RE: [KC-Midtown-FreeThinkers] Jesus Poll by Josh Stewart combining of the three groups
| From: | Marlys Kummer Doerflinger |
| Sent on: | Wednesday, September 12, 2012 7:03 AM |
I did leave the posts from the social group out. Here they are.
Just a couple of notes, Marlys. The expectation that, if Jesus had existed, one would find much written about him by contemporary classical historians is misguided. For one thing, until Jesus' fatal trip to the great city of Jerusalem at the end of his life, Jesus had preached mainly or exclusively in rural backwaters of Galilee to largely illiterate people who had no influence outside their local communities. Thus, there wasn't much occasion during Jesus' lifetime for anybody--particularly for anybody of influence in the classical world--to write about him and transmit any such writings, especially since Jesus was only one of the itinerant Jewish prophets active in the region at the time. (Consider, too, the implications of such a simple fact as the rarity and expense of writing materials, among many other points that are relevant in this connection.)
The Greek and Roman historians lived in the major cities of the classical world, far removed in customs and interests from anything in rural Palestine. News of the Christian movement reached Rome only when it became noteworthy in alleged connection with an event that mattered to Romans, namely the great fire of 64 CE. Tacitus, writing around the beginning of the second century, records that the emperor Nero, who was rumored to have started the fire, falsely blamed it on nefarious actions of a sinister group "instigated by Chrestus [sic]", which had only recently reached Rome.
Classical historians simply didn't travel to and camp out in the backwoods of Galilee waiting to see and record what a particular itinerant Jewish prophet, of whom they had never heard, said or did; nor did they have any interest in doing so. Classical historians had different kinds of concerns from those of rural Palestine: they cared about important persons and events of great moment to their own great classical civilization; and that certainly did not, for them, include the activities any particular Jewish itinerant prophet in Galilee. There were also no journalists or journalism in Jesus' day. Nobody could have gotten reports of him in the paper, on the radio, or on television. Ancient communications didn't work that way. There are no good reasons at all to expect that Greek or Roman historians would have produced volumes about Jesus' life, teachings, or wondrous works and deeds. They weren't there; and they didn't care. Furthermore, reports of miracles were commonplace in parts of the Empire, and they did not especially impress the Greeks and Romans. The Greco-Roman historians had no more occasion to record the deeds and words of Jesus than those of any other contemporary wonder-worker.
By the way, Ehrman's blog has a long series of detailed responses to the deniers of Jesus' existence, including Richard Carrier.
Christopher M. Riels
1332 Crosswinds Court Apt. 2
Lawrence, KS 66046
Telephone: [masked]
--- On Mon, 9/10/12, Marlys Kummer Doerflinger <[address removed]> wrote:
From: Marlys Kummer Doerflinger <[address removed]>
Subject: Re: [KC-Freethinking-Social] Jesus Poll by Josh Stewart
To: [address removed]
Date: Monday, September 10, 2012, 8:08 PM
Yes Bart Is a very good writer. I have not read his most recent book but have read one of his others. He and Fitzgerald (Carrier) have come to different conclusions. I may get his book someday, read it and change my mind about the historic Jesus. However right now it is not at the top of my to do list.
Marlys
Sent from iPhone
On Sep 10, 2012, at 7:06 PM, Christopher <[address removed]> wrote:
Marlys, There are many things to be said in response to your evidence and conclusions regarding the historicity of Jesus. I'll try to register a few of them here. Since you point out that you have done much research on the question of the existence of the historical Jesus--a fact that I respect and that entitles you to be taken seriously on the subject--I should say that I, too, have some preparation that qualifies me to address the relevant evidence and venture conclusions on the basis of it. I have read a a good bit about early Christianity and have corresponded substantially with others on the specific question of the existence of the historical Jesus. (Perhaps later I can find some of my correspondence on the matter and send it along, too.) My formal education, which I have done much to augment through long and assiduous independent study, is largely relevant to this topic (M.A. Classics [=Greek and Latin languages and literature / Greek and Roman civilization]). Thus, the comments I offer will, like yours, be "based on research and evidence." With that, I undertake to address your points in a regrettably, but necessarily, summary fashion. I have read the entire Bible carefully, and have studied much of it intensely, from the point of view of a non-believer, in the same spirit as you. I have extensively and sedulously compared the accounts of Jesus' life and message in each of the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which have important characteristics in common with each other, as opposed to John, which is unique in nature and was written considerably later), and thus necessarily found a plethora of inconsistencies among these gospels in matters great and small. (Everyone should see my collation of the passages in the synoptics on the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. There is no way in which they can be harmonized [without a great deal of perverse imagination and mental acrobatics].) At the beginning of your post you stated that "there were some real differences in what [the gospels] said about Jesus’ life", but you did not say what conclusion, if any, you derived from this obvious fact. Are you suggesting that the fact that there are differences among the various gospel accounts indicates that the historical Jesus never existed? In any case, these inconsistencies do not--certainly not by themselves--lead legitimately to this conclusion. There are other, and on reflection far better, conclusions to draw from these inconsistencies than this one. Here are just a couple of considerations to contrast with the conclusion that Jesus did not exist as a human being in ancient Palestine. First, it is hard to account for some basic features of the gospels on the hypothesis that Jesus did not exist. Unfortunately, I don't know how you think these gospels came to be written; e.g., was there a cabal of conspirators fabricating historical accounts of the mythological Jesus' life, and are these fabricated accounts more or less equivalent to the gospels that have been handed down to us? This conclusion would be extremely difficult to accept, one reason being that we might expect organized fabricators to write one consistent account of their subject rather than three or four contradictory ones. Also, there are reports and doctrines in the gospels that tell powerfully against the truth of their allegedly fabricated story. All the synoptics (and all the other books of the NT except the very latest ones) are replete with the idea that Jesus (or "the Son of Man") would return to destroy this world and establish in its place the perfect "Kingdom of God" within the lifetime or "generation" of persons to whom he preached on earth. This doctrine is the very basis of all Jesus' other teaching (e.g., abandon and "hate" your family and go and preach the gospel, because "the time is at hand") and it turned out to be manifestly and spectacularly false. This doctrine caused a tremendous crisis among late- and post-1st century Christians, and they downplayed or reinterpreted it as best they could after it proved to be false. The latest books of the NT testify to this fact: readers are exhorted to get back to their ordinary lives, taking care of their families, etc. (many had thrown away their livelihoods in the expectation that Jesus would come back any minute, as he had in fact taught, and as the gospels record). The reason these Christians had to contend somehow with the doctrine of the imminent Kingdom of God is that it was what Jesus in fact had taught; and since Jesus taught it, it couldn't be simply and conveniently tossed away. It seems highly improbable that putative gospel-fabricaters would have included this extremely problematic prophecy any story that they wanted to be believed. I, and many others, have long been aware that the Christian calendar came to celebrate putative events and personages in its history on dates that pre-Christians had earlier used to celebrate putative events and personages in their religious history. This is an instance of a phenomenon called syncretism, defined by Merriam-Webster online as: "the developmental process of historical growth within a religion by accretion and coalescence of different and often originally conflicting forms of belief and practice through the interaction with or supersession of other religions." When Christians (whom by this point we can call "Catholic") spread their religion to "pagan" peoples, especially during the late Roman Empire, they made Christianity easier for these peoples to understand and appreciate by synthesizing supposed features of "Christ" with those of currently worshipped "pagan" gods. This development has nothing to do with the origins of Christianity, but is rather a later effort to accommodate Christianity--the essential nature of which had already been decided--to aspects of "pagan" religion in order to make it more palatable to "pagans," to whom it was by nature fundamentally alien in spirit. (This is how we get the association of, e.g., mistletoe--which was a magical plant for certain "pagans" in northern Europe--with Christmas.) Christianity itself is in no way related to, nor does it in any way depend upon, the "pagan" religious calendar; none of the Catholic "feast days" are original to Christianity and are not mentioned in the Bible. For example, nothing in the New Testament or, as far as I can recall at the moment, in any other early Christian document of which I am aware even hints that Jesus was born on December 25, or that this date was to be celebrated as "Christmas." The calendar that was in fact important to Christians was the Jewish one, and Christianity in origin was Jewish; thus, Passover, for example, is in the origin of Christianity (and the gospels depict Jesus and his disciples celebrating it) while, e.g., Saturnalia was not. Thus, the fact that former pagan holidays later were taken over as "Christian" holidays in no way suggests that Christianity was fabricated and based on "pagan" holidays. Unfortunately, this is all I can write for now. I urge you, as well as everyone else interested in the question of the historical Jesus, to read the book by Bart D. Ehrman that I mentioned before: Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. In addition, Ehrman has a subscription blog (all proceeds go to charity) in which, among other things, he answers questions from readers (and, if you ask a question, he will almost certainly reply on the site): http://ehrmanblog.org/. Christopher M. Riels
My answers to Josh’s questions on what I believe, is based on research and evidence. A quick answer would be numbers 3) A mythical figure mistaken as historical by later Christians 4) Other. Below is the story of how I arrived at that conclusion. As I began to study the Bible, the way I was taught to study any other research project, by comparing and contrasting what each of the gospels said about this person, I found that there were some real differences in what these books said about Jesus’ life. About a year ago, after almost 69 years on this planet, I heard something this Christmas season which I had not known before. This is what I posted on my Facebook at that time. Why is this not common knowledge or was I just not listening? I researched several credible sources (college professors, historians, etc.), one of which says that there are over thirty (30) similar stories of ancient savior gods. I don’t want you to live that long without hearing the fact that several ancient gods were born on December 25 and had lives similar to Jesus, who is now worshiped by 1/3 of the world’s population. Yes, please do your own research, like I would expect any intelligent person to do. I would not dare say that you have to believe the facts presented in this video or roast in …….. But please remember I was not part of a ‘cover up’. Click here to see the first part of a two part video which highlights some of those stories. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EYm8lj-9zw I searched the net for information about Mythraism which was practiced in the Roman Empire from about the 1st to 4th centuries AD. The name of the Persian god Mithra, adapted into Greek as Mithras, was linked to a new and distinctive imagery. After learning of how religions have combined with one another over time, I was changing my beliefs. I search the internet and found this talk from the Skepticon 3 by David Fitzgerald http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvleOBYTrDE I also watch a bit of what Richard Carrier [the man who mentored David] had to say. Then I purchased his book Nailed Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed At All. Many things in his book I had been already aware. However I did not realize that there were several contemporary “ Roman and Jewish historians who had a great interest in and much to say about the region and its happenings during Jesus’ time. We still have many of their writings today:………..detailing humdrum events and lesser exploits of much more mundane figures of Roman Palestine, including several failed Jewish messiahs.” Page 22 Nothing is metioned about Jesus in these historian’s writings. Marlys From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Buzz Kettles I agree with Christopher & Adam -Buzz From: "Christopher" <[address removed]>
|
Since there are three groups involved in this question, I thought I would copy and paste what has been written on the Skeptics thread. I hope I have not left anyone’s comment out.
This is from the Skeptic’s group.
Seems like a banner on the George Brett bridge would have been his first choice....
Bill G.
From: Marlys Kummer Doerflinger
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 4:02 PM
Subject: RE: [skeptics-137] Jesus Poll by Josh Stewart
My statement that being placed in a remote area is a pretty weak argument is based on some assumptions.
1) God wanted to get his word out to the world.
2) God is all knowing, kind and loving. He really wants to get his word out to all nations.
3) Therefore he has his son, the savior of the world; spread his teachings in a remote part of a small nation where there are no historians to record what he is doing for future generations.
Something is wrong with the logic of the statements above.
So either God did not send Jesus to save the world and/or God is not all knowing, kind and loving and wants to get his word out to all nations and/or this really did not happen and/or there is no God.
From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Marlys Kummer Doerflinger
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 1:52 PM
To: [address removed]
Subject: Re: [skeptics-137] Jesus Poll by Josh Stewart
No. My decisions are based on evidence. Fitzgerald and Doherty at not the only scholars who take the view that Jesus never existed.
I assume from what Chris said as the refutation to the fact the there is no historic contemporary writers telling of Jesus is what Ehrman says. If that is the case I think that is a pretty weak argument.
As far as being out numbered by popular vote being and indicator of the truth. In other words just because everyone thinks something is true. It is true. As the kids would say "Da.". I am an atheist. So what do you think?
Marlys
Sent from iPhone
On Sep 11, 2012, at 12:52 PM, Josh Stewart <[address removed]> wrote:
Considering that the view that Jesus never existed is a minority one even among non-Christian scholars.
And that Fitzgerald and Doherty both lack formal (adequate?) education in the subject matter. (both have only bachelors degrees in history)
Does this change anything for you?
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 11, 2012, at 10:22 AM, Marlys Kummer Doerflinger <[address removed]> wrote:
I thought he was an historic figure for a long time too. I searched for the books of the historians of Jesus' times which were mentioned in Nailed. They are translated and on the web. I found them but have not bothered to read them. Greg, a member of skeptics, also
Mentioned "The Jesus Puzzle". Iggy and I have also had discussions on the other similar savior gods of ancient times.
Marlys
Sent from iPhone
On Sep 11, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Shirl <[address removed]> wrote:
Thanks Marlys for the helpful links posted in your response. I had always considered Jesus to be a historical figure but after watching the videos you referenced I feel better informed. Fitzgerald's arguments are especially compelling!
I am thinking mythical figure now.
Shirl
t via DroidX2 on Verizon Wireless™
-----Original message-----
From: Marlys Kummer Doerflinger <[address removed]>
To: [address removed]
Sent: Mon, Sep 10, 2012 18:49:29 GMT+00:00
Subject: RE: [skeptics-137] Jesus Poll by Josh Stewart
My answers to Josh’s questions on what I believe, is based on research and evidence. A quick answer would be numbers 3) A mythical figure mistaken as historical by later Christians 4) Other. Below is the story of how I arrived at that conclusion.
As I began to study the Bible, the way I was taught to study any other research project, by comparing and contrasting what each of the gospels said about this person, I found that there were some real differences in what these books said about Jesus’ life.
About a year ago, after almost 69 years on this planet, I heard something about Christmas season which I had not known before. This is what I posted on my Facebook at that time. Why is this not common knowledge or was I just not listening? I researched several credible sources (college professors, historians, etc.), one of which says that there are over thirty (30) similar stories of ancient savior gods. I don’t want you to live that long without hearing the fact that several ancient gods were born on December 25 and had lives similar to Jesus, who is now worshiped by 1/3 of the world’s population. Yes, please do your own research, like I would expect any intelligent person to do. I would not dare say that you have to believe the facts presented in this video or roast in …….. But please remember I was not part of a ‘cover up’. Click here to see the first part of a two part video which highlights some of those stories. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EYm8lj-9zw
I searched the net for information about Mythraism which was practiced in the Roman Empire from about the 1st to 4th centuries AD. The name of the Persian god Mithra, adapted into Greek as Mithras, was linked to a new and distinctive imagery.
After learning of how religions have combined with one another over time, I was changing my beliefs.
I search the internet and found this talk from the Skepticon 3 by David Fitzgerald http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvleOBYTrDE I also watch a bit of what Richard Carrier [the man who mentored David] had to say. Then I purchased his book Nailed Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed At All. Many things in his book I had been already aware. However I did not realize that there were several contemporary “ Roman and Jewish historians who had a great interest in and much to say about the region and its happenings during Jesus’ time. We still have many of their writings today:………..detailing humdrum events and lesser exploits of much more mundane figures of Roman Palestine, including several failed Jewish messiahs.” Page 22 Nothing is metioned about Jesus in these historian’s writings.
Marlys
From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Brad Howard
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:41 PM
To: [address removed]
Subject: Re: [KC-Midtown-FreeThinkers] Jesus Poll by Josh Stewart
I would like to echo Eric's previous post. There was probably a real person, and he was probably an apocalyptic preacher. This is Bart Ehrman's and most other scholar's views. His primary reason is not as somebody suggested earlier in the string. He gives many reasons based in historical science. His is also the majority opinion among scholars. That doesn't mean he must be right, but I certainly think it gives the idea merit. (It's the same reason I accept AGW and evolution; the vast majority of scholars who study it agree.) I think we need to be careful as atheists not to look for the answer we want; it's a very tasty idea to us atheists that the person is completely made up. However, just because later followers made up a lot of stuff about him, like his birth on Dec. 25 and many other details of his life, doesn't mean that there wasn't an actual person. I fully intend to read more by those that disagree with Ehrman, but for now Ehrman convinces me. We all like to throw out Occam's razor, so I ask everyone: Are there more assumptions in the theory that a man lived, preached, created a following, and some of his followers embellished his life? Or in the theory that someone or many people made a man up, or made ideas up, and somehow a bunch of other people made more stuff up about an idea of a man, until finally everybody believed that there was such a person? I see the evidence for the latter, and some it is very convincing, but overall, it's just a little too conspiratorial for me.
That's my opinion, for what it's worth.
Brad
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:13 PM, cole morgan <[address removed]> wrote:
Josh emailed this idea to me. Please answer the question(s) below:
Cole
***********************************************************************
As a non-Christian, who do you think Jesus was?
1. A historical figure
2. A fictional person purposefully invented by a group of Christians.
3. A mythical figure mistaken as historical by later Christians
4. Other?
Your thoughts? I would certainly find people's answers interesting.
-josh Stewart
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by cole morgan ([address removed]) from KC Midtown FreeThinkers.
To learn more about cole morgan, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [address removed] Error! Filename not specified.
--
Brad Howard
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Brad Howard ([address removed]) from KC Midtown FreeThinkers.
To learn more about Brad Howard, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [address removed] 
This email message originally included an attachment.
People in thisMeetup are also in:
