How large was Jesus following while alive?

[outhouse]

Jesus is supposed to have crossed the path of Priests, Sanhedrin, Romans, Centurions, Egyptians; many who would have been literate or had scribes, yet to date not one single first hand account has been found.

he stayed away from these types on purpose as they were the enemy.

I view jesus as more of a zealot then a son of god charactor.

Its a fact jews hated romans for their heavy taxation, and a figure like jesus would have looked at the jewish governement as being infected by roman control since its high priest were appointed by Pilate! You add the fact pilate hated Galilian jews and jesus was headed for trouble before he started.

he started a new religion to try and keep jewish money away from roman hands, he wanted to start something that wasnt infected by roman control. running around poor with no money or property means you have nothing to tax or take away, thus not putting money into the roman hands. he wanted no part of roman controlled judaism

 

[outhouse]

I find it very difficult to say that the evidence for Jesus is any more convincing.

learning history of the land and exact area of that time! brings things into light

 

[outhouse]

That's one possibility. I'm inclined to believe that a lot of the casting out of spirits and healings were placebo effects that became exaggerated.

agreed :yes:

 

[outhouse]

Funny. I think the same thing when I hear "we have no good evidence that Jesus existed." Except the "so near" part. Someone in another thread posted an interesting clip where the agnostic scholar Ehrman responds to this view stating we have more evidence for Jesus than for almost any of his contemporaries and that he doesn't know of any serious historian who doubts the that Jesus was a historical person. Angellous may correct me here (early christian studies is his area of expertise), but I haven't come across any academic publication by any historian asserting Jesus didn't exist. Lot's of blogs and sensationalist books, but nothing published in the forums (not online, I mean, for example, journals) used by specialists.

only from a semi view of ignorance on the subject combined with peronal bias can one come to the conclusion.

if one only studies history of the that area at that time does it become very obvious there was in fact a catalyst for the movement known as christianity beyond literature.

 

[cablescavenger]

You mean I'm supposed to realize that you haven't read much in the way of historical Jesus studied (at least not anything reputable)?

If by reputable you mean fits in with your world view, probably not, no, since I like my evidence to be measured and impartial.

It might surprise you to know I am completely open to the existence of Jesus. (God in the flesh or Son of God is another matter).

I don't deny the Egyptians, the Romans, Pompeian, or the Minoans existed because there are first hand accounts and archaeological evidence. I am not even asking for the same level of evidence, just some would be nice; I am not big on blind faith.

 

[cablescavenger]

Funny. I think the same thing when I hear "we have no good evidence that Jesus existed." Except the "so near" part. Someone in another thread posted an interesting clip where the agnostic scholar Ehrman responds to this view stating we have more evidence for Jesus than for almost any of his contemporaries and that he doesn't know of any serious historian who doubts the that Jesus was a historical person. Angellous may correct me here (early christian studies is his area of expertise), but I haven't come across any academic publication by any historian asserting Jesus didn't exist. Lot's of blogs and sensationalist books, but nothing published in the forums (not online, I mean, for example, journals) used by specialists.

Yes. I have seen it. I do like the argument too, but it still requires faith. Sorry.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Yes. I have seen it. I do like the argument too, but it still requires faith. Sorry.

It requires a knowledge of history. Your taking a particular stance on a historical question. Now, there is a great deal of academic literature on this subject. There's also a lot of nonsense one can find on the web (among other places). So your assertion that the argument requires "faith" is trivially true (all beliefs, including the belief that my sensory perceptions are accurate involve "faith"), but it is not true in the sense the term is usually used. You are making claims about history, and as your stance runs counter to every single specialist in this area (or at least, all the academic literature), the natural question is: on what do you base your belief that Jesus did not exist? What, of the vast literature, have you read?

 

[outhouse]

Yes. I have seen it. I do like the argument too, but it still requires faith. Sorry.

if jesus didnt exist

would that not mean that paul had to fabricate the whole movement?


while I agree biblical jesus did not exist, theres more then enough evidence left to leave a trail of crumbs to build a figure of a movement without using faith.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

yes but im asking for you to prove this has historicity outside the bible.



if written in only scripture it reflects bibical jesus over historical jesus, and has little historicity

As you can imagine, that evidence is rather thin.

The earliest Christian artwork appears in Rome in about 250CE, which is roughly the time that the oldest manuscripts appear.

With the earlier artwork, it's hard to distinguish it from Jewish and Roman stories.

The most reliable method to guess the number of Christians is homes (where they worshipped) times how many households are listed in Paul times how many people those households could comfortably accomodate. But with Jesus, it's more difficult because there aren't a given number of households, and aside from early Christian writings there isn't much evidence for anything.

Christianity was an emerging religion that gained significance long after its first generation.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

if jesus didnt exist

would that not mean that paul had to fabricate the whole movement?


while I agree biblical jesus did not exist, theres more then enough evidence left to leave a trail of crumbs to build a figure of a movement without using faith.

... to the people who told it to Paul .... or the people who told him.

 

[fallingblood]

But he did. The disciples abandoned their families to follow him

I do find it funny that he jumped on my statement and claimed my credibility is being lost. You're right though. The disciples left everything they had (there is a possibility some of the wives followed, but nonetheless, he uprooted them).

 

[fallingblood]

I dont think so

jesus doesnt have that much historicity to begin with, to do anything but make guesses

And then your question is a complete waste, and you are knowingly wasting our time. You might as well have said he was a pink unicorn, and then when someone disagreed with you, stated that we can only make guesses.

So I'm guessing he walked around with a sword and screamed at little kids to get off the grass, and then had bears rip them apart. You know, like a good wizard.

 

[cablescavenger]

he stayed away from these types on purpose as they were the enemy.

I view jesus as more of a zealot then a son of god charactor.

Its a fact jews hated romans for their heavy taxation, and a figure like jesus would have looked at the jewish governement as being infected by roman control since its high priest were appointed by Pilate! You add the fact pilate hated Galilian jews and jesus was headed for trouble before he started.

he started a new religion to try and keep jewish money away from roman hands, he wanted to start something that wasnt infected by roman control. running around poor with no money or property means you have nothing to tax or take away, thus not putting money into the roman hands. he wanted no part of roman controlled judaism

The bible doesn't suggest that he avoids these people.

Sanhedrin scribes were at his trial. He cured a Centurions slave. He turned over a Jewish Temple. Jewish Priests were supposed to have turned against him (Why if he was unknown to them?). One of his followers was a scribe. Pilate crucified him, Herod was supposed to have killed the children of Bethlehem looking for him, Herod's son Agrippa is supposed to have killed James, the first Christian Martyr.

 

[Caladan]

How large was Jesus following while alive?

I'll entertain this question through the gospels narrative. John the Baptist, presaging Jesus, was very popular in Jewish society. the NT links the two people and John is interwoven into the narrative. the NT tells us that Jesus had Pharisee friends (like Nicodemus), people who believed in his abilities from among the Jewish population, Romans, and Samaritans. I also believe the NT talks about certain popularity Jesus had among the Jewish people in general, and its impossible to ignore the fact that the followers of Jesus in early Christianity, most of whom were Jews reached a certain stage that they were recognized as a sect both by other Jews and by non Jews.

 

[fallingblood]

Funny. I think the same thing when I hear "we have no good evidence that Jesus existed." Except the "so near" part. Someone in another thread posted an interesting clip where the agnostic scholar Ehrman responds to this view stating we have more evidence for Jesus than for almost any of his contemporaries and that he doesn't know of any serious historian who doubts the that Jesus was a historical person. Angellous may correct me here (early christian studies is his area of expertise), but I haven't come across any academic publication by any historian asserting Jesus didn't exist. Lot's of blogs and sensationalist books, but nothing published in the forums (not online, I mean, for example, journals) used by specialists.

There were some very early scholars who subscribed to this idea. Schweitzer mentions one (I'm blanking on his name), but he was mainly just dismissed. Today, there is Robert M. Price, who has a Ph.D in New Testament, but he seems more agnostic on the subject. And then there is Richard Carrier, but he has a degree in Classicist. But I don't think he has published anything on the subject yet. And he is not a die hard of the idea either.

Incidentally, one of the bigger plays, G.A. Wells (was a professor of German) backed off from the Jesus myth idea.

But no, I don't think recently there has been anything used by specialists. Robert Price was included in a book called Five Views of Jesus, but he was pretty much destroyed.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

There were some very early scholars who subscribed to this idea. Schweitzer mentions one (I'm blanking on his name), but he was mainly just dismissed. Today, there is Robert M. Price, who has a Ph.D in New Testament, but he seems more agnostic on the subject.

Price is, if I recall, rather clear that he doesn't believe in the historical Jesus. I've only read his contributions to The Historical Jesus: Five Views. I have the book so I can look again. But while he and Carrier are historians, neither have published anything in any academic work. Carrier has written a lot of blogs, and Price some popular books, but as far as I'm aware nothing published through academic venues.

But no, I don't think recently there has been anything used by specialists. Robert Price was included in a book called Five Views of Jesus, but he was pretty much destroyed.

You've read it too. I'll have to go back and look. I thought he was pretty clear on the non-historicity.

EDIT: So I checked. It seems he does entertain the possbility that there may have been a man behind them myth.

 

[cablescavenger]

if jesus didnt exist

would that not mean that paul had to fabricate the whole movement?


while I agree biblical jesus did not exist, theres more then enough evidence left to leave a trail of crumbs to build a figure of a movement without using faith.

I am not saying he did or didn't because I don't know, but if Jesus didn't exist, someone would have had to have created him. Why not Paul?
He seemed to write a few books and a lot of the early forgeries were claiming to be Paul, he seemed to be the authority after the fact.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Why not Paul?
He seemed to write a few books and a lot of the early forgeries were claiming to be Paul, he seemed to be the authority after the fact.

First, Paul wrote letters, not books. And they were letters to communities of Jesus' followers. Second, if one posits he created some Christ myth, then we run into several problems:
1) Paul's letters reflect his lower status in the church. Peter, for example, had more authority than Paul.
2) Paul's letters were written to places where other followers of Jesus, including those who actually knew him, were said to have lived or visisted. If he was making it all up, then why would anybody listen to him?
3) Paul and Josephus both refer to James, the brother of Jesus. Kind of hard for a myth to have a living relative.
4) None of the gospel authors show any awareness of Paul's letters, and the author of Luke/Acts was around when Paul was, so we have an independent account of Paul's subordinate position to those who actually knew Jesus when he was alive.

 

[outhouse]

... to the people who told it to Paul .... or the people who told him.

good point

i didnt put any weight in paul fabricating it.


more or less trying to find out his alternate view since he finds no historicity in what most historians follow

 

[outhouse]

I do find it funny that he jumped on my statement and claimed my credibility is being lost. You're right though. The disciples left everything they had (there is a possibility some of the wives followed, but nonetheless, he uprooted them).

it was a bit of a low blow againt you agree, and I do apologize, but you jumped in and gave historicity to possible families that may or may not exist.

we do not know how many people followed him from town to town, we dont even know if he just took boat rides with the inner 4 while in their town let alone say he took people away from families.

in that time leaving a poverty striken mother and children at home would be a death sentance for the whole family had a disciple walked away from it all. I find the whole notion ludicrious.