Help with understanding (page 5)

adjusted knowledge

Doltologist

he Josephus references were written in AD 93/94. One, even christian scholars agree, was tampered with by early christians though to what extent isn't know although the core document was still thought to be intact.

Could you give me a reference to those of scholarly repute that believe the text that referenced Jesus was tampered with? Also what text exactly is being disputed as a forgery?

Half banana

Josephus’ mention of Jesus had long ago been dismissed by textual scholars in the past as a forged insert into his text... but Christians now, in their desperate need to find Jesus as a real person, have resurrected the matter again in an attempt to make Jesus real.

Who are the textual scholars you are referencing and what specific insert is the claimed forgery?

Doltologist

Adjusted Knowledge:

Could you give me a reference to those of scholarly repute that believe the text that referenced Jesus was tampered with? Also what text exactly is being disputed as a forgery?

Suggest that you take the time to research the area yourself, rather than me point you in a given direction. That way, when you arrive at a conclusion, it will be one that you have arrived at and the one that you will agree with and trust. I could suggest Carrier as a starting point?

However, I think that it's important to look at this issue and its many facets as a whole rather than piecemeal. For example, how come that incidents that supposedly happened to jesus also happened to a number of historical deities too (eg. the resurrection?). Are we to believe that so many coincidences are realistic or are we to believe that jesus was a composite of historic deities? What are we to make of the fact that in spite of the plethora of miracles supposedly performed by jesus there is no primary source evidence? I could go on.

The existence of god is now under attack from science. It's not that science is out to disprove god, it's just that, in the search for truth, there will be some casualties and god may well be one of them, ultimately. Religion now understands this. Even the pope got involved last year when he stated that some scientists are now straying into 'god's realm'.

I now see religious groups battening down the hatches and madly scrambling for any purchase available in order that they able to defend the existence of their oh so precious Bronze Age Myth (AKA god, jesus, the babble yada, yada). Revisiting the likes of Josephus to see if they can spin and politic their way forward is just one such ploy. However, Josephus lived in Galilee about 30 mins. walk from where jesus was supposedly born. Yet, he makes no mention of this in his writings. Why? I could go on and on.

Looked at as a whole, the chances of jesus actually existing as a person aren't looking too good right now. There is no primary evidence whatsoever. The secondary evidence doesn't look good either, what little there is of it. If jesus falls, the rest falls too like a house of cards. Then, it's egg on face - BIG TIME. Then, just as Dawkins predicts, christianity could disappear in the space of a generation.

I also think that we also need to consider the following:

- Did life evolve or was it created?

- How did the universe come into being?

Science is winning both arguments at the moment and, if I was a betting man, I would want BIG, BIG, BIG odds before I bet on the big fella' me lad in the sky.

Doltologist

Adjusted Knowledge

I feel that I must apologise for my last post. It could be taken as if I am being unhelpful. I'm not. The problem is that there is this wealth of information out there. Some is well researched. Some less. so. However, just because something is less well researched doesn't make it wrong and because something is well researched doesn't make it right either. If the research is biased and/or the documents suspect, then so will be the research.

Tacitus tells us a little about jusus and christians in AD 116. From what I've read, I think that Tacitus is genuine. However, what was his source? He tells us not. At best, Tacitus can only be considered a tertiary source, even at best. I'm not saying that Tacitus was lying but, it is possible that what he wrote was unwittingly based on lie.

Josephus also tells us about jesus in AD 93/94. From what I've read, I think that the original Josphus text was genuine. I also believe that the text relating to jesus was an insert by early christians. Regardless, it's still a secondary source, even at best.

I could go on but, at the end of the day, the evidence that jesus lived an earthly life is flimsy. Basically, even at this point, even with all of our technology, we do not have a definitive answer. It pains me to say this but it all comes down to 'probabilities'. I hate that word. It hurts my brain but that's where we are at.

The more wide the view I take of this whole area, the more convinced I get that god, jesus and the babble are the biggest hoax in Man's chequered history, PROBABLY. However, we must all seek our own truth because, at the end of the day, belief is a personal thing. That's why I suggest you do your own research and come to your own conclusion.

The great pity in all of this is RELIGION - One of Man's greatest mistakes.

adjusted knowledge

Suggest that you take the time to research the area yourself, rather than me point you in a given direction.

The statement "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" was the obscured statement I was referencing in my original response. It is agreed by a majority of scholars that this statement is authentic. My reference: Louis Feldman American Professor of classic literature .

Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence by Robert E. Van Voorst pg 88

Josephus: The Essential Works by Flavius Josephus and Paul L. Maier 1995 pg 285

I personally don't know if Jesus exist, nor does anyone alive. However, your question was related to why people believe in him. I answered because of fear of death, and since there are some references to him by Josephus.

This thread wasn't originally an argument for the support or denial of the existent of Jesus, nor do I make an attempt at such a statement. I'm only stating why people believe in him, and now that not all believe the references in Josephus are not authentic as stated by you.

Doltologist

Adjusted Knowledge

Got to go out now. However, I would like to continue this discussion if I may.

Talk later.

doofdaddy

I (currently) see belief in god/jesus this way.

Humans since evolving to self awareness (conscious) became terrified of being alone, to being if you like the ultimate decision maker for themselves and any who relied on them. Parents take this role but once we become adults we become personally responsible for our actions and inevitable errors. That's how we learn and continue to evolve.

If I pray to the spirit of my prey I will succeed in the hunt. Not such a stretch to say if I pray to god/jesus I will get everlasting life.

Both infantile, superstitious and stunt our growth as humans.

never a jw

The diverse life on Earth, our perfect ecosystem, and our incredibly complex body and mind is more than enough proof that a Creator does exist. How? from Tenacious

Perfect ecosystem? Really?

Creator? Why not? Just not the one in the Bible, not an anthropomorphic one, not one that breaks the laws of the Universe to please the desires contained in millions of prayers around the world.

What is left is an amazing amount of energy and matter that is constantly in flux, always subject to the immutable laws of physics of the universe, not the capricious human desires. If you want to call that energy God, that's fine with me. I call it energy, because this name describes better what it is and what it does. The meaning of the word God varies wildly from human to human, even in members of the same cult.

Doltologist

Adjusted Knowledge

A few months ago, I couldn't sleep one night. I wasn't feeling particularly well either and was just channel surfing when I came across a TV program which compared the old gods (Rome & Greece etc) with the christian god.

I didn't fully appreciate it at the time due my illness but the more I think about it, and still do today, the better I think the program was. It's a great pity that I can't remember the name of the program.

Basically, it stated that until the 13 Century, when christianity was unfortunately really taking hold in Europe, Man wasn't thought to be afraid of death to the same extent as he is now. Prior to the 13 century, Man just accepted death, well, as part of life, really, if that makes sense. The program insinuated that the fear of death was created by christianity.

Under the old regime of multiple deities, Man went to the 'Afterlife', for want of a better world, when he died. It's what naturally happened. There wasn't an 'Afterlife' for the rich and one for the poor nor was there one for the good and another for the bad. There was just one afterlife and, when you died, that's where you went.

Then, the christards came along and change all that. Now, there were two 'afterlifes'. One was called heaven, where all the good people went and those bad people who could afford to leave the church lots of money and land. The other was called hell where the bad people went and the rich bad people who weren't gullible enough to be taken in by the christards.

So, yes, Man needs to believe in god because he's afraid of death but, it was christianity that created the fear of death in the first place.

adjusted knowledge

I have not seen that program, but am interested in viewing it. I was required to write a research paper on ancient writers for one of my humanities courses at college. Your topic brings up a little of my memory on what I wrote. This research project I worked on was in the 90's, and my memory is failing me. Perhaps you or someone on this thread could help me recall a particular word I'm struggling to remember.

When someone copies a text and changes or adds to it to support a particular belief (Christianity), there is a specific word for this action. I can't recall it and now it is like a little gnat in my head. The word was used often when discussing the copying and translation of Josephus' works.

Half banana

@ adjusted,I haven’t got much time to spare at the moment but copious discussions of Josephus’ three references to a Christ are found under the scholarly heading of Testimonium Flavianum. This subject is so important that over the centuries it has accumulated more interest and research than you can throw a stick at; it is vast! Note how The English writer Thackeray analysed his writing style and recorded how many times J used each repeated expression. Amongst the problems incurred are the viewpoint of the reviewer, like the shaman’s divination device; the results often confirm the psychological bias. It is also to be remembered there were many christs before Jesus and in the first century it seems from my reading of events his name is not mentioned anywhere and only appears perhaps as late as the end of the second.

Help with understanding

Share this