than any historical one, rather than one's that stretch credulity more so than 9.11 truthers.

Pointing out that your story sucks, does not require anyone to rewrite a better story.

And, given the sheer number of inconsistencies and outright contradictions in the four gospels alone, I would not recommend comparing the bible to conspiracy theories. I've read conspiracy theories that make more sense.

(24-05-2016 06:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I mean you have the mother of all conspiracy theories in the making here, so I can't wait to hear more about it.

Pointing out a lack of historical evidence does not constitute a conspiracy theory.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: