I was joking. I just don't really understand how some people can take the historicity of one for granted and reject the other. Both were rather insignificant on the international scene during their lifetimes.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why the Jesus Myth is illogical.
- Thread starter fallingblood
- Start date
I was joking. I just don't really understand how some people can take the historicity of one for granted and reject the other. Both were rather insignificant on the international scene during their lifetimes.
Ah. My mistake.
I'm sure most mythicists would be happy to proclaim we don't have any good evidence for a historical John the Baptist either.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Yeah, that's why Herod had J the B killed, because he was insignificant? Yeah, that's it.
Yeah, that's why Herod had J the B killed, because he was insignificant? Yeah, that's it.
Do you know what international means?
Yeah, that's why Herod had J the B killed, because he was insignificant? Yeah, that's it.
He was popular enough among the Jews for Herod to see him as a threat, but how many people outside of Palestine actually heard of him?
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
His baptism was well known way beyond Palestine if we can believe anything we read of in Acts. 24Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, well versed in the scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the Spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John.
Paul himself had to write to the Corinthians because Apollos was infringing on his turf.
"I have been told . . . that there is quarrelling among you . . . that each of you is saying: 'I am for Paul,' or 'I am for Apollos,' or 'I follow Cephas' or 'I Christ'." (1 Cor. 1:11-12)
Josephus apparently wrote of him while in Rome.
Last edited:
There's a lot in Acts that's historically questionable. Besides, by your logic, isn't it irrelevant?
But Josephus was a native of Palestine. If both his references to Jesus in Antiquities are forged, why such certainty that his passage about John is authentic?
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
You can assess Acts for yourself.
Considering Josephus passages relating to Christian themes, concerns do remain.
Last edited:
logician
Well-Known Member
So you accept the possibility they are forged?
No doubt. The first reference likely is a forgery. Arguments to discredit the second, however, aren't so convincing.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Acts was written in the 90's, thirty years after James the Just was supposedly killed according to Josephus yet the author of Acts fails to mention James the Just, nor his ministry, nor his martyr. Go figure. Perhaps it's in Josephus' Antiquities because Christians put it there.
That was hardly Luke's purpose for writing Acts.
Meh. Although it's not impossible that the phrase "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ" began as a scribal note, it's far from conclusive. From all the scholarly literature I've read, the phrase is most likely original to Josephus. Christians would have been well known in Rome in the 90's and it would have been unnecessary for Josephus to introduce Jesus earlier in his work. Also, James and Josephus lived in Jerusalem around the same time so it's not impossible that they would have bumped shoulders from time to time.
Last edited:
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Actually it was his purpose to write of the apostles.
If Christians were well known then why didn't any non-Christians write of them in the first century? Maybe you're allowing your imagination to run away with yourself.
Last edited:
They did.
Thanks dogsgod. Yes. I meant that. I also meant that the Krishna is my unparted consciousness where i go every night. Can this be untrue for any one? What is most adorable to all without exception?
Without stoking the ego, i wish to relate a small story here. About 15 years ago my daughter was learning to add 1 and 1 etc., from her mother. On being able to proceed from 1+1=2 to 1+2=3, she was thrilled and asked her mother "ye papa ko aata hai?" (Can Pop do this?").
Sometimes, i get the feeling of such innocence about the christians.All is well. All is good.
Regards