Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
-
Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8619
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
the question of what may be implied or not is split off here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11690
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
@Peter I'm not sure why you didn't move your own post above to the other thread...
But anyway, Irenaeus seems to be saying that there are Christian "heretics" who teach that Christ taking on human form was "imaginary". Irenaeus seems to be confused here. It would seem that what they were claiming was that Christ was heavenly and never took on human form. Unfortunately Irenaeus doesn't provide us with much to go on. Beyond this vague statement, not much can be gleaned.
But anyway, Irenaeus seems to be saying that there are Christian "heretics" who teach that Christ taking on human form was "imaginary". Irenaeus seems to be confused here. It would seem that what they were claiming was that Christ was heavenly and never took on human form. Unfortunately Irenaeus doesn't provide us with much to go on. Beyond this vague statement, not much can be gleaned.
-
Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8619
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
-
GakuseiDon
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
Thanks Chrissy. That's a name I've never of, I'll look it up!Chrissy Hansen wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 6:28 amI have never found a single convincing piece of evidence that anyone denied the historicity of Jesus prior to the 1600s. The earliest evidence I've ever found was Hugo Grotius responding to people (unnamed) claiming Jesus didn't exist by producing evidence of his existence from non-Christian sources.
-
GakuseiDon
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
Yes, there are no doubt there are texts that people can point to (which they have done in this thread) where the interpretation might suggest a claim of non-historicity, with a strong argument built to support that interpretation. So that's all good. My interest here is in the data, the passages within the texts themselves.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 11:13 amAgain in this case, most of the comment exploring the interpretation also came from me at the time. Likewise, it can be discussed, but I don't know if I would defend what I wrote then.
-
Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8619
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
And what are your thoughts on these texts and these passages?GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 1:21 pmYes, there are no doubt there are texts that people can point to (which they have done in this thread) where the interpretation might suggest a claim of non-historicity, with a strong argument built to support that interpretation. So that's all good. My interest here is in the data, the passages within the texts themselves.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 11:13 amAgain in this case, most of the comment exploring the interpretation also came from me at the time. Likewise, it can be discussed, but I don't know if I would defend what I wrote then.
-
GakuseiDon
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
I've never looked into the Recognitions passage. The others seem to involve questioning whether Christ has come, rather than whether Jesus existed.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 1:42 pmAnd what are your thoughts on these texts and these passages?
-
Leucius Charinus
- Posts: 2842
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
- Location: memoriae damnatio
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
What about the reports (above) of those "who confess not that Jesus Christ (IS XS) is come in the flesh"? It stands to reason there were people who doubted IS XS appeared in the flesh. Could these people be doubting whether IS XS appeared in history as a human being? Isn't this the same as doubting the historicity - historical existence - of the figure IS XS?GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 3:21 pmThe others seem to involve questioning whether Christ has come, rather than whether Jesus existed.
-
GakuseiDon
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
Yes, I agree.Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:37 pmWhat about the reports (above) of those "who confess not that Jesus Christ (IS XS) is come in the flesh"? It stands to reason there were people who doubted IS XS appeared in the flesh.
Yes. It's reasonable to assume they doubted that IS XS appeared in history as a human being.Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:37 pmCould these people be doubting whether IS XS appeared in history as a human being?
No, of course it's not the same, and I'm surprised you think so.Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:37 pmIsn't this the same as doubting the historicity - historical existence - of the figure IS XS?
-
Leucius Charinus
- Posts: 2842
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
- Location: memoriae damnatio
Re: Any pre-325 CE writings where Jesus' historicity was doubted?
Are you contending that these people thought that the figure of IS XS appeared in history as a god, or a deity, or a spirit, or a mythological being rather than a historical "fleshy" human being?GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:56 pmYes, I agree.Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:37 pmWhat about the reports (above) of those "who confess not that Jesus Christ (IS XS) is come in the flesh"? It stands to reason there were people who doubted IS XS appeared in the flesh.
Yes. It's reasonable to assume they doubted that IS XS appeared in history as a human being.Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:37 pmCould these people be doubting whether IS XS appeared in history as a human being?
No, of course it's not the same, and I'm surprised you think so.Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:37 pmIsn't this the same as doubting the historicity - historical existence - of the figure IS XS?