Author Topic: The invention of Jesus  (Read 601 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jontom10

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • Darwins +14/-0
The invention of Jesus
« on: December 23, 2013, 02:41:12 PM »
A little long but interesting video on how and why the romans created the myth of Jesus Christ.

Hasa Diga Eebowai

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4375
  • Darwins +96/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2013, 06:19:49 PM »
There is NO power if you do not have a way to control.
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline OldChurchGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1478
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • One of those theists who enjoys exchanging ideas
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2014, 10:08:05 AM »
A little long but interesting video on how and why the romans created the myth of Jesus Christ.



This appears to no longer be available for viewing due to copyright problems.  Any other links available?  I am intrigued why the Romans would want to create Jesus the Christ.

Ever curious,

OldChurchGuy
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle - Philo of Alexandria

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion - Dalai Lama

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2014, 11:28:37 AM »
I watched a film that was titled like this a few nights ago. It might have been this one but, obviously, without seeing this one how do I know? Anyway here's what I can remember....

The NT consists of gospels which are dated 70CE or later with the exception of Mark who is sometimes dated 65CE though I am not quite sure why. The letters of Paul (genuine and others) appear to fit into the, sort of 45CE - 60CE timeframe up to Paul's death. This all makes perfectly good sense until one puts on one's historians hat and start asking questions Questions like 'why is there no reference to Paul in any secular history of the time (not stuff written much later as later stuff often reported what Christians believed. Then again, why is it that Corinth, that big church community Paul is said to have built up is nowhere to be seen in the archaeology at the time it was supposed to have been built up. There's lots more but that's enough for now.

Then again, what we call Paul's genuine letters are only a group of letters where the writing seems to be from one pen and to have the same theological outlook. We have no figure we can say definitely wrote the stuff and adding a name other than one's own to texts was quite common at the time. Finally, Paul is more advanced, theologically, that the gospels. Indeed, his description of the Last Supper and the words he uses are still used in communion services today even though Paul never knew Jesus and wasn't at the Supper. if one could free Paul from the date slot he seems to have  we would have another way of looking at the NT - one that didn't need anything historical.

So there's Vespasian and Titus his son. Vespasian defeated the Jews to take Jerusalem but was recalled to Rome to be emperor leaving his son Titus to finish the job off. Vespasian took Josephus (the Jewish Historian) back with him to Rome to write up official history. Of course, in time, Vespasian was anointed (Christos / Messiah) and there was an official cult to worship the deified emperor too. The idea is that Vespasian set up Josephus to write up the NT mirroring Vespasian as Jesus.

the only thing I did not see explained was why the Romans wanted to do this. I am still unsure if there was any reason but the film suggested that the gospels match events in Josephus book,'The Wars of the Jews'. I am reading this at the moment to see if I agree. One thing is certain, though. Had Vespasian wanted to set up a rival religion to Judaism he could easily have done so and he has the expertise to do so. The chaos of a sacked Israel with the people dispersed would mean it would not be a problem to create people and events from the past as who could argue with them.

Anyway, it is an interesting idea. What gives me most interest is that, if we can remove Paul from the early scenes of the church, his writings make much more sense in terms of theology as well as pushing back the earliest record of the religion. As an historian one really ought to have problems fitting in another unbacked-up character in the NT - after Jesus, Peter and James.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline OldChurchGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1478
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • One of those theists who enjoys exchanging ideas
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2014, 05:17:46 PM »
I watched a film that was titled like this a few nights ago. It might have been this one but, obviously, without seeing this one how do I know? Anyway here's what I can remember....

The NT consists of gospels which are dated 70CE or later with the exception of Mark who is sometimes dated 65CE though I am not quite sure why. The letters of Paul (genuine and others) appear to fit into the, sort of 45CE - 60CE timeframe up to Paul's death. This all makes perfectly good sense until one puts on one's historians hat and start asking questions Questions like 'why is there no reference to Paul in any secular history of the time (not stuff written much later as later stuff often reported what Christians believed. Then again, why is it that Corinth, that big church community Paul is said to have built up is nowhere to be seen in the archaeology at the time it was supposed to have been built up. There's lots more but that's enough for now.

Then again, what we call Paul's genuine letters are only a group of letters where the writing seems to be from one pen and to have the same theological outlook. We have no figure we can say definitely wrote the stuff and adding a name other than one's own to texts was quite common at the time. Finally, Paul is more advanced, theologically, that the gospels. Indeed, his description of the Last Supper and the words he uses are still used in communion services today even though Paul never knew Jesus and wasn't at the Supper. if one could free Paul from the date slot he seems to have  we would have another way of looking at the NT - one that didn't need anything historical.

So there's Vespasian and Titus his son. Vespasian defeated the Jews to take Jerusalem but was recalled to Rome to be emperor leaving his son Titus to finish the job off. Vespasian took Josephus (the Jewish Historian) back with him to Rome to write up official history. Of course, in time, Vespasian was anointed (Christos / Messiah) and there was an official cult to worship the deified emperor too. The idea is that Vespasian set up Josephus to write up the NT mirroring Vespasian as Jesus.

the only thing I did not see explained was why the Romans wanted to do this. I am still unsure if there was any reason but the film suggested that the gospels match events in Josephus book,'The Wars of the Jews'. I am reading this at the moment to see if I agree. One thing is certain, though. Had Vespasian wanted to set up a rival religion to Judaism he could easily have done so and he has the expertise to do so. The chaos of a sacked Israel with the people dispersed would mean it would not be a problem to create people and events from the past as who could argue with them.

Anyway, it is an interesting idea. What gives me most interest is that, if we can remove Paul from the early scenes of the church, his writings make much more sense in terms of theology as well as pushing back the earliest record of the religion. As an historian one really ought to have problems fitting in another unbacked-up character in the NT - after Jesus, Peter and James.

Interesting theory.  Never thought about putting Paul in a later era.  Not sure I agree with the idea but I am no Bible scholar.  And my discomfort with the idea may be because it runs counter to my understanding of Paul. 

Poor Josephus.  Depending on the person, he is either a scoundrel who worked only for his own personal gain or he was one of the greatest historians of his time.  There doesn't seem to be any middle ground. 

Like you, I can't quite figure out why any Roman leader would want to be associated with what, from their opinion, was a trouble maker named Jesus of Nazareth.   There is or was a school of thought the story of Jesus was patterned after the Buddha due to all the parallels in their lives.  All sorts of ideas out there to ponder and explore. 

Let me know if you come across anything else on this theory, please.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 05:19:18 PM by OldChurchGuy »
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle - Philo of Alexandria

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion - Dalai Lama

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2014, 05:14:37 AM »
Yes, OCG, it is thought provoking. The fact is that the dating of the whole of the NT is unsure. We can only base it on the timing of the first quotation of a text in another document and use that as the latest time something was written. However, that's about as good as it gets and fixing an earliest date is really hard - most scholars tend to see the destruction of the temple as a baseline with the texts written after that date - based on Jesus and the destruction of the temple speech. It's very vague.

Now Paul's theology is quite advanced - both with the communion texts but with the New Adam explanation of the death of Jesus. None of the gospels have stuff like that so that one would probably date Paul after the gospels if it wasn't for the claims in the text of various missionary journeys that look like they can be dated. I suspect a lot of work might be needed but I do wonder if the dating of Paul might change if there is a consistent lack of evidence for churches in places Paul claims to have founded.

I have tended over the years to see Paul as the founder of Christianity but this sort of dating problem suggests that maybe he was much later and the gospels are the earliest texts but this puts the first Christian texts much later that we have dated Paul (mid 40s to 60CE). Maybe we do live in interesting times!
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline OldChurchGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1478
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • One of those theists who enjoys exchanging ideas
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2014, 06:32:13 AM »
Yes, OCG, it is thought provoking. The fact is that the dating of the whole of the NT is unsure. We can only base it on the timing of the first quotation of a text in another document and use that as the latest time something was written. However, that's about as good as it gets and fixing an earliest date is really hard - most scholars tend to see the destruction of the temple as a baseline with the texts written after that date - based on Jesus and the destruction of the temple speech. It's very vague.

Now Paul's theology is quite advanced - both with the communion texts but with the New Adam explanation of the death of Jesus. None of the gospels have stuff like that so that one would probably date Paul after the gospels if it wasn't for the claims in the text of various missionary journeys that look like they can be dated. I suspect a lot of work might be needed but I do wonder if the dating of Paul might change if there is a consistent lack of evidence for churches in places Paul claims to have founded.

I have tended over the years to see Paul as the founder of Christianity but this sort of dating problem suggests that maybe he was much later and the gospels are the earliest texts but this puts the first Christian texts much later that we have dated Paul (mid 40s to 60CE). Maybe we do live in interesting times!

I wonder how one would prove the existence of churches during the time of Paul?  It is my understandings believers met at a home or homes as opposed to building a house of worship.  Building a house of worship might disrupt the "Pax Romana" which granted an exemption to the Jews due to their economic influence (as I understand the times anyway). 

But you are correct that these are definitely interesting times.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle - Philo of Alexandria

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion - Dalai Lama

Offline Jontom10

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 378
  • Darwins +14/-0
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2014, 06:22:21 AM »
I've looked about but it is indeed under copyright so taken down by YouTube and other similar sites. There are sites out there that will let you stream it for a couple of US dollars if you want to watch it.

It is further theory on the invention of Jesus by the Romans. As well as being the standard solar messiah model the character has been imbued with life events matching that of Titus Flavius. The Romans wanted to instill into the Jewish the practice of worshipping whatever god they want but also worship the Caesar as a living god so created the character to be the messiah of jewish prophecy. This is why the jews never accepted "Jesus Christ" as the messiah as the character does not have a single characteristic the saviour supposed to have.

There are a lot of web pages dedicated to the truth behind the invention of the character jesus christ

Couple here for example

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/was-jesus-made-up-by-the-romans/

You might start with looking into the origins of the bible, the origins of israel and the rise of Yahweh from an unimportant obscure babylonian minor god to the single god of the bible before you start to look at the falsehood of the new testament and jesus myth.


Hasa Diga Eebowai

Offline Graybeard

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6418
  • Darwins +456/-14
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2014, 07:14:45 AM »
Vespasian took Josephus (the Jewish Historian) back with him to Rome to write up official history. Of course, in time, Vespasian was anointed (Christos / Messiah) and there was an official cult to worship the deified emperor too. The idea is that Vespasian set up Josephus to write up the NT mirroring Vespasian as Jesus.
This seems more than unlikely. There is one passage in Josephus that allegedly refers to Christ and, it gives every indication of having been inserted by some unscrupulous scribe. The rest of his works are those of a historian recording the lives and events of Roman Judeah.

Had I been Vespasian, and I wished to set up a cult, I would have been a little clearer in my instructions to Josephus. I would have told him to create my pseudonymous and highly glorified biography that would later been discovered to be my (Vespasian's) life.

The question of the historical Paul is another matter: his introduction into the NT is unreliable (the account of the Road to Damascus incident has two versions). However, it does fall into the category of most of the "Great Men of the Bible" mould, as we see a character, who is clearly delusional but charismatic and influential, telling of the insights he has in his mind into the life of Christ. This was a man who was prone to visions and voices brought on by frontal-lobe epilepsy.

Paul, or whoever he was, was more than liberal with his interpretation of what he thought Christ's purposes was. I get the impression, from not much knowledge, that Paul was so enthusiastic about Christ's philosophy that he felt that everyone (not just the Jews as Christ had said) should benefit (See Romans 9 and elsewhere.) Paul did not even stop there, he started inventing things to suit his audience and their circumstances. I hesitate to say it, but he was a sort of Pat Robertson of the NT. And, having built a successful business, this model was seized upon by others elsewhere to propagate Christianity for profit.

I think OCG will, justifiably, ask, "Does it matter who wrote Paul, if the words are inspirational?" I have answered this before but basically, the answer is "No, but if you are fraudulent, everything that follows must also be fraudulent. And Paul was asking people to share a delusion.

As we know, in Roman times, thousands suffered for the belief in Christ. If what Paul said could have been said as convincingly without reference to a god, then that suffering would have been unlikely to have taken place."
RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable. Ambrose Bierce

Offline OldChurchGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1478
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • One of those theists who enjoys exchanging ideas
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2014, 07:58:34 AM »
I've looked about but it is indeed under copyright so taken down by YouTube and other similar sites. There are sites out there that will let you stream it for a couple of US dollars if you want to watch it.

It is further theory on the invention of Jesus by the Romans. As well as being the standard solar messiah model the character has been imbued with life events matching that of Titus Flavius. The Romans wanted to instill into the Jewish the practice of worshipping whatever god they want but also worship the Caesar as a living god so created the character to be the messiah of jewish prophecy. This is why the jews never accepted "Jesus Christ" as the messiah as the character does not have a single characteristic the saviour supposed to have.

There are a lot of web pages dedicated to the truth behind the invention of the character jesus christ

Couple here for example

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/was-jesus-made-up-by-the-romans/

You might start with looking into the origins of the bible, the origins of israel and the rise of Yahweh from an unimportant obscure babylonian minor god to the single god of the bible before you start to look at the falsehood of the new testament and jesus myth.



Thanks for the links.  I have added them to my Favorites and will look at them later today. 

I read Armstrong's book "A History of God" some years ago as well as others she has authored.  All very thought provoking and interesting. 

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy
« Last Edit: January 05, 2014, 08:00:13 AM by OldChurchGuy »
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle - Philo of Alexandria

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion - Dalai Lama

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Darwins +48/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2014, 09:08:47 AM »
Vespasian took Josephus (the Jewish Historian) back with him to Rome to write up official history. Of course, in time, Vespasian was anointed (Christos / Messiah) and there was an official cult to worship the deified emperor too. The idea is that Vespasian set up Josephus to write up the NT mirroring Vespasian as Jesus.
This seems more than unlikely. There is one passage in Josephus that allegedly refers to Christ and, it gives every indication of having been inserted by some unscrupulous scribe. The rest of his works are those of a historian recording the lives and events of Roman Judeah.

Had I been Vespasian, and I wished to set up a cult, I would have been a little clearer in my instructions to Josephus. I would have told him to create my pseudonymous and highly glorified biography that would later been discovered to be my (Vespasian's) life.

I agree. It does seem more than unlikely. There's a reason that the overwhelming majority of scholars don't accept the "Jesus was invented by Vespasian/Josephus/Titus" proposal. The funny thing is, this latest book-selling scheme is still more plausible than any claim of the average Christian. And, I feel this "hierarchy of plausibility" of three proposals needs to be laid out for the Christian to seriously think about:

Most plausible: Whatever most scholars currently agree upon concerning what they are certain of and what they are uncertain of pertaining to the mythical figure known as Jesus Christ, this is always the best place to begin your search for the truth. Babe Ruth was a real person who played baseball. Babe Ruth is more real than mythical, even though there are myths about Babe Ruth. George Washington is more real than myth. Jesus Christ is probably at least 99% myth. Even when talking about characters who we know are fictional(Darth Vader, for example), I guess one could still wedge in the argument that all ideas stem from something real.

Not plausible: Vespasian and/or Josephus and/or Titus invented Jesus Christ.

Bat-shit crazy: Jesus Christ, whose real miracles were recorded in the perfectly reliable canonical Gospels, is the son of the god, and/or is the god of the Hebrew Bible,[1] even though their personalities are nothing alike. One guy is jealous and floods entire planets. The other gets nailed to a cross without even putting up a fight. 
 1. Modern scholars have a pretty good picture of how the god of the Israelites evolved from even-more-ancient pantheons of gods.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7268
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2014, 09:34:47 AM »
Darth Vader.  There's a character who could potentially get translated into a real person in the future.  I mean, if humanity experienced another "dark age", and a few armageddons, etc., who's to say that the best records left available from history don't point to Darth Vader as the initial instigator?

It is entirely possible that Jesus is nothing but a fictional character.

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Darwins +48/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2014, 09:41:51 AM »
Darth Vader.  There's a character who could potentially get translated into a real person in the future.  I mean, if humanity experienced another "dark age", and a few armageddons, etc., who's to say that the best records left available from history don't point to Darth Vader as the initial instigator?

It is entirely possible that Jesus is nothing but a fictional character.

Absolutely. Especially if those that find themselves in control after your hypothetical chain of events happen to be Star Wars fanatics.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Darwins +48/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #13 on: January 05, 2014, 09:47:27 AM »
Darth Vader.  There's a character who could potentially get translated into a real person in the future.  I mean, if humanity experienced another "dark age", and a few armageddons, etc., who's to say that the best records left available from history don't point to Darth Vader as the initial instigator?

It is entirely possible that Jesus is nothing but a fictional character.

And, in a real world of evolving myths, Darth Vader could evolve into a long-haired, blue-eyed Caucasian. This is just one out of a myriad of possibilities.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Darwins +48/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #14 on: January 05, 2014, 09:53:04 AM »
Darth Vader.  There's a character who could potentially get translated into a real person in the future.  I mean, if humanity experienced another "dark age", and a few armageddons, etc., who's to say that the best records left available from history don't point to Darth Vader as the initial instigator?

It is entirely possible that Jesus is nothing but a fictional character.

Or, thousands of years from now, archaeologists and linguists uncover the truth about the god Jetson:

"The concept of the god Jetson actually began as a 20th century cartoon character. Many of his proverbs can be traced to an online-forum participant who took the name from that exact cartoon character."
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7268
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2014, 09:58:15 AM »
Kneel before Jetson.

Just try to put yourself in a position where you are a prince, or a king, and people kneel and bow before you, and cater to your every whim.  It feels uncomfortable to me, actually?  Is that weird?  Should I embrace such a feeling and wish to have it?

I don't know how a single human can feel great inside about this?

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11679
  • Darwins +290/-80
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2014, 12:09:24 PM »
Kneel before Jetson.

Just try to put yourself in a position where you are a prince, or a king, and people kneel and bow before you, and cater to your every whim.  It feels uncomfortable to me, actually?  Is that weird?  Should I embrace such a feeling and wish to have it?

I don't know how a single human can feel great inside about this?

Namgod denies you.

;)

-Nam
This is my signature "Nam", don't I have nice typing skills?

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2014, 12:17:01 PM »
Kneel before Jetson.

Just try to put yourself in a position where you are a prince, or a king, and people kneel and bow before you, and cater to your every whim.  It feels uncomfortable to me, actually?  Is that weird?  Should I embrace such a feeling and wish to have it?

I don't know how a single human can feel great inside about this?

Well there's more to be said about being a Jetsonite than being a Christian. For example -

1. Jetson nearly always answers my prayers and tells me when he can't do as I have asked.

2. Due to his reliable responses, there is abundantly more evidence for Jetson being a person that there is for Jesus (unless Jetson is a computer that passed the Turing test!)

3. It is possible that someone on the forum even knows Jetson in real life so we could potentially get real evidence of Jetson.

So, theists, for your god, can you provide any of the above - for 3. I would be quite happy with an eye witness account. This is your chance, theists, to win us over to your side - don't mess up!
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11679
  • Darwins +290/-80
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2014, 12:20:34 PM »
Kneel before Jetson.

Just try to put yourself in a position where you are a prince, or a king, and people kneel and bow before you, and cater to your every whim.  It feels uncomfortable to me, actually?  Is that weird?  Should I embrace such a feeling and wish to have it?

I don't know how a single human can feel great inside about this?

Well there's more to be said about being a Jetsonite than being a Christian. For example -

1. Jetson nearly always answers my prayers and tells me when he can't do as I have asked.

2. Due to his reliable responses, there is abundantly more evidence for Jetson being a person that there is for Jesus (unless Jetson is a computer that passed the Turing test!)

3. It is possible that someone on the forum even knows Jetson in real life so we could potentially get real evidence of Jetson.

So, theists, for your god, can you provide any of the above - for 3. I would be quite happy with an eye witness account. This is your chance, theists, to win us over to your side - don't mess up!

Namgod denies you, too!

-Nam
This is my signature "Nam", don't I have nice typing skills?

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2014, 12:35:49 PM »

Namgod denies you, too!

-Nam

You are the anti-Jetson - come to take us away from our true faith! get thee behind me, Nam!
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11679
  • Darwins +290/-80
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2014, 12:40:39 PM »

Namgod denies you, too!

-Nam

You are the anti-Jetson - come to take us away from our true faith! get thee behind me, Nam!

I am Namgod, Nam is just my son, the messenger.

-Nam
This is my signature "Nam", don't I have nice typing skills?

Offline OldChurchGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1478
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • One of those theists who enjoys exchanging ideas
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2014, 02:41:51 PM »
Vespasian took Josephus (the Jewish Historian) back with him to Rome to write up official history. Of course, in time, Vespasian was anointed (Christos / Messiah) and there was an official cult to worship the deified emperor too. The idea is that Vespasian set up Josephus to write up the NT mirroring Vespasian as Jesus.
This seems more than unlikely. There is one passage in Josephus that allegedly refers to Christ and, it gives every indication of having been inserted by some unscrupulous scribe. The rest of his works are those of a historian recording the lives and events of Roman Judeah.

Had I been Vespasian, and I wished to set up a cult, I would have been a little clearer in my instructions to Josephus. I would have told him to create my pseudonymous and highly glorified biography that would later been discovered to be my (Vespasian's) life.

The question of the historical Paul is another matter: his introduction into the NT is unreliable (the account of the Road to Damascus incident has two versions). However, it does fall into the category of most of the "Great Men of the Bible" mould, as we see a character, who is clearly delusional but charismatic and influential, telling of the insights he has in his mind into the life of Christ. This was a man who was prone to visions and voices brought on by frontal-lobe epilepsy.

Paul, or whoever he was, was more than liberal with his interpretation of what he thought Christ's purposes was. I get the impression, from not much knowledge, that Paul was so enthusiastic about Christ's philosophy that he felt that everyone (not just the Jews as Christ had said) should benefit (See Romans 9 and elsewhere.) Paul did not even stop there, he started inventing things to suit his audience and their circumstances. I hesitate to say it, but he was a sort of Pat Robertson of the NT. And, having built a successful business, this model was seized upon by others elsewhere to propagate Christianity for profit.

I think OCG will, justifiably, ask, "Does it matter who wrote Paul, if the words are inspirational?" I have answered this before but basically, the answer is "No, but if you are fraudulent, everything that follows must also be fraudulent. And Paul was asking people to share a delusion.

As we know, in Roman times, thousands suffered for the belief in Christ. If what Paul said could have been said as convincingly without reference to a god, then that suffering would have been unlikely to have taken place."

Just to add another 2 cents, Vespasian came into power (69-79CE) after the death of Nero (68 CE) .  Nero blamed the Christians when Rome burned under Nero's reign (most likely arson by Nero as I understand history).  So with Christians being vilified just a few years previous, it seems very odd that Vespasian would use the Christians to further his ego. 

In case you want to do additional reading:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vespasian#Great_Jewish_Revolt_.2866.E2.80.9369.29

As always,

OldChurchGuy
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle - Philo of Alexandria

Whether one believes in a religion or not, and whether one believes in rebirth or not, there isn't anyone who doesn't appreciate kindness and compassion - Dalai Lama

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The invention of Jesus
« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2014, 04:34:59 PM »
Yes, I know about the reference by Tacitus though the word he uses is Chrestos. Also he was 9 when the riot took place and so may only be reporting what was talked about much later. Indeed, Tacitus mentions Pontius Pilate too by I haven't had tim eto look up when this was written to see if this is really a write-uo of what he was told.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)