Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Bernard

(with respect to Josephus and whose brother James is):
it's not tenuous and there is no evidence it has been doctored or interpolated.
Only two or three words are in dispute (that is, the striking coincidence that Josephus' Greek-language consultants chose the same phrase as Matthew did for his genealogy and for his Pilate, "called Christ"). Evidence either way is almost necessarily meager. The issue is thus normatively resolved almost entirely by prior plausibility.

Sure enough, those who believe confidently that James the Just was killed kind-of when and kind-of as James of Josephus was sentenced tend to find the two are the same (and further that two words asserting that are genuine). Those who are less confident about the conclusion tend also to be less confident about this evidence's genuineness.
Theories about interpolation are very problematic.
There's nothing very problematic about two words being changed to the channel owners' advantage over about a thousand years of manual retransmission. Interpolation does unfortunately connote an intentional act. That unnecessarily restricts the hypothesis set that is consistent with transmission error.

Even Carrier's recent and charitable hypothesis (that the error was an innocent mistake) involves an intentional and now missing "reader's comment," that was later mistaken for a scribe's proofreading note. That sad song-and-dance also unnecessarily restricts the hypothesis set which comports with transmission error.

On a thorny point arising,
Furthermore, if Mary conceived the brothers with Joseph, the Christians would think Jesus was conceived the same way.
Says who? The experiment has been done. Although it is still a minority view within living and developing Chrisitanity, plenty of living Christians, many of them Protestant, profess the Apostles' or Nicene Creeds and also profess that Jesus had full sibs.

If somebody can believe that a woman can have a human baby without a human father (whatever that word salad would mean), then by what logic would this person demand that she must also have been barren for the rest of her life?

Yes, the two doctrines (Mary let go and let God, and Mary retired from the cycle of life thereafter) express a coherent worldview, but alternatives are also as coherent as the oxymoron premise (virgin motherhood) allows.
hakeem
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by hakeem »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sat Dec 09, 2017 5:16 pm to MrMacSon,
Were there 1st century CE Christians?
Yes. If you don't want to accept the normal critical dating of many Christian texts (the ones normally dated 1st century), then there are the testimonies of Tacitus (during Nero), Suetonius (during Nero) and Pliny the Younger:
"Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years" (written 111-113 CE)
It is hopelessly absurd, highly illogical, to assume that the words "Christ" and "Christian" must only refer to Jesus or people who believed the Jesus stories. Even Christian writings admit there were multiple sects of Christians whose leaders were believed to be Gods or Christ and did not accept the stories of Jesus since the time of Simon Magus.

First Apology attributed to Justin Martyr, Against Heresies attributed to Irenaeus, Prescription Against the Heretics attributed to Tertullian and Refutation of All Heresies attributed to Hippolytus made references to numerous heretical Christian cults.

First Apology Ch 26
.... There was a Samaritan, Simon, a native of the village called Gitto, who in the reign of Claudius Cæsar, and in your royal city of Rome, did mighty acts of magic, by virtue of the art of the devils operating in him......... And a man, Menander, also a Samaritan, of the town Capparetæa, a disciple of Simon, and inspired by devils, we know to have deceived many while he was in Antioch by his magical art. He persuaded those who adhered to him that they should never die, and even now there are some living who hold this opinion of his.

And there is Marcion, a man of Pontus, who is even at this day alive, and teaching his disciples to believe in some other god greater than the Creator. And he, by the aid of the devils, has caused many of every nation to speak blasphemies, and to deny that God is the maker of this universe, and to assert that some other being, greater than He, has done greater works.

All who take their opinions from these men, are, as we before said, called Christians...

Dialogue with Trypho
....There are, therefore, and there were many, my friends, who, coming forward in the name of Jesus, taught both to speak and act impious and blasphemous things; and these are called by us after the name of the men from whom each doctrine and opinion had its origin. (For some in one way, others in another, teach to blaspheme the Maker of all things, and Christ, who was foretold by Him as coming, and the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, with whom we have nothing in common, since we know them to be atheists, impious, unrighteous, and sinful, and confessors of Jesus in name only, instead of worshippers of Him.

Yet they style themselves Christians, just as certain among the Gentiles inscribe the name of God upon the works of their own hands, and partake in nefarious and impious rites.)

Some are called Marcians, and some Valentinians, and some Basilidians, and some Saturnilians, and others by other names...
Even the very Gospels claim people shall come in the name of Christ and deceive many---See gMark, gMatthew and gLuke.

Christian writings themselves confirm that the names Christ and Christians do not inherently refer to their Jesus or believers in the Jesus stories.

The writings attributed to Tacitus, Suetonius and Pliny the younger do not even identify or mention any person called Jesus.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Bernard Muller »

As far as 'Mark' goes, isn't his Jesus just a guy that has the holy spirit descend on him? Why else does his family think that he has gone insane? Or that the townspeople where he grew up wondering where he gets his new knowledge and wisdom?

'Mark' needs a family for his Jesus to contrast the "before" Jesus with the post spirit Jesus.
When Jesus is already "post spirit", his family thinks he is insane. Therefore I do not see a contrast on how the family see the "before" Jesus with the post spirit Jesus.

In Mk 3:31-35, "Mark" needed the mother & brothers of Jesus to make a point (I accept that). But here "Mark" had no use of Jesus' sisters, who anyway are not there with the mother & brothers. However, somewhere else, "Mark" mentioned "sisters" regardless (Mk 6:3) even if he did not need them.

So overall, I do not think "Mark" invented brothers & sisters of Jesus just to use them to make arguments in his gospel.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Jax »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:05 am
As far as 'Mark' goes, isn't his Jesus just a guy that has the holy spirit descend on him? Why else does his family think that he has gone insane? Or that the townspeople where he grew up wondering where he gets his new knowledge and wisdom?

'Mark' needs a family for his Jesus to contrast the "before" Jesus with the post spirit Jesus.
When Jesus is already "post spirit", his family thinks he is insane. Therefore I do not see a contrast on how the family see the "before" Jesus with the post spirit Jesus.

In Mk 3:31-35, "Mark" needed the mother & brothers of Jesus to make a point (I accept that). But here "Mark" had no use of Jesus' sisters, who anyway are not there with the mother & brothers. However, somewhere else, "Mark" mentioned "sisters" regardless (Mk 6:3) even if he did not need them.

So overall, I do not think "Mark" invented brothers & sisters of Jesus just to use them to make arguments in his gospel.

Cordially, Bernard
The two passages that I site are of course Mk 3:20-21 and Mk 6:1-3. Both passages have people that knew the 'man' Jesus from before and now do not recognize the new "post-spirit" Jesus that he has become.

This is why 'Mark' created a family for his Jesus. Who else but family and people that he grew up with to point out the stark contrast of the new "post-spirit" Jesus with the old, normal, 'man' that Jesus was before the 'spirit' descended on him and he is adopted by God as a son?
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Bernard Muller »

The two passages that I site are of course Mk 3:20-21 and Mk 6:1-3. Both passages have people that knew the 'man' Jesus from before and now do not recognize the new "post-spirit" Jesus that he has become.

This is why 'Mark' created a family for his Jesus. Who else but family and people that he grew up with to point out the stark contrast of the new "post-spirit" Jesus with the old, normal, 'man' that Jesus was before the 'spirit' descended on him and he is adopted by God as a son?
In Mk 6:1-3, it is Jesus' town people, not his family, who finds Jesus has changed. No need for a family (with brothers) here.
For 3:20-21, I already made an argument about "sisters": not needed (and even present), but regardless mentioned in 6:3.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Jax »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sun Dec 10, 2017 2:43 pm
The two passages that I site are of course Mk 3:20-21 and Mk 6:1-3. Both passages have people that knew the 'man' Jesus from before and now do not recognize the new "post-spirit" Jesus that he has become.

This is why 'Mark' created a family for his Jesus. Who else but family and people that he grew up with to point out the stark contrast of the new "post-spirit" Jesus with the old, normal, 'man' that Jesus was before the 'spirit' descended on him and he is adopted by God as a son?
In Mk 6:1-3, it is Jesus' town people, not his family, who finds Jesus has changed. No need for a family (with brothers) here.
For 3:20-21, I already made an argument about "sisters": not needed (and even present), but regardless mentioned in 6:3.

Cordially, Bernard
“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. MK 6:1-3
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Hakeem,
It is hopelessly absurd, highly illogical, to assume that the words "Christ" and "Christian" must only refer to Jesus or people who believed the Jesus stories. Even Christian writings admit there were multiple sects of Christians whose leaders were believed to be Gods or Christ and did not accept the stories of Jesus since the time of Simon Magus.

First Apology attributed to Justin Martyr, Against Heresies attributed to Irenaeus, Prescription Against the Heretics attributed to Tertullian and Refutation of All Heresies attributed to Hippolytus made references to numerous heretical Christian cults.
I doubt that in time of Nero, these so-called heresies were existing. Christians then were divided in two main groups: Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, according to Paul's epistles.
Simon Magus might have existed then or even before, but, according to Acts, he was baptized as a Christian. Also Simon would have pretended to be the (Christian) Christ for part of his life, up to the crucifixion: "he taught that it was himself who appeared among the Jews as the Son" Irenaeus, AH, I, 23, 1
So his followers might have been (or wanted to be) considered Christians also.
Actually, here, I don't mind what kind of Christians were the ones referred to by Tacitus & Suetonius during Nero's times. But for Tacitus, these Christians had their faith started by a Christ, terminated by Pilate. I do not see why that would be different for Suetonius.
Even Christian writings admit there were multiple sects of Christians whose leaders were believed to be Gods or Christ
Where did you get that information?
Menander considered himself as the Messiah, but that does not mean his followers were called Christians.

As for the latter Gnostics, their beliefs were based, in great part, on interpretations of the Jesus of Paul and the gospels (or one of them: Marcion). So it is not surprising they would be called (or called themselves) also Christians. And I don't care to what Christians Pliny the Younger is referring, but is is highly probable they were Christians who based their faith on the Christ of Paul & the gospels.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Bernard Muller »

“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. MK 6:1-3
The one who asked are the town people, not Jesus or Jesus' family.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Paul the Uncertain,
There's nothing very problematic about two words being changed to the channel owners' advantage over about a thousand years of manual retransmission.
But you have to show that has been changed. That's what is problematic.
And what are these two words? And change from what?
Is it "son of Damneus" changed to "called Christ"?
If yes, I have that comment (from http://historical-jesus.info/104.html):
B) If it was "son of Damneus" instead of "who was called Christ", why would Josephus not write "James, the son of Damneus"? Why bother to identify someone with two identifiers ('brother of Jesus' and 'son of Damneus'), when one ('son of Damneus') is sufficient? More so when this Jesus (son of Damneus) does not need to be introduced yet, and Josephus normally preferred identification through the father (when known, as it is the case here) rather than through a brother.
And some ninety words later, the new high priest would have been introduced such as "Jesus, another son of Damneus" or, even better, "Jesus, the brother of James" or simply "Jesus" (if that Jesus had been already identified as brother of James and son of Damneus, as postulated by Carrier) but, in that case, "Jesus, the son of Damneus" is the most unlikely wording by Josephus.
And removing “son of Damneus” to replace it by “who was called Christ” could not be accidental]
Says who? The experiment has been done. Although it is still a minority view within living and developing Christianity, plenty of living Christians, many of them Protestant, profess the Apostles' or Nicene Creeds and also profess that Jesus had full sibs.
But not the catholic (papal) church and some Christians texts from the 2nd century. And Protestantism came late. There was only the catholic church before that (and the orthodox church in the East).
If somebody can believe that a woman can have a human baby without a human father (whatever that word salad would mean), then by what logic would this person demand that she must also have been barren for the rest of her life?
But the catholic church insists on the perpetual virginity of Mary:
The Catholic Faith teaches us that God miraculously preserved this bodily integrity, in the Blessed Virgin Mary, even during and after her childbirth
(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15458a.htm). And logic does not apply to religion. To be noted: "Luke" and "Matthew" did not go for the perpetual virginity of Mary. That concept came latter, progressively.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Why I don't see myself as a Christ Mythicist

Post by Jax »

Bernard Muller wrote: Sun Dec 10, 2017 4:02 pm
“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him? What are these remarkable miracles he is performing? 3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. MK 6:1-3
The one who asked are the town people, not Jesus or Jesus' family.

Cordially, Bernard
You seem to be prepared to be purposely obtuse about this indefinitely and I have no interest in derailing this thread further.
Post Reply