The case for the Historical Jesus

Nope .  You offered him an invitation.   The brother only mentioned him as part of a related post

 And so it should be. 

Until they are politely asked to leave.

--> @Tradesecret

 Ethan gets more mentions than the rest of you together - 

  

Yes, 

for all the wrong reasons.  Public Moderation Log (debateart.com)

My thread is open to all and everyone 

And so it should be. 

Until they are politely asked to leave.

No one has been asked to leave on this thread.

I know. That will be because no one is wilfully derailing your thread and taking it off topic..... except you.

Everyone needs a chance to say where they stand with the Historical Jesus.

Everyone needs a chance to say where they stand with the Historical Jesus.

--> @Shila

Everyone needs a chance to say where they stand with the Historical Jesus.

everyone needs a chance to say where they stand on the historical joseph smith

everyone needs a chance to say where they stand on the historical confucius 

everyone needs a chance to say where they stand on the historical prophet muhammad 

everyone needs a chance to say where they stand on the historical abraham

everyone needs a chance to say where they stand on the historical jemima wilkinson

But this thread is only about the historical Jesus. Look for other threads specific to your historical champion.

for instance, the Golden Rule "do unto others", is believed by some to have originated with Confucius. This not to reduce the import in any way.

Various expressions of this rule can be found in the tenets of most religions and creeds through the ages, 

Were you of the opinion that people think Jesus invented religion?

The historical Jesus had a movement following after him,

 So had all the others until their time was up and along came a new 'god' on the block when the skies moved into a new age.  <<< you should seriously consider that.

I actually had already seriously considered that there were other people with followers both before and after Jesus,

what is the significance of that, how does pointing that out serve your agenda?

The Gospels are not simply about what happened to Jesus, they are also about what happened to Jesus’ followers, who experienced His continuing presence as a living reality long after his death.

Well, if one wanted to continue a movement after it lost its leader, that is the "vision" and image I would be promoting.

And you think being a catalyst for a movement that two thousand years later is two billion strong, amounts to “no change”, 

  The historical Jesus didn’t found the Christian church by his ministry, the church came into being after His death, it is the resurrection that is the starting point of Christian religion. 

(A) And I believe that the Jew Jesus would have been absolutely appalled that a whole new religion had sprang up in his name.

I would agree with that speculation, I think early Christianity was a movement within Judaism that was tolerated until the destruction of the second temple, afterward it was seen as a threat to traditional Judaism and rejected as having moved far enough away from traditional Judaism to no be a separate religion.

An honest reading of what he actually said and did indicates that he was a Jewish rabbi who walked in the tradition of the prophets, was a teacher, a healer and wonderworker, a man that challenged prevailing systems of purity while associating with the marginal elements of society. 

 I can agree with some of that. But it is not unusual for say a politician to come out on the side of the poor and disenfranchised and that claims to " feel you pain" is it?  Seriously what better and more fertile place to gather new recruits?  And why? because this is where one will find the numbers. There are more of "us" than there are "them", that is why?

Is this conspiracy scholarship, do you think Jesus was trying to get elected?  What office do you think he was campaigning for? 

There is no historical evidence that he ever intended to establish a new set of religious dogmas or found a new religion.

 I agree see (A) above. It was those that came after and maybe the few remaining members of the original movement. and we have to consider that which Jesus himself is alleged to have said " I have not come to change the law". 

Yep, I’ve considered that, and the point you are making again?

 

(a)It appears that you are trying to make an argument of some kind, it’s just not clear what it is you are arguing.  If you were to have made you point, what would be the conclusion?

His teaching "astonished" those who heard him.

Maybe it did. But again, this is nothing new. He was speaking to a new generation of a nation that had been under one foreign rule) or another for hundreds of years and heir gods by the time Jesus made his appearance there had been many "messiahs" come and go.

OK, and you were thinking that there are people who think that Jesus was the first person in history to “astonish” those who heard him?  How doesn’t pointing out that he wasn’t serve you agenda, what is the point?

There could be an entirely different answer to this if ,Jesus survived the cross,

OK, do tell, what changed only if Jesus survived the cross? 

which is what I believe.

Do you think that you are the first person in history to believe that? 

Also, how does your assertion relate to your BOP game,

is there a burden of proof that Jesus survived the cross,

or do you have a “get out of BOP free” card, or maybe you are wearing your cloak of BOP invisibility?

the point here is

even if the person's existence is verified

that doesn't somehow make all their stories automatically true

the point here is

even if the person's existence is verified

that doesn't somehow make all their stories automatically true

If the persons existence is verified then that person becomes a historical fact.

Stories about the person can be verified through eyewitness accounts. But the persons existence is no longer in doubt.

--> @Tradesecret

 Ethan gets more mentions than the rest of you together - 

  

Yes, 

for all the wrong reasons.  Public Moderation Log (debateart.com)

The link says Ethang was banned for sexual harassment.

Is the Reverend defending his actions?

the point here is

even if the person's existence is verified

that doesn't somehow make all their stories automatically true

even if the jesus stories are based on a real person

that doesn't make any of the "eyewitness accounts" magically true

Maybe if you followed the topic in each thread  instead of making it all about your depravity and gender dysphoria you  might get your views across as a Reverend  and not what you are perceived as to the members.

But even that gets up your nose doesn't it Stephen.

But the persons existence is no longer in doubt.

--> @Shila

Maybe if you followed the topic in each thread  instead of making it all about your depravity and gender dysphoria you  might get your views across as a Reverend  and not what you are perceived as to the members.

I'm not particularly interested in pursuing a conversation which has gone down so many rabbits holes by those involved - and without any particular parameters in which to make a point.  To me it looks primarily like you and Stephen are measuring each other up. the rest of those involved are along for the ride and obviously don't have anything better to do. 

your sources can still be in doubt

do you think the epic of gilgamesh is true because it is based on a historical king ?

or the legends of king arthur, which are also apparently based on a historical figure ?

for instance, the Golden Rule "do unto others", is believed by some to have originated with Confucius. This not to reduce the import in any way.

Various expressions of this rule can be found in the tenets of most religions and creeds through the ages, 

That is my point. Fluffy sayings, old or new are the order of the day when change/revolution is the intended goal. 

Were you of the opinion that people think Jesus invented religion?

No. Stop being so silly.

The historical Jesus had a movement following after him,

 So had all the others until their time was up and along came a new 'god' on the block when the skies moved into a new age.  <<< you should seriously consider that.

I actually had already seriously considered that there were other people with followers both before and after Jesus,

Then you will understand that anyone educated enough will and is able to rally around him supporters, especially from among the poor and disenfranchised (the dead) as I have already explained above. And especially a leader with manifesto of freeing a nation from invading oppressors. This what was expected from a "Messiah". This is what the people expected, and this is what the people had been waiting for. And many had come and gone before Jesus, and they, like him failed miserably.

what is the significance of that, how does pointing that out serve your agenda?

I don't have an agenda. But Jesus did. He believed himself to be rightful heir to the throne. And he may well have had a case considering both Herod and the priesthood were all given their positions by Rome. I am simply pointing out that any charismatic leader with promises of a better life will always,  and have always, garnered followers especially from among the ignorant poor and disenfranchised .... and let's not forget the superstitious. In Jesus' case the larger part his followers came from among the poor of Galilee the heartland of the zealots who hated Roman and anything Roman. Nearly all of his inner circle were zealots.

The Gospels are not simply about what happened to Jesus, they are also about what happened to Jesus’ followers, who experienced His continuing presence as a living reality long after his death.

Well, if one wanted to continue a movement after it lost its leader, that is the "vision" and image I would be promoting.

And you think being a catalyst for a movement that two thousand years later is two billion strong, amounts to “no change”, 

I asked you what Jesus had changed in the time of his short ministry?  Which was nothing. After the crucifixions the puppet king Herod was still in place and so were the puppet priests. Palestine was still under the Roman yoke and Jerusalem under Roman occupation. What came centuries after is completely another story. And nothing to do with the living historical JEW man that believed he should have been king of Jerusalem.

  The historical Jesus didn’t found the Christian church by his ministry, the church came into being after His death, it is the resurrection that is the starting point of Christian religion. 

(A) And I believe that the Jew Jesus would have been absolutely appalled that a whole new religion had sprang up in his name.

I would agree with that speculation, I think early Christianity was a movement within Judaism that was tolerated until the destruction of the second temple, afterward it was seen as a threat to traditional Judaism and rejected as having moved far enough away from traditional Judaism to no be a separate religion.

Well going by the very little we do know about Jesus the man; it is worth remembering that we know a lot more about Palestine in the 1st century.  

An honest reading of what he actually said and did indicates that he was a Jewish rabbi who walked in the tradition of the prophets, was a teacher, a healer and wonderworker, a man that challenged prevailing systems of purity while associating with the marginal elements of society. 

 I can agree with some of that. But it is not unusual for say a politician to come out on the side of the poor and disenfranchised and that claims to " feel you pain" is it?  Seriously what better and more fertile place to gather new recruits?  And why? because this is where one will find the numbers. There are more of "us" than there are "them", that is why?

Is this conspiracy scholarship, do you think Jesus was trying to get elected?  What office do you think he was campaigning for? 

The highest office in the land, KINGSHIP FFS , how many times!!!! He was trying to garner supporters that would support his claim to the throne. And a close reading of the scripture will show that he had friends and supporters in high places... and low places that believed or at least agreed him to be rightful heir.

There is no historical evidence that he ever intended to establish a new set of religious dogmas or found a new religion.

 I agree see (A) above. It was those that came after and maybe the few remaining members of the original movement. and we have to consider that which Jesus himself is alleged to have said " I have not come to change the law". 

Yep, I’ve considered that, and the point you are making again?

 

(a)It appears that you are trying to make an argument of some kind, it’s just not clear what it is you are arguing.  If you were to have made you point, what would be the conclusion?

 I am. My argument is that the man Jesus, because his time was approaching, came out of exile to claim what he believed was rightfully his. I also believe he was building an army to take what was his by force if he couldn't reach his goal through diplomacy.

But II cannot prove it no more than you can prove Jesus literally and physically walked on water.

His teaching "astonished" those who heard him.

Maybe it did. But again, this is nothing new. He was speaking to a new generation of a nation that had been under one foreign rule) or another for hundreds of years and heir gods by the time Jesus made his appearance there had been many "messiahs" come and go.

OK, and you were thinking that there are people who think that Jesus was the first person in history to “astonish” those who heard him?  How doesn’t pointing out that he wasn’t serve you agenda, what is the point?

You keep saying I have an agenda. I don't.  I am simply putting my own theory and opinions as I see them. These theories and opinions come from the scriptures themselves. And NO, I don't believe Jesus was "the first person to astonish" anyone. I thought I'd made that clear. There had been plenty of pretenders to the title of Messiah before and since. And in this regard, Jesus was no exception.  

There could be an entirely different answer to this if ,Jesus survived the cross,

OK, do tell, what changed only if Jesus survived the cross? 

This thread is not the place to discuss that. It would take a completely new thread and a lot of hours. But that shouldn't concern you in the slightest, should it? If you are of the belief that a three-day old rotting and stinking corpse came back to life and then took himself off up into the sky?

which is what I believe.

Do you think that you are the first person in history to believe that? 

 I know I'm not. I also know that there are better qualified people than myself that have proposed this theory<< before I was probably even born. So you can set your veiled sarcastic slights aside if you wish to discuss this subject further with me. 

Also, how does your assertion relate to your BOP game,

In what sense? Surviving the cross?

is there a burden of proof that Jesus survived the cross,

(1) There is. And just like the burden of proof relating to the existence of an historical biblical Jesus, the 'evidence' is very scant. (2) The difference here though is that I can admit that I cannot prove my beliefs, or opinions and I always have done. Unlike the devout that believe their "faith" has all the answers, when it doesn't in the real world.   "Because god or the bible says so" just does not work for the 21st century mind. 

or do you have a “get out of BOP free” card, or maybe you are wearing your cloak of BOP invisibility?

If you wish to continue this conversation with me, stop being so fkn childish and read (1) & (2) above.

Here you are admitting you are not particularly interested in pursuing a conversation which has gone down so many rabbits holes. But you make no attempt to address your depravity and gender dysphoria.

You also appear very judgemental despite links and evidence that confirm  your depravity and gender dysphoria.

Everyone appears to you like they don't have anything better to do. But you are the only one obsessed with your depravity and gender dysphoria.

Let us help you Reverend so you can continue your mission to help others discover the historical and biblical Jesus,

You still seem to have me confused with someone who gives a crap about what you think,....... Did you want me to be someone who gives a crap? ...... And you were hoping I would give a crap, 

I'm sorry, but that’s just not my thing......

 you think I have problems!

 you think I have problems!

I know you do.

You still seem to have me confused with someone who gives a crap about what you think,....... Did you want me to be someone who gives a crap? ...... And you were hoping I would give a crap, 

I'm sorry, but that’s just not my thing......

oh dear. And there was me thinking you did give crap ethang,   Didn't take too long to expose you did it thicko.😂😂