|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,809 Year: 4,066/9,624 Month: 937/974 Week: 264/286 Day: 25/46 Hour: 2/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Time Problem With A Mythical Jesus | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13036 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
To all, even though I'm replying to Gilgamesh:
Gilgamesh writes: Sorry I didn't take your bait, Willow. I know what you're trying to do. What WillowTree is trying to do is change the subject. Whether or not WillowTree accepts as odd and unsupported the original examples of recent odd and unsupported ideas, the examples themselves are not this thread's topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Gilgamesh Inactive Member |
Point taken. Sorry; I can be accused of following Willow off topic.
My examples of rapidly arising myths: 1. Roswell2. Medjugorje 3. Sai Baba still stand. And to those we can add Willow's useful input of the Bermuda Triangle. If I'm correct, this myth originally arose after the 1945 disappearance of Flight 19: five American Avenger Bombers. In this case the myth took about 20 years or so to flourish with the publication of articles and books in the 1960's. To the above examples, it could be argued, any urban legend could be added. The Christian argument that there was not enough time for the Christ myth to arise before the Gospels were written has always been a no brainer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3074 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Gil writes: My examples of rapidly arising myths: 1. Roswell2. Medjugorje 3. Sai Baba Can we add Francis Crick's space aliens to this list ? Previously, you assert the Gospels to be myths. Not even your precious Jesus Seminar believes this. Burton L. Mack asserts that the "Q"/source document is contained within the gospels. He simply discards every passage and text except the natural sayings of Jesus and declares these to be the "Q" document. ("Lost Gospel: Book of "Q", [1994]) Seems you are out of touch with your own "scholarship".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5935 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
Willowtree
Can we add Francis Crick's space aliens to this list ? Directed panspermia is a remote possibility however there are huge difficulties and it is odd that an alien race would find it necessary to do such a resource intensive effort.While it is unlikely it stands on the borderlands as a possibility but a very low probability due to physical constraints on space travel over the distances involved.Roswell,though, has been thoroughly debunked through all attempts to perform CPR on its dusty corpse.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Gastric ReFlux Inactive Member |
Considering the time and nature of the situation, 70 years seems like plenty of time to get a mythic figure rolling.
Just today, I saw this on another message board:
quote: Source of quote above Anyhow, at the time you've got some seriously pissed off Jews about Roman involvement and overlording. What's better than a messianic figure who will deliver the wrath of God like written about in Revelations to get the people inspired to resist and get rid of the Romans? It was a time without the scientific method, information moved much more slowly, and it was common for many to accept the word of those they felt were important. As others have already pointed out, even in our times we've seen that 50 years has been plenty to establish a rather devoted following in UFOs, so 70 years back then seems plenty, more than enough.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Gilgamesh Inactive Member |
Willow wrote:
Can we add Francis Crick's space aliens to this list ? Previously, you assert the Gospels to be myths. Not even your precious Jesus Seminar believes this. Burton L. Mack asserts that the "Q"/source document is contained within the gospels. He simply discards every passage and text except the natural sayings of Jesus and declares these to be the "Q" document. ("Lost Gospel: Book of "Q", [1994]) Seems you are out of touch with your own "scholarship". I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Personally, I really don't care whether the Gospels are myths in their entirity or based on real world events with mythical elements thrown in. While I find the arguments of Earl Doherty's "Jesus Puzzle" compelling, I also respect the honest findings of those scholars from the Jesus Seminar and others such as Burton Mack who do not go so far as to deny a historical character at the core of Christianity. The fact that we have nothing written about Jesus in either Christian or non-Christian literature until decades after his life is compelling evidence in favour of an entirely mythical Jesus, but I don't deny the Christ myth may have originated from an actual messiahic nutcase, a self deluded fool, or a genuinely nice guy who had the best intentions to help those around him. From that central core has arisen mythology containing supernatural claims, that maybe even the historical Jesus might have found embarassing. Roswell, Medjugorje, Sai Baba and the Bermuda triangle have real people and real events at their core. The supernatural claims derive from the rapidly growing mythology that followed immediatly after.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
quote: Jasonb writes: Not to mention why the story did not die out as most other ancient legends and fables did. We have a fragment of the gospel of John (John Rylands Fragment, p52) that has been dated to circa 125 AD. ...lets assume the first NT book written was the gospel of John and it was written sometime after the death of the last apostle, say 100 AD. This would give us a starting time of 70 years after the death of Christ for the second generation Christians to begin preaching a mythical Jesus.This is simply not enough time for a mythical Jesus to emerge. No one could make these claims to so many people without them being refuted by the many religious groups in opposition to Christianity at that time, unless the claims were grounded in fact....It is my assertion that even a liberal date of 70 years after the death of Christ for the first NT book to be written is simply not a sufficient amount of time for a legend like the mythical Jesus to even evolve, let alone spread.portmaster1000 writes: Does this mean that people even today who are very rational, methodical, and even a bit skeptical will tend to disregard an authentic Risen Christ as implausible? The largely superstitious(Pagan and Jewish) population of that time was thirsty for any shard of hope to explain their world. Myself having witnessed supernatural events, I believe the myth to be reality! Jesus lives! If we have a large percentage of the population that already believes in supernatural cult events then news of more supernatural events will probably be seen as plausible.Ifen writes: OK...what do you tend to think,Ifen? Are you a strict scientific method type of guy? I see that you have our favorite antiMcDowell guy in quotes. I personally think that Josh has some good research. The two problems I see are Paul and Mark. The mythicists have to show that Paul did not know or refer to an earthly Jesus and the Mark was doing a midrash. The debates on these issues involved language and textual analysis. The historicist appear to have the broadest options. They only need a figure who caught the attention of a few who carried stories after his death, and those stories grew into a myth the way Elvis is becoming a myth.Chiroptera writes: First of all, UFO legends are not a mainstream item. In a time of limited communication, the communication that DID occur between groups of people would be important. If it took me several months to travel to your village, I would not waste my time spreading some fable unless it burned within me as a necessary bit of information. This is why the "personal experiences" and "changed lives" arguments support an actual Jesus as Son of God rather than a myth that tickles the hopes and imaginations and is later seized upon by a control minded church. The first popular UFO reports started shortly after the second world war. By the time I was a kid, in the 1970's, UFO's were a big industry -- it seemed "everyone" believed in it, and there was a huge industry pumping out supposedly non-fiction magazines, as well as fictional TV shows and movies. This occurred in about 30 years. In a time where communications were poor, the scientific method had not yet developed, and the miracles claimed by Christians were well withing mainstream thought, I see no reason that such legends and myths could not have developed in a generation or two.Iasion writes: So then, do you see me as a fanatical story teller that is merely spreading my myth on a posting board such as this? What is my motive? If the original Jesus was a mythical being, then the story could have been developing for centuries - which is exactly what we DO see - the various elements of the Jesus story can be clearly seen in the prior Jewish scriptures and pagan writers.Iasion writes: What would make them true? Truth, for me, is not based entirely on material evidence. Truth is based on internal awareness. Concerning this post, what are we trying to do? Consider the three motives: Many religious writings of this primitive period were not "refuted" - e.g. the Golden Ass of Apuleis written in the same period as the Gospels was not "refuted" - that does not make them true.1)Convince people that Jesus is no myth. 2)Show people that Jesus well could be a myth 3) Discuss and commune verbally with each other, sharing ideas and emotions. Iasion writes:
Remember, also, that a legend is not necessarily a myth or a fable. A legend can be an actual event or an effect from an event communicated to others.
In 70CE the Romans conquered Jerusalem,in 135CE they destroyed the whole city and dispersed the Jews that remained. Only AFTER that, did the Gospels become known to Christians - 2 wars and several generations after the alleged events. Legends have been known to arise in DAYS. legend \"le-jnd\ n [ME legende, fr. MF & ML; MF legende, fr. ML legenda, fr. L legere to read] 1 : a story coming down from the past; esp : one popularly accepted as historical though not verifiable 2 : an inscription on an object; also : caption 3 : an explanatory list of the symbols on a map or chart
Also, I found what you said about Aristedes: Aristides dates the Gospel
The Gospel was un-named? The name of Jesus Christ is the good news, and that is what was spreading. I will admit it. I am biased.Interestingly, one Christian church father Aristides refers to "...the Gospel as it is called, which (has been) preached a short time among them". This tells us that in his day - * the Gospel was un-named, * the Gospel had only been preached "a short time". Jasonb writes: I realize that there was a fanaticism which can be compared with the modern day terrorists. I also understand that willingness to die does not make a belief correct. Skepticism CAN be a useful thing. As much as I believe, I don't know if I could die for my belief. I believe that Jesus was no myth and that He lives today. Any one of the many religions in opposition to Christianity could have simply checked the facts out and presented the masses with the counter proof. Many of these converts suffered death rather than deny Christ. It would have been so simple for the Jewish religious leaders to disproof these claims, or at least presented doubt in the converts mind. They were outrageous claims, which usually are not immediately taken at face value, especially when there are groups teaching something else.Jasonb writes: There is quite a bit of evidence that Mohammed was not that saintly and nobel, but that does not stop Islam. (I am playing Devils advocate, here) All it would take is one piece of evidence that Jesus never existed or that he was simply a man and that would be the end of the Christian movement.jar writes: I realize that you were talking to Jasonb,jar, but allow me to answer this question. I do not find the Bible stories to be unique or unusual in any way except that when I am in prayer groups or church and certain scriptures are read, they seem to take on a life and a meaning of their own. The same scripture read at two or more different times may inspire me in many seemingly unrelated ways. I am not a fanatic or a robot who takes the scripture literally, but I sense a living presence behind and within the words and meaning. For those of you who see no such magic in the Bible, I can see why you consider it unimportant. You keep refering to the mythical Jesus claim as though there were something unique about the Jesus stories. I'm not sure that I understand what it is you are saying. Can you outline for us what you find unique or unusual about the Jesus stories?Jasonb writes: OK, Jason...its your thread. I will say that SOME myths did develop along with the true story and that the true story has carried through to this day. But for this thread let focus on the time question, is 70 years enough time for a legend like the Mythical Jesus to evolve.Ifen writes: When I hear a claim or consider one, I often note the character and personality of the author or speaker of such a claim. The more that people believe in a personality, the more that they are likely to accept the claims made by such a personality. Which claims do you consider outrageous in terms of those times?Ifen writes: Yes. A Christian is not a Christian by education, indoctorination or mere persuasion. To me, a true Christian is a Christian through spiritual impartation. In "Christian Rome", much of the church that claimed to be christian was not. Many Popes did bad things, as we all do but the power of religion cannot be denied in these times. The truth survived those times....not because of a printed book or political/religious agenda used by fallible humans but because of a true impartation within a few of them. Lots of sects survived at least until Constantine adopted Christianity and the christians began to stamp out other religions.Ifen writes: I disagree. The truth would have spread without Constantine, and there would always be a lot of myths to go along with it...yet we can tell the difference. I think Constantine saved Christianity by giving it the backing of the Roman Empire.Chiroptera writes: So why do people like myself believe in this one particular story? Why in this modern age can not a better story...say a UFO one...capture the popular imagination en masse and start a revival? Why do people still cling to this one story that happened in a small country so many years ago? The way that the N.T. was written shows me that it is either a very convincing fraud or a true epic. Consider: So, seeing how quickly legends can develop, even to the point where we have "eye witnesses", how are the Jesus legends sufficiently different to preclude this? I recall that about 40 years is the accepted time between the alleged ministry of Jesus and the writing of the first narrative Gospel.NIV writes:
When I respond and communicate with all of you, I do it with joy. I like to chat with people...even those whom I disagree with. I have no real motive or quota to meet, but if the spark of joy that is within me influences any of you, that would be a GOOD thing! 1 John 1:1-4=That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched-this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We write this to make our joy complete. This message has been edited by Phatboy, 09-02-2004 01:17 PM This message has been edited by Phatboy, 09-02-2004 01:20 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
portmaster1000 Inactive Member |
I wrote:
quote: Phatboy writes: Does this mean that people even today who are very rational, methodical, and even a bit skeptical will tend to disregard an authentic Risen Christ as implausible? The largely superstitious(Pagan and Jewish) population of that time was thirsty for any shard of hope to explain their world. Myself having witnessed supernatural events, I believe the myth to be reality! Jesus lives! A person's bias will always effect their initial response to new information. If I have a belief that the world operates in such a way and I read an article that contradicts that belief I will want to reject that article. However, I shouldn't reject it because it conflicts with my world view. I should evaluate the article on it's own merits. Of course, that action may lead to an uncomfortable evaluation of my own world view . I see bias working in the opposite way as well. If I read an article that agrees with my world view I am very inclined to accept it. I'm not likely to accept this article on it's own merits. I'll accept it because it reinforces what I already belief. In a way, this agreeable article is more insidious than the conflicting one. It could reinforce a falsehood. You have intrigued me, Phatboy. Would you be willing to go into more detail about the supernatural events you have witnessed? thanxPM1K
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Perhaps in another thread. We are talking probabilities of rumors, stories, and myths about Jesus and IF the current Belief is based on myths or reality. Actually, I do know one story that ties in to my belief concerning the reality of scripture vs myth.
We had a young man named Tobias come to church one day. He was a hard worker and even though he came from a poverty and drug addicted family, he was an overachiever. He had rarely read the Bible, however, and when he "got saved", all of a sudden you could see the telltale signs of a massive change in his life and habits. His countenence was different. His new passion and love that he showed us was something beyond what he had ever had before. What was really wild, however, was that when he talked to us, he virtually quoted lots of obscure scriptures that he had not ever read. (I know I can't prove this) We would show him stuff in Psalms or somewhere that he had just said to us and he would say "Thats in the Bible?" It was as if he had never read it. To me, it proved that the Word was and is Spirit and is alive.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
Phatboy,
When you don't reply directly to the post, the poster, in this case, myself, doesn't get an email notification of your reply and reading your post I don't know which post of mine you are referring to. Please don't do group replies it's too confusing. Reply to each post you wish to individualy so that 1. the poster gets notification and2. the poster can easily find the post you are referring to. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
So why do people like myself believe in this one particular story? Though not on topic I think that is a very good question. (Perhaps you would like to propose it for a new thread?) To state it in it's general form: Why does someone like X believe in this one particular story Y? Where Y could be Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism, even Communism, and so on and on and on. This is a subset of why does some one person X like product Y? Where the product could be Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola, etc, or Ford or Dodge, or this football team, or that. Is Coca Cola the "Real Thing"? Lots of people like it, buy it, and drink it. But then Pepsi Cola is doing real well also. It's been decades since I read James' THE VARIETY OF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE, but I was very impressed with his examination of different personality types and the differing approaches to religion. I will close this with the observation/assertion that religious and other beliefs are adopted for a wide variety of reasons and the truth of those beliefs, particularly in the case of religious beliefs that can't be proven, has nothing to do with the choice. The choosing will create the "feeling" or belief that the religion is truth. It's a consequence of believing not a cause. Having said that Iwill also state that I think there are benefits and positive effects to religious beliefs along with the possibilities of drawbacks. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
Phat,
Have you heard of Bridey Murphy? It was a book that showed the evidence for reincarnation. A young woman had been hypnotized and recalled a previous life in Ireland as a Bridey Murphy. Well an investigator finally explored her background and she grew up knowing an older Irish woman. It wasn't a case of fraud but her knowledge of events didn't show she had lived in Ireland in a previous life time. It showed that there can be a lot of stuff stored in our brains that we no longer have direct access to. Being born and raised in a culture dominated by european culture then there is lots of exposure to bibical material and also Shakespeare. They have entered into the language and culture. I don't think there is anything supernatural here. It is a rare phenomena as that is what I mean by "miraculous". Most people die of cancer X, but a certain small percentage experience spontaneous remission. That is a non supernatural, in fact, quite natural miracle. If I go down and buy a lottery ticket and win a million dollars that is miraculous as I stood an extremely small chance of winning. But it isn't supernatural because sooner or later someone wins the lottery. Religions will have greater appeal than psychology to many people. And if it works for you then that's great. It is the effectiveness not the truth of religions that maintain them. It was the effectiveness of the christian religion not it's historical truth that resulted in its continuance. But it is not the only effective religion. Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Mormonism, and so on all are effective. Hmmm, another interesting thread might be using the theory of evolution to examine the evolution of religions and make parallels. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 639 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
The problem with that hypothetical, I can show you someone who went through the same kind of profound, lifechanging shift for the positive by LEAVE Christianity, and joining Islam, Buddaism, Taoism, or leaving all religion behind totally.
If someone leaves Christianity, and goes through those major positive life changes, (of which I know a number of people personally), does that 'disprove' the holy spirit??
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18338 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ramoss writes: You have a good point. I was changed in a positive way by what I believe to be the Holy Spirit, But I also knew other people who left the church and became "enlightened" as to the shams of religion. Often, a church body is an imperfect and even unhealthy environment to become co-dependant on. By "getting out" of the controlling environment, many people DO become more aware of their individual potential. The church that I was "saved" at was in many ways a cult environment. People became hooked on it like a drug. When some of them finally broke out of it, they "saw the light". I still think that my experience was valid, despite the imperfections and hypocrisies around me. I am no longer "hooked" on church, but I go when I want to go. Assembling means fellowship and it need not be structured or organized. It can mean going out with friends and sharing love. If someone leaves Christianity, and goes through those major positive life changes, (of which I know a number of people personally), does that 'disprove' the holy spirit??BTW..the young man Tobias whom I mentioned is now no longer in church and has studied Native American Spirituality as well as other alternatives. He has, if anything, become an even stronger believer by leaving organized religion. He is still most definitely a believer in the Holy Spirit and Jesus as God incarnate. This message has been edited by Phatboy, 09-05-2004 12:49 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
Phat,
There is in Indian Religion a hierarchical way of looking at these experiences. One aspect of Hinduism is the bhakti or devotion to God which is often an ecstatic path. Hinduism, certainly to westerners, appears to be polytheistic with quite a number of gods, but the multiplicity of appearance is just an appearance. Devotion to a god is only a path in spiritual developement leading to a realization of the One non dual reality. For a Hindu Jesus, or the Holy Spirit are authentic ways of experiencing God and a path to the final knowledge which lies beyond dualism. From what you've written I think you may see a certain kind of sense in that. lfen
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024