Poll: What's Jesus about?
Son of God, etc
Lowly preacher bigged up
Total myth, never existed
Based on real people and events to create a religion
King Arthur
[Show Results]
 
What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-06-2014, 11:54 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
Oh, I forget to add, that I touch type at over 120 wpm so, sorry, I make typographical mistakes. As do you, but I try not to be anal about repeating them back.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deltabravo's post
09-06-2014, 01:31 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
Chas, here is a study examining the migration of people out of the Near East: http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2014..._time.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 05:05 AM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2014 05:11 AM by Deltabravo.)
Just finished Ralph Ellis' Jesus book
I just finished reading Jesus, King of Edessa.

There is a lot in the book which is thought provoking and it would take a while to go through all of his arguments. He definitely has a "theme" which is that there is a huge gap in the history of the first century resulting from its rewriting to suit the purposes of a newly invented religion by the Romans.

Not sure where to start but the good thing about the book, in my opinion, is that although it seems like it is heading toward some esoteric theory about the holy grail, the message of the book is quite clear, that the West, having gone through the Reformation and "achieved this glorious goal of restoring reason and rationality to our governmental institutions and our society", is at risk of returning to a time where religious fundamentalism again gets a foothold.

The book is essentially about a part of history which has been largely erased or suppressed by the Romans and this is the history of a population of Greco-Egyptian "Jews" who left Persia and settle in Edessa and Palmyra, were given tax free status by Rome, were allies of Rome but formed the nucleus of a movement resulting in the Jewish Revolt against Rome in the 60's AD. This revolt was a result of the removal of this tax free status and the idea that the ruling family of this population were suitable candidates to rule Judea and the Roman Empire which was in a state of turmoil after the death of Nero.

The book is about 525 pages with a lot of photos and maps etc. It is a very interesting read. I think that the theory in it could be developed a lot further by using other history of the Romans and their religious goings-on at the time and also by looking at the philosophy of the "Fourth Sect", the Nazarites, to which the "Jesus" character appears, according to the book, to belong. The theory Ellis develops is based largely on interpretation of histories written by Josephus and the Armenian historian, Moses of Chorene, as well as the Talmud.

Ellis has a pretty comprehensive understanding of these works and where I was familiar with certain parts of it, it conformed to what I already know, so I am not able to challenge anything in the book. I agree with his idea that the NT is a work written about a secular history by a secularist. It confirms my own view that the NT is a work of fiction written by someone who knew it was a fiction. Where it is interesting is that it explains the story behind this in a way which shows a historical reality behind this to which the Jesus story is alluding and shows why the NT was written which I think is hugely significant and even "liberating". I don't, however, agree with all of his conclusions but given his extensive knowledge of the field, I would be reluctant to stick my neck out and say where I differ and I will probably write to him directly to see what his views are before posting much more.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deltabravo's post
15-06-2014, 07:10 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(09-06-2014 11:34 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  As for Horus and Christ being the same word, you need to study linguistic analysis which is moving in a different direction now. It is becoming accepted that words in different language with similar sounds and similar meanings have common roots.

That is untrue on three levels. First, the idea is not even close to 'new'.

Second, it is not sufficient that words sound alike, there has to be other evidence to support it.

And finally, real scholars don't just assume that words that sound alike have common roots.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 07:11 AM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2014 07:15 AM by Chas.)
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(09-06-2014 01:31 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Chas, here is a study examining the migration of people out of the Near East: http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2014..._time.html


You continue to misinterpret the papers.
"Neolithic expansion took place through pioneer migrations of small groups of population. "

Of course there is genetic diffusion, just not the wholesale migration you seem bent upon believing.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2014, 03:42 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(15-06-2014 05:05 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I just finished reading Jesus, King of Edessa.

There is a lot in the book which is thought provoking and it would take a while to go through all of his arguments. He definitely has a "theme" which is that there is a huge gap in the history of the first century resulting from its rewriting to suit the purposes of a newly invented religion by the Romans.

Not sure where to start but the good thing about the book, in my opinion, is that although it seems like it is heading toward some esoteric theory about the holy grail, the message of the book is quite clear, that the West, having gone through the Reformation and "achieved this glorious goal of restoring reason and rationality to our governmental institutions and our society", is at risk of returning to a time where religious fundamentalism again gets a foothold.

The book is essentially about a part of history which has been largely erased or suppressed by the Romans and this is the history of a population of Greco-Egyptian "Jews" who left Persia and settle in Edessa and Palmyra, were given tax free status by Rome, were allies of Rome but formed the nucleus of a movement resulting in the Jewish Revolt against Rome in the 60's AD. This revolt was a result of the removal of this tax free status and the idea that the ruling family of this population were suitable candidates to rule Judea and the Roman Empire which was in a state of turmoil after the death of Nero.

The book is about 525 pages with a lot of photos and maps etc. It is a very interesting read. I think that the theory in it could be developed a lot further by using other history of the Romans and their religious goings-on at the time and also by looking at the philosophy of the "Fourth Sect", the Nazarites, to which the "Jesus" character appears, according to the book, to belong. The theory Ellis develops is based largely on interpretation of histories written by Josephus and the Armenian historian, Moses of Chorene, as well as the Talmud.

Ellis has a pretty comprehensive understanding of these works and where I was familiar with certain parts of it, it conformed to what I already know, so I am not able to challenge anything in the book. I agree with his idea that the NT is a work written about a secular history by a secularist. It confirms my own view that the NT is a work of fiction written by someone who knew it was a fiction. Where it is interesting is that it explains the story behind this in a way which shows a historical reality behind this to which the Jesus story is alluding and shows why the NT was written which I think is hugely significant and even "liberating". I don't, however, agree with all of his conclusions but given his extensive knowledge of the field, I would be reluctant to stick my neck out and say where I differ and I will probably write to him directly to see what his views are before posting much more.

I admire your patience getting through all those pages.

"The book is essentially about a part of history which has been largely erased or suppressed by the Romans and this is the history of a population of Greco-Egyptian "Jews" who left Persia and settle in Edessa and Palmyra, were given tax free status by Rome, were allies of Rome but formed the nucleus of a movement resulting in the Jewish Revolt against Rome in the 60's AD. This revolt was a result of the removal of this tax free status and the idea that the ruling family of this population were suitable candidates to rule Judea and the Roman Empire which was in a state of turmoil after the death of Nero."

You've got my attention. Tell me more. Ah...no, just changed my mind. It all sounds just too wrong.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2014, 02:43 PM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(16-06-2014 03:42 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 05:05 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I just finished reading Jesus, King of Edessa.

There is a lot in the book which is thought provoking and it would take a while to go through all of his arguments. He definitely has a "theme" which is that there is a huge gap in the history of the first century resulting from its rewriting to suit the purposes of a newly invented religion by the Romans.

Not sure where to start but the good thing about the book, in my opinion, is that although it seems like it is heading toward some esoteric theory about the holy grail, the message of the book is quite clear, that the West, having gone through the Reformation and "achieved this glorious goal of restoring reason and rationality to our governmental institutions and our society", is at risk of returning to a time where religious fundamentalism again gets a foothold.

The book is essentially about a part of history which has been largely erased or suppressed by the Romans and this is the history of a population of Greco-Egyptian "Jews" who left Persia and settle in Edessa and Palmyra, were given tax free status by Rome, were allies of Rome but formed the nucleus of a movement resulting in the Jewish Revolt against Rome in the 60's AD. This revolt was a result of the removal of this tax free status and the idea that the ruling family of this population were suitable candidates to rule Judea and the Roman Empire which was in a state of turmoil after the death of Nero.

The book is about 525 pages with a lot of photos and maps etc. It is a very interesting read. I think that the theory in it could be developed a lot further by using other history of the Romans and their religious goings-on at the time and also by looking at the philosophy of the "Fourth Sect", the Nazarites, to which the "Jesus" character appears, according to the book, to belong. The theory Ellis develops is based largely on interpretation of histories written by Josephus and the Armenian historian, Moses of Chorene, as well as the Talmud.

Ellis has a pretty comprehensive understanding of these works and where I was familiar with certain parts of it, it conformed to what I already know, so I am not able to challenge anything in the book. I agree with his idea that the NT is a work written about a secular history by a secularist. It confirms my own view that the NT is a work of fiction written by someone who knew it was a fiction. Where it is interesting is that it explains the story behind this in a way which shows a historical reality behind this to which the Jesus story is alluding and shows why the NT was written which I think is hugely significant and even "liberating". I don't, however, agree with all of his conclusions but given his extensive knowledge of the field, I would be reluctant to stick my neck out and say where I differ and I will probably write to him directly to see what his views are before posting much more.

I admire your patience getting through all those pages.

"The book is essentially about a part of history which has been largely erased or suppressed by the Romans and this is the history of a population of Greco-Egyptian "Jews" who left Persia and settle in Edessa and Palmyra, were given tax free status by Rome, were allies of Rome but formed the nucleus of a movement resulting in the Jewish Revolt against Rome in the 60's AD. This revolt was a result of the removal of this tax free status and the idea that the ruling family of this population were suitable candidates to rule Judea and the Roman Empire which was in a state of turmoil after the death of Nero."

You've got my attention. Tell me more. Ah...no, just changed my mind. It all sounds just too wrong.

Very funny! I just wrote a long post and my system crashed so I lost itCensored. It's late here in "Judea" so I will write more later.

It raises the question "where does one start?" I will say it was engrossing and one of only two books I have ever read cover to cover and not wanted to put down. I think Ellis has become my "guilty pleasure". BowingLaugh out loadDrinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 02:16 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(16-06-2014 02:43 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  
(16-06-2014 03:42 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I admire your patience getting through all those pages.

"The book is essentially about a part of history which has been largely erased or suppressed by the Romans and this is the history of a population of Greco-Egyptian "Jews" who left Persia and settle in Edessa and Palmyra, were given tax free status by Rome, were allies of Rome but formed the nucleus of a movement resulting in the Jewish Revolt against Rome in the 60's AD. This revolt was a result of the removal of this tax free status and the idea that the ruling family of this population were suitable candidates to rule Judea and the Roman Empire which was in a state of turmoil after the death of Nero."

You've got my attention. Tell me more. Ah...no, just changed my mind. It all sounds just too wrong.

Very funny! I just wrote a long post and my system crashed so I lost itCensored. It's late here in "Judea" so I will write more later.

It raises the question "where does one start?" I will say it was engrossing and one of only two books I have ever read cover to cover and not wanted to put down. I think Ellis has become my "guilty pleasure". BowingLaugh out loadDrinking Beverage

A trash romance novel or a dime-store disposable sci-fi novel is a guilty pleasure, because they're bad. You know they're bad, the author's know they're bad.

While Ellis is trash, somehow I don't think either you or Ellis seem to appreciate it the same way; because you both don't realize it is terrible trash.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 10:00 AM (This post was last modified: 17-06-2014 10:08 AM by Deltabravo.)
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(15-06-2014 07:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-06-2014 11:34 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  As for Horus and Christ being the same word, you need to study linguistic analysis which is moving in a different direction now. It is becoming accepted that words in different language with similar sounds and similar meanings have common roots.

That is untrue on three levels. First, the idea is not even close to 'new'.

Second, it is not sufficient that words sound alike, there has to be other evidence to support it.

And finally, real scholars don't just assume that words that sound alike have common roots.

Chas, Chas...what are we going to do with you. The world is passing you by.

Christ comes from "karas" which/who was Horus. That is how they pronounced it and they both mean the anointed son of god.

And, don't misrepresent what I posted. I said that words in different languages with similar sounds and similar meanings are likely to have a common root. That is precisely what modern linguists are now saying.

Also, I haven't suggested Europe was repopulated by mass spontaneous migration. The prevailing view is that Europe was repopulated slowly over thousands of years.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 10:09 AM
RE: What is the more likely explanation of Jesus?
(17-06-2014 10:00 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 07:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  That is untrue on three levels. First, the idea is not even close to 'new'.

Second, it is not sufficient that words sound alike, there has to be other evidence to support it.

And finally, real scholars don't just assume that words that sound alike have common roots.

Chas, Chas...what are we going to do with you. The world is passing you by.

Christ comes from "karas" which/who was Horus. That is how they pronounced it and they both mean the anointed son of god.

And, don't misrepresent what I posted. I said that words in different languages with similar sounds and similar meanings are likely to have a common root. That is precisely what modern linguists are now saying.

Also, I haven't suggested Europe was repopulated by mass spontaneous migration. The prevailing view is that Europe was repopulated slowly over thousands of years.




(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: