How would an Historical JC be Defined?

[outhouse]

Ok.... so JtB might not have had leather girdle etc.... sounds like you have put that description into the improbable box. No probs.
.

More I dont think so then improbable.

Galilean Fishing Economy

Here is a great link on Galilee with some valuable cultural information regarding socioeconomics and life in general


and the severe Galilean taxation

 

[Copernicus]

These people wrote in allegory and mythology when creating theology.

Not always but generally they did.

Thus, its more then probable a man was factually martyred at Passover and placed on a cross after fighting the corruption in the temple. Mythology developed in cross culturtal oral traditions and were later recorded as the mythology gained importance to their lives.

How can you possibly assess probability here? To me, it is little different from Carrier invoking Bayesian reasoning to assess the improbability of Jesus. Passover was actually the traditional time of year for dying godmen to get resurrected--a Spring "renewal" event--so that was a convenient time for the crucifixion to take place. It resonated with other legends. I certainly agree with your point about the influence of local cultural myths, but I do not understand your continual endorsement of certain details that could easily have been as apocryphal as the details you discard. In the end, we have people fighting over whose speculation sounds the most credible, even though the record is obscure and muddled.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

In the end, we have people fighting over whose speculation sounds the most credible, even though the record is obscure and muddled.

... or whose speculation is most comforting.

 

[steeltoes]

... or whose speculation is most comforting.

You got THAT right.

 

[outhouse]

How can you possibly assess probability here? To me, it is little different from Carrier invoking Bayesian reasoning to assess the improbability of Jesus. Passover was actually the traditional time of year for dying godmen to get resurrected--a Spring "renewal" event--so that was a convenient time for the crucifixion to take place. It resonated with other legends. I certainly agree with your point about the influence of local cultural myths, but I do not understand your continual endorsement of certain details that could easily have been as apocryphal as the details you discard. In the end, we have people fighting over whose speculation sounds the most credible, even though the record is obscure and muddled.

Passover was a time of celibration of freedom from oppresors, correct?

People fighting this oppression would be normal. Would it not?

There was a extreme socioeconomic difference between Hebrews and Hellenistic Judaism, was there not?

Would 400,000 possible witnesses to a event, be able to spread mythology through the diaspora?


Hellenistic Proselytes to Judaism wanted to worship the one powerful god, but did
not want to convert to Judaism, no adult really wants his winky clipped. This sect of Judaism was ready to form its own sect and did. There is no reason to invent a peasant Galilean teacher to follow. The whole thing is a embarrassment if one was going to create a mighty deity to rival the emperors divinity also called the "son of god"

Im using cultural anthropology to help define probability and plausibility.

 

[oldbadger]

More I dont think so then improbable.

Galilean Fishing Economy

Here is a great link on Galilee with some valuable cultural information regarding socioeconomics and life in general


and the severe Galilean taxation

Yes..... I've got the 'taxation diagram'. OK, very heavy fees and taxes. I don't know where the diagram came from or how it was drawn up, but, fair enough.

However, licences to fish were tightly controlled, which probably meant that catches were consistent and large (despite Jesus having to give fishing instructions!!).

But.... yes..... taxation looks to have been high.

I've read somewhere that 50% of the walnut crop was taken for taxation, etc.

 

[steeltoes]

Passover was a time of celibration of freedom from oppresors, correct?

People fighting this oppression would be normal. Would it not?

There was a extreme socioeconomic difference between Hebrews and Hellenistic Judaism, was there not?

Would 400,000 possible witnesses to a event, be able to spread mythology through the diaspora?


Hellenistic Proselytes to Judaism wanted to worship the one powerful god, but did
not want to convert to Judaism, no adult really wants his winky clipped. This sect of Judaism was ready to form its own sect and did. There is no reason to invent a peasant Galilean teacher to follow. The whole thing is a embarrassment if one was going to create a mighty deity to rival the emperors divinity also called the "son of god"

Im using cultural anthropology to help define probability and plausibility.

I think you are just dreaming. 400,000 witnesses and one storied account drawn from Isaiah, Psalms and so on written many years after the so called fact, what are the odds of that?

 

[outhouse]

Yes..... I've got the 'taxation diagram'. OK, very heavy fees and taxes. I don't know where the diagram came from or how it was drawn up, but, fair enough.

However, licences to fish were tightly controlled, which probably meant that catches were consistent and large (despite Jesus having to give fishing instructions!!).

But.... yes..... taxation looks to have been high.

I've read somewhere that 50% of the walnut crop was taken for taxation, etc.

and 10% of crops left for the hungry

 

[outhouse]

I think you are just dreaming. 400,000 witnesses and one storied account drawn from Isaiah, Psalms and so on written many years after the so called fact, what are the odds of that?

What are you talking about.

The 400,000 is from E.P.Sanders. With Jerusalem full, I have no problem with that number. They had the water, sewage tunnels and sheep were brought in in advance for the celebration. At minimum there would have been 200,000.

You might have forgotten, at one time this was a wonder of the world and one of the best temples ever built. These peasants would have been awestruck. I think modern man would for that matter.

In those years we also had the crowded Passover

We also know from that time of a Roman guard who pulled out his junk, and started a riot in which tens of thousands of Hebrews and Gentiles and Proselytes were killed.

Another Passover a old man was trampled, thus we have another name the "trampling Passover" which I believe was part of the crowded Passover.

Josephas goes into detail for some of those.

 

[steeltoes]

What are you talking about.

The 400,000 is from E.P.Sanders. With Jerusalem full, I have no problem with that number. They had the water, sewage tunnels and sheep were brought in in advance for the celebration. At minimum there would have been 200,000.

You might have forgotten, at one time this was a wonder of the world and one of the best temples ever built. These peasants would have been awestruck. I think modern man would for that matter.

In those years we also had the crowded Passover

We also know from that time of a Roman guard who pulled out his junk, and started a riot in which tens of thousands of Hebrews and Gentiles and Proselytes were killed.

Another Passover a old man was trampled, thus we have another name the "trampling Passover" which I believe was part of the crowded Passover.

Josephas goes into detail for some of those.

I'm not doubting the 400,000, let's go with it for argument's sake, I'm saying 400,000 people and not an eye witness account. Maybe it didn't happen for all we know. Maybe people liked a story once it caught on by the end of the second century and believed there was an historical basis to it.

 

[outhouse]

I'm not doubting the 400,000, let's go with it for argument's sake, I'm saying 400,000 people and not an eye witness account. Maybe it didn't happen for all we know. Maybe people liked a story once it caught on by the end of the second century and believed there was an historical basis to it.

Its why I use the word possible witnesses.


My point is if even 100,000 knew what was going on, this is the event that made Jesus famous, his death.

Now we are talking about a oral culture, and this would have been the talk of the event. No death at Passover, and no martyrdom and no legends would have grown afterwards.

Remember all the authors were just filling in the blanks with what another culture were talking about a Jew 30-40 years previously in cities far away from the actual events at a Passover.

For the most part, the NT deals with the last week and death and perceived resurrection of a man at Passover.

 

[roger1440]

That's not really true. He has written some great material that is well accepted by scholars in those fields. He is a respected scholar, who has the credentials. He may explore ideas that many wouldn't venture, but he does provide evidence for his claims, and is willing to correct them based on critiques.

After reading you guys argue back and about James tabor’s credibility I was motivated to read, “The Jesus Dynasty”. One of things I had noticed is that he presents his theories as facts. I find myself constantly reading his foot notes to find out whether his claims are fact or fiction. The following is just one example. Tabor’s account in his book presents the find as a fact. Archaeologists present the same find as a theory.


The Jesus Dynasty
James D. Tabor
pages 129-130
“As I mentioned in the introduction, in December 1999, archeologist Shimon Gibson discovered a cave a few miles west of Ein kerem at a place called Suba that primitive drawings of john the Baptizer etched into its walls. It turned out to be an enormous plastered water reservoir cut out of solid bedrock in the time of Isaiah (8th century B.C.) “


Cave linked to John the Baptist
Underground pool excavated near Jerusalem
By Karin Laub
Associated Press
updated 8/16/2004 7:07:33 PM ET
“KIBBUTZ TZUBA, Israel — Archaeologists think they’ve found a cave where John the Baptist baptized many of his followers — basing their theory on thousands of shards from ritual jugs, a stone used for foot cleansing and wall carvings that tell the story of the biblical preacher….. But some scholars said Gibson’s finds aren’t enough to support his theory, and one colleague said that short of an inscription with John’s name in the cave, there could never be conclusive proof of his presence there.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5724143/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/cave-linked-john-baptist/

 

[steeltoes]

Its why I use the word possible witnesses.


My point is if even 100,000 knew what was going on, this is the event that made Jesus famous, his death.

Now we are talking about a oral culture, and this would have been the talk of the event. No death at Passover, and no martyrdom and no legends would have grown afterwards.

Remember all the authors were just filling in the blanks with what another culture were talking about a Jew 30-40 years previously in cities far away from the actual events at a Passover.

For the most part, the NT deals with the last week and death and perceived resurrection of a man at Passover.

And you know what people said back then. Amazing. There's evidence that suggests Jesus' character was lifted from Isaiah, and of events that were lifted from Psalms. You'd have much better luck looking to see what people were writing then what you claim to know about what people were saying.

 

[Copernicus]

Passover was a time of celibration of freedom from oppresors, correct?
People fighting this oppression would be normal. Would it not?

I honestly wouldn't know. Were there more revolts around the time of Passover? You shouldn't jump to a conclusion merely because you think it sounds plausible to you.

Simon of Peraea, according to Josephus, was a would-be "king of the Jews", who was slain in 4 BC, the date some scholars think Jesus was born. He was allegedly a former slave of Herod and some of his followers may have been crucified, a common Roman punishment for slaves that rebelled. Messianic scholar Israel Knohl has claimed that this event might have served as an early basis for the Jesus legend, but I don't know whether he still holds to that belief. In any case, it all comes down to whose historical speculation sounds the most convincing. The earliest Jesus tradition, according to Bart Ehrman, was the "Son of Man" version in which the Christ figure was resurrected and became divine (adopted by God) only at the point of resurrection. Maybe Jesus was thought to be a reincarnated version of Simon. Anyone can make up plausible-sounding stories.

There was a extreme socioeconomic difference between Hebrews and Hellenistic Judaism, was there not?

And that would still have been true if Jesus never existed, would it not?

Would 400,000 possible witnesses to a event, be able to spread mythology through the diaspora?

Is that what you think happened? Had there been that many witnesses, I would expect the historical record to have produced more evidence than we currently have.

Hellenistic Proselytes to Judaism wanted to worship the one powerful god, but did not want to convert to Judaism, no adult really wants his winky clipped. This sect of Judaism was ready to form its own sect and did. There is no reason to invent a peasant Galilean teacher to follow. The whole thing is a embarrassment if one was going to create a mighty deity to rival the emperors divinity also called the "son of god"

You mean that you do not find rags-to-riches stories inspiring? People wouldn't be interested in someone from humble beginnings to be resurrected as the salvation of all mankind? I don't know. It sounds like it would make a great movie script. The Greatest Story Ever Told, in fact. But you think they would have been embarrassed. I do agree with you that nobody wants to have their winky clipped.

Im using cultural anthropology to help define probability and plausibility.

No, you are not. You are just speculating on the basis of your very limited understanding of those times and the historical record. The earliest manuscripts that we use to reconstruct these stories were copies created about 1,000 years after the alleged event, and we know that they contain some errors and distortions. Moreover, the people in charge of copying and preserving the record were utterly convinced of a historical Jesus, and that bias was often reflected in the known scribal errors and interpolations. So it is hardly surprising that the best story we can construct from those records is that Jesus existed as a historical figure. And maybe he did, but the record that preserves the historical events is still severely compromised.

 

[outhouse]

And you know what people said back then. Amazing. There's evidence that suggests Jesus' character was lifted from Isaiah, and of events that were lifted from Psalms. You'd have much better luck looking to see what people were writing then what you claim to know about what people were saying.

I don't doubt for a second mythology from that part of the OT was used. We know it was.

But the historical core was not.

 

[roger1440]

And you know what people said back then. Amazing. There's evidence that suggests Jesus' character was lifted from Isaiah, and of events that were lifted from Psalms. You'd have much better luck looking to see what people were writing then what you claim to know about what people were saying.

It’s difficult to determine with certainly what in the canonical gospels are to be interpreted as metaphors, allegory or symbols. Jesus taught with parables. Parables use symbols. Maybe even Jesus was a metaphor. There is no way to know for sure. Jesus’s last week alive was spent in Jerusalem. It can be interpreted as a retelling of the creation story found in the first chapter in the book of Genesis. “By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work”. (Gen. 2:2, NIV). “When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. (John 19:30, NIV).

 

[steeltoes]

I don't doubt for a second mythology from that part of the OT was used. We know it was.

But the historical core was not.

Of course not.

 

[outhouse]

You are just trying speculating on the basis of your very limited understanding of those times and the historical record

.

I'm not trying to insult your knowledge, and have always enjoyed your post.

I would like the same in return.

At this time mythicist or mythicism of Jesus doesn't have a leg to stand on. You stated earlier in this thread you follow a the possibility of a historical Jesus, did you not?

I follow a very minimal Jesus that doesn't match biblical Jesus in any way.

If you would like to try and create a historical Jesus with your opinion backing it, I am all ears. If you were one of the few mythicist that decided to try and create a full replacement hypothesis, I would also like to hear it. To date only a few have tried and their view is easily picked a part.

Im not above learning from my peers.


If you just want to criticize my "limited" view because I have made a personal stand, please be more specific so I can address each issue.

You shouldn't jump to a conclusion merely because you think it sounds plausible to you.

Its because of the countless hours I have invested in this hobby I'm passionate about.

And not only sounding plausible, you should know there are issues not really up for debate, and there are many areas that are in a grey area where freedom of educated opinion is welcome.

I honestly wouldn't know. Were there more revolts around the time of Passover?

Yes

When did the temple fall? What time of year did the great revolt start? Passover

And that would still have been true if Jesus never existed, would it not?

Definitely

But something had to light the match. Reality does a much better job then mythology.

Is that what you think happened? Had there been that many witnesses, I would expect the historical record to have produced more evidence than we currently have.

There is no other man on the planet that has been written about so extensively.

Not only that the scripture we are left with is only a small fraction of what once was. The majority of scripture has been lost for various reasons from natural disaster and war, to theological pruning by the powers that be.

No, you are not

Yes I am.

Cultural anthropology of Johnathon Reed to be exact. Most of my view is nothing more then parroting his work. He has done most of the archeology in Sepphoris.

You are just trying speculating on the basis of your very limited understanding of those times and the historical record.

Well bud, your wrong here. Honestly, there is only so much to know here, and what there is, I have covered, but now I am adding different opinions by different scholars.

I have studied in depth here.

The earliest manuscripts that we use to reconstruct these stories were created about 1,000 years after the alleged event, and we know that they contain some errors and distortions

And yet they have not really changed the legends core or foundation at all. yes Ehrman goes into the scribal errors and the differences we have, but the work still retains almost perfectly, its original messages.

I don't hang on wording in the bible anyway, I see others doing this trying to prove personal hobby horses and most get lost. Earl Doherty is a language expert like you, but he is no scholar nor historian, and I pick his work a part debating with him one on one.

the people in charge of copying and preserving the record were utterly convinced of a historical Jesus, and that bias was often reflected in the known scribal errors and interpolations

Another reason why I don't follow wording to close.

So it is hardly surprising that the best story we can construct from those records is that Jesus existed as a historical figure.

Actually we can do a bit better then that with certainty.

A Galilean Jew who was from Nazareth and was also found in Capernaum, who lived on a staple of flat bread and olive oil and vinegar, and lentils and seasonal greens, who ate very little meat less Passover holidays. he lived in a crude field stone house packed with mud, no window and lit with one clay oil lamp. He traveled within small traditional Jewish villages that were poor. he taught and healed for food, not charging but hoping to preach around a dinner table about the kingdom of god. he made at least one trip to Jerusalem where he cause some trouble in the temple and was put to death by Romans on a cross. he did have a small handful of apostles his inner circle that were also poor 3-4 people tops.


That is my historical Jesus which matches generally with most scholarships

but the record that preserves the historical events is still severely compromised.

Agreed, I have never stated differently.


I started as a mythicist, and only through study did I change my mind. That is with the help of Fallingblood and Angellous who set me on the right track from the start

 

[outhouse]

Those would be mythicist maybe can answer this.

Why would Hellenist, Romans and Gentiles. Create a deity out of a poor oppressed peasant Galilean Jew from a poor hovel like Nazareth. Who learned under a homeless man eating bugs to survive.

Answer that with credibility, and I'm all ears.

 

[fallingblood]

After reading you guys argue back and about James tabor’s credibility I was motivated to read, “The Jesus Dynasty”. One of things I had noticed is that he presents his theories as facts. I find myself constantly reading his foot notes to find out whether his claims are fact or fiction. The following is just one example. Tabor’s account in his book presents the find as a fact. Archaeologists present the same find as a theory.

The Jesus Dynasty is one of the works of Tabor that I have found least rewarding. While it does present some very interesting ideas, and he does have support, like you said, he does imply more security in what he is saying that there probably is.

However, what has to be remembered is that this book was for a general readership. It is quite common for scholars to state their assertions more boldly in these sort of works. Part of it is that people would rather have cut and dry facts, then a detailed explanation of all the specifics of their arguments.

His scholarly work (that which is published for other scholars) is much more detailed in this sense.