Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-30-2017 1:10 AM
387 online now:
Dredge, Faith, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Rrhain (4 members, 383 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,774 Year: 10,380/21,208 Month: 3,467/2,674 Week: 10/873 Day: 10/76 Hour: 1/9

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
3233
34
35363738Next
Author Topic:   Reconstructing the Historical Jesus
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 496 of 560 (620940)
06-21-2011 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 487 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 5:50 PM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
What is the response to this interpretation? Where specifically does Paul claim that Jesus was a real man who really lived?

This argument is rather common in the ahistorical circles. It fails, though, to take into account the nature of Paul, his work, and his theology.

Everything we have from Paul is in the form of letters, written to people who are already followers of the Jesus movement. This makes it difficult to expect much discussion of matters early Christians would have considered undisputedone such matter could well have been the historicity of Jesus.

Paul admittedly doesn't care much about the life of Jesus:

quote:
1 Corinthians 2:2 (NRSV):

For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified.


So right here we have to question any arguments made based on Paul's silence about the life of Jesus. But if this isn't enough, we actually have good reason to believe that Paul thought Jesus an actual historical figure. That is, we don't actually have a full silence.

Dead things don't get killed; only living things do:

quote:
1 Thessalonians 2:1415 (NRSV):

For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you suffered the same things from your own compatriots as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out; they displease God and oppose everyone


More here:

quote:
Philippians 2:58 (NRSV):

Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus,
who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to the point of death
even death on a cross.


And here, where Paul indicates that Jesus' resurrection appearances were witnessed by people then still alive (strongly suggesting that Paul considered Jesus a recent figure):

quote:
1 Corinthians 15:37 (NRSV):

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.


This is pat of an the argument in 1 Cor 15, in which Paul uses the resurrection of Jesus to convince his audience that they too will be resurrected. This argument only makes sense if Paul is working from the premise that Jesus, like his audience, had at one time been a living creature walking the Earth.

This should serve as a good starting base; perhaps if you can present some of the specific arguments from Flemming, more can be added to the discussion.

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 487 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 5:50 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 498 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:04 PM Jon has responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 497 of 560 (620941)
06-21-2011 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 491 by Jon
06-21-2011 6:16 PM


Re: Q
There's a difference between Q material and Q source.

The Q source should contain Q material, right?

Depends on whose debate you're talking about.

Oh. Well, since I guess you need to have it explained to you - I'm talking about the debate we're having in this thread.

You know, the one where your side is expected to provide evidence that supports the Gospels' claim of the existence of Jesus.

It depends on how much corroboration you're talking about.

It's either corrborative or it isn't.

If the minimal corroboration is just the existence of an historical Jesus, then multiple sources with an historical Jesus as one of their common premises certainly meets the criteria of being corroboratory.

Ok, but as you've explained, the Q source, Matthew, and Luke aren't "multiple sources"; they're multiple versions of the same material.

If two people simply repeat a lie I told them, the three of us do not "corroborate" each other. We're not three sources; we're a single source.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 491 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 6:16 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 499 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:08 PM crashfrog has responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 498 of 560 (620944)
06-21-2011 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 496 by Jon
06-21-2011 6:49 PM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
Everything we have from Paul is in the form of letters, written to people who are already followers of the Jesus movement. This makes it difficult to expect much discussion of matters early Christians would have considered undisputedone such matter could well have been the historicity of Jesus.

Well, ok.

So then Paul can't be an independent source for evidence for the existence of Jesus, if he's simply taking his fellow Christians at their word.

So, of the sum total of evidence presented that supposedly corroborates the existence of Jesus, which was:

quote:

The Q source

*The Gospels
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John

*The Pauline Epistles
Romans
First Corinthians
Second Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
First Thessalonians
Second Thessalonians
First Timothy
Second Timothy
Titus
Philemon

Tacitus
Josephus


and now taking out everything that has been demonstrated not to actually be a source of evidence, but either merely a repetition of claims already made or a source we can't trust to actually be legitimate, we're left with:

quote:

The Q Source

*The Gospels
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John

*The Pauline Epistles
Romans
First Corinthians
Second Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
First Thessalonians
Second Thessalonians
First Timothy
Second Timothy
Titus
Philemon

Tacitus
Josephus


So, basically you guys have been blowing smoke straight up my ass this entire time: the only evidence that Jesus ever actually lived is that he's mentioned in Mark and John.

Oh, but wait - Mark wasn't written until 64 AD, and John until 90 AD. So those can't be independent sources, either, since they're both written way too late to refer or be based on anything anybody actually observed at the time Jesus was supposedly alive.

So really, there's nothing. Which is what I've been saying all along.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 496 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 6:49 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 501 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:16 PM crashfrog has responded

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 499 of 560 (620945)
06-21-2011 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 497 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 6:52 PM


Re: Q
The Q source should contain Q material, right?

Yes. They are still not the same thing.

Ok, but as you've explained, the Q source, Matthew, and Luke aren't "multiple sources"; they're multiple versions of the same material.

I never said they weren't multiple sources. I never said they were multiple versions of the same material.

If two people simply repeat a lie I told them, the three of us do not "corroborate" each other. We're not three sources; we're a single source.

And this is the issue we have with information from the triple tradition. But not everything in the synoptics is from the triple tradition.

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 497 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 6:52 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 503 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:21 PM Jon has responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 500 of 560 (620946)
06-21-2011 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 494 by Modulous
06-21-2011 6:31 PM


Re: foundations
If we include the ones by caffiene (Message 448) the score is a little different. Feel free to examine the major world religions that propose a historical founder, and tally up the score yourself.

Er, wait. You're still misunderstanding the claim. How could I claim that any real-world religion had a fictitious founder? Who started the religion, after all, if the founder didn't exist?

The claim is that the central figure of most world religions is a fictional person, and that's completely accurate, even if you don't grant me Jesus (which I wouldn't expect you to.)

To continue to claim that it is extraodinary for a person to be at the centre of a religion about a person pretty much ends the discussion I think.

Again you've misunderstood the claim. What I claim is extraordinary is that a religion - which is universally an exercise in falsehood, myth, and superstition - could produce or accurately reproduce the truth. I mean Christianity couldn't even get heredity right. We're supposed to believe they got anything right about Jesus? Nonsense.

You've misunderstood me quite badly, Mod, but don't worry - I don't hold it against you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 494 by Modulous, posted 06-21-2011 6:31 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 502 by Modulous, posted 06-21-2011 7:18 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 501 of 560 (620947)
06-21-2011 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 498 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 7:04 PM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
So then Paul can't be an independent source for evidence for the existence of Jesus, if he's simply taking his fellow Christians at their word.

How did you ever manage to draw this out of what I said? It is clear that Paul never met an historical Jesus; he never claims to have met an historical Jesus; he only claims to have had a revelation.

The issue was whether or not Paul believed the Jesus in his letters to have been an actual person or not. I presented evidence that indicates he did; would you mind addressing that evidence?

So really, there's nothing. Which is what I've been saying all along.

There is something. What you're arguing is that what we have isn't credible. And that argument isn't relevant to the issues you raised on whether or not Paul thought Jesus to have been an actual person.

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 498 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:04 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 506 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:37 PM Jon has responded

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7407
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 502 of 560 (620948)
06-21-2011 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 500 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 7:09 PM


Re: foundations
Er, wait. You're still misunderstanding the claim. How could I claim that any real-world religion had a fictitious founder? Who started the religion, after all, if the founder didn't exist?

The claim is that the central figure of most world religions is a fictional person, and that's completely accurate, even if you don't grant me Jesus (which I wouldn't expect you to.)

So tally them up, show me that it is true that the central figure of most major world religions (that claim an individual central figure) is fictional.

Again you've misunderstood the claim.

Then I will ask you the question again, and this time you can answer it properly.

Would you agree that it is not an extraordinary claim that the founding cause of a major world religion is a human being that the religion claims is the founding cause?

The last time you disagreed, implying that you think it is an extraordinary claim.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 500 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:09 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 503 of 560 (620949)
06-21-2011 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 499 by Jon
06-21-2011 7:08 PM


Re: Q
They are still not the same thing.

Never said they were.

And this is the issue we have with information from the triple tradition. But not everything in the synoptics is from the triple tradition.

If you insist.

Regardless, what is the evidence for the Gospels' claim that there was a real person called Jesus?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 499 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:08 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 504 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:27 PM crashfrog has responded

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 504 of 560 (620951)
06-21-2011 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 503 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 7:21 PM


Re: Q
Why do you insist on moving goal posts?

You raise all of these points; folk like me spend good time going through them and addressing them.

You disregard everything in order to repeat the same points you started repeating when you first joined in on this thread.

Where is the incentive for anyone to continue wasting time discussing things with you when you insist on such dishonest and shifty tactics?

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 503 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:21 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 505 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:33 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

crashfrog
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 505 of 560 (620952)
06-21-2011 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 504 by Jon
06-21-2011 7:27 PM


Re: Q
Why do you insist on moving goal posts?

Jon, the goalposts have never changed. Here they are again - what is the evidence that supports the Gospels' claim that Jesus was a real person who existed in history?

Same question I've been asking for a hundred posts. It's not a moving target.

You raise all of these points; folk like me spend good time going through them and addressing them.

I don't believe you've even once satisfactorily addressed a point I've raised. You just spout nonsense and irrelevant Bible history that seems like an answer, but doesn't actually provide any evidence. It's of a piece with a century of Jesus scholarship, frankly.

Pardon me if I seem impatient, but I am. I just cut the end of my finger off with a mandoline trying to make dinner and I'm done fucking around with you. Present the evidence or GTFO, as they say these days.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:27 PM Jon has acknowledged this reply

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 506 of 560 (620953)
06-21-2011 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 501 by Jon
06-21-2011 7:16 PM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
How did you ever manage to draw this out of what I said? It is clear that Paul never met an historical Jesus

Then why were the Pauline epistles brought forward as "independent evidence of the existence of Jesus" if Paul doesn't have any knowledge of whether Jesus lived or not? What the hell is his testimony worth? Nothing!

The issue was whether or not Paul believed the Jesus in his letters to have been an actual person or not.

Of course he fucking believed it. Don't be stupid. He believed it just the same as all modern Christians believe it and for the exact same reasons - as a matter of faith.

I don't give a shit about Paul's faith or yours. I'm asking what evidence can be found for the existence of Jesus as a historical person, and now you've admitted that the Pauline epistles aren't that kind of evidence at all.

Well, fine. That makes them irrelevant to the discussion. Why on Earth were they even brought up?

What you're arguing is that what we have isn't credible.

Yes! Just as the testimony of a liar isn't testimony at all. If all the evidence lacks credibility then there is no evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 501 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:16 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 507 by Jon, posted 06-21-2011 7:51 PM crashfrog has responded

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 507 of 560 (620955)
06-21-2011 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 506 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 7:37 PM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
Then why were the Pauline epistles brought forward as "independent evidence of the existence of Jesus"

You'll have to ask the people who brought them forward. I was replying specifically to the points you brought up that you say you got from watching a show in which it was argued that Paul never claims Jesus to have been an historical person.

If you are no longer interested in discussing that matter, then we can drop this line.

if Paul doesn't have any knowledge of whether Jesus lived or not?

I never said Paul didn't have knowledge of whether Jesus lived or not. I specifically said that Paul never claimed to have personally met Jesus. That is not the same as not having knowledge of whether Jesus lived or not.

Jon writes:

The issue was whether or not Paul believed the Jesus in his letters to have been an actual person or not.

Of course he fucking believed it.

Then why in the Hell did you make a post asking if there was anything to the position that Paul didn't perhaps believe Jesus to have existed on Earth?

Jeesh! Talk about wasting peoples' time!

Why on Earth were they even brought up?

You brought up the points about Paul that I was addressing. If you don't want to talk about those points, then why did you raise them?

You brought up Flemming's arguments. If you don't want to talk about those points, then that is fine.

Just don't reply to this post and I'll know you don't care about Flemming's points anymore.

Jon


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 506 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 7:37 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 524 by crashfrog, posted 06-24-2011 4:41 PM Jon has responded

PaulK
Member
Posts: 12595
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 508 of 560 (620963)
06-22-2011 1:54 AM
Reply to: Message 495 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 6:49 PM


Re: Summary: Jesus Myther's and Creationists
quote:

I don't recall you mentioning Earl Doherty except as someone related to the debate, and you mentioned him in the context of Mythical Jesus proponents not knowing anything about the arguments in favor of the Historical Jesus.

False. I mentioned him in the context of Mythical Jesus proponents not knowing the arguments for a Mythical Jesus.

quote:

If you now admit that you were using that context to mislead people as to which position it is that Earl Doherty - whoever that is - actually argues in support of, that's just another example of the great dishonesty with which you've prosecuted this debate.

More typical Creationist behaviour. Having been caught in an error, you refuse to admit it and try to blame your opponent instead.

quote:

And note - you didn't answer any of my questions. Is Earl Doherty in this discussion? Have his arguments been put forward for consideration?

Yes or no?


And of course this is just more typical behaviour. Asking a supposed "killer" question without even understanding the point at issue.

But OK. At the time I wrote the Summary post, the answer was NO. Go ahead punk, make my day.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 495 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 6:49 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 526 by crashfrog, posted 06-24-2011 4:44 PM PaulK has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5762
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 509 of 560 (621074)
06-23-2011 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 487 by crashfrog
06-21-2011 5:50 PM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
As I posted earlier here is the youtube link to "The God That Wasn't There"

Not surprisingly Jon refused to respond to the points brought up in the post.
Message 154


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 487 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2011 5:50 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 510 by Jon, posted 06-23-2011 1:30 PM Theodoric has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 510 of 560 (621083)
06-23-2011 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 509 by Theodoric
06-23-2011 10:49 AM


Re: Does Paul actually support the existence of Jesus?
Any points in particular you'd like to discuss from that video?

Bring some specific points forward and we can discuss them.

Jon

Edited by Jon, : typ0


Love your enemies!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 509 by Theodoric, posted 06-23-2011 10:49 AM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 511 by Theodoric, posted 06-23-2011 10:01 PM Jon has responded

RewPrev1
...
3233
34
35363738Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017