Jesus Myth Theory

[tim]

X

A crucifixion of Jesu sounds right.

Yes, you've nailed it.

 

[tim]

It's organised with a purpose. And that purpose is to control people by establishing orthodoxy and doctrine that must be obeyed.

It's not doing so very well then, is it?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's not doing so very well then, is it?

Fuck me, historically it has done extraordinarily well.

And it still does very well in many parts of the world at controlling, for instance, children's education and women's reproductive rights.

 

[tim]

If there was a single, identifiable 'he'.

When did Christianity really take off as a faith? What years? Where? I'm not demanding answers, those questions are really hard to answer conclusively.

The history if the early (pre-nicean) Church is very contested and lost in the fog of time and Roman history/propaganda. Copts are all but forgotten, Christianity in lands that later became Islamic is blurred and confused. Not to mention the Roman Catholic Church, which had ~1500 years to write its own history in Europe, free from any competition whatsoever.

Copts are forgotten about? Probably not by the 5-6 million actual Copts who go about doing their distinctly Coptic religious stuff. It also ignores the millions of Ethiopian band Eritrean Christians who are part of the same broader tradition as the Copts

As to the 1,500 years to write it's own history, that ignores the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches who spent a lot of those pre-Reformation Centuries disputing with each other and the representatives of the Bishop of Rome or Bishops of Rome if we take into account all those periods when there were two or three competing medieval Popes in Rome and or Avignon.

There's also little blurred confused about the history of those churches "in the lands that later became Islamic". They, mostly members of the aforementioned Eastern and Orthodox rites kept on doing their stuff.

 

[mojo pixy]

I'm interested to understand the theory. I used to like the idea that Jesus was not a historical figure: not created as a lie but misinterpreted over the centuries. You have brought in the Flavians as a key part of this other theory and I want know what they are supposed to have done and why, and I want to do that the old-fashioned way, by arguing with people on the internet.

To be fair, I never brought the Flavians into it - they were in it from the beginning. Titus razed Jerusalem, Domitian put the Second Temple on display in Rome, Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea that essentially composed the Bible we know today. The actual questions is, where did the gospel story originate? And as far as I know, this is still an open question. I think it may have been largely composed in the library of Domitian, under the supervision of Josephus, and that it told a story of a rebellion that failed, a leader who led it and was punished for it, and Roma Victoria again so don't do what the Jews did, and slaves behave yourselves because Blessed are the meek, Turn the other cheek etc.

X

The Flavians are clearly the First Century equivalents of the Rothschild's in your conspiracy. I'm wondering what the First Century equivalent of a tin-foil hat is: a Samian-wear helmet, perhaps.

Not really. Four emperors came from that family, and three of those were intimately, famously connected with Judea, Jews and the origins of Christianity. I actually think at least some of what we inherited as Christians (I'm not, but I was baptized and confirmed so for the purposes of this post I'll own that) was the remains of some grift by Domitian, which failed because he got assassinated. But then one of the family line several generations later needed some grift of his own, to get the throne, and Christianity became his thing .. Constantine did conspire, and make war, and he won - which is why he's 'Saint' Constantine 'the Great' rather than some forgotten roman-emperor-wannabe (there are thousands of those).

Copts are forgotten about? Probably not by the 5-6 million actual Copts who go about doing their distinctly Coptic religious stuff. It also ignores the millions of Ethiopian band Eritrean Christians who are part of the same broader tradition as the Copts

Yes and the oldest church in the world is in Ethiopia IIRC. But for example in Jerusalem, they are a minor party in the governance of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Ask 100 random people to name a few sects of Christianity, and I expect Baptists, Seventh-Day Adventists and Mormons will come up far more than Coptic Orthodox (ironically, the oldest continuous sect).

As to the 1,500 years to write it's own history, that ignores the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches who spent a lot of those pre-Reformation Centuries disputing with each other and the representatives of the Bishop of Rome or Bishops of Rome if we take into account all those periods when there were two or three competing medieval Popes in Rome and or Avignon.

There's also little blurred confused about the history of those churches "in the lands that later became Islamic". They, mostly members of the aforementioned Eastern and Orthodox rites kept on doing their stuff.

And they still are - there's even a radio station that broadcasts Syrian Orthodox religious music and prayer 24/7 from Damascus. It's really nice. But again, at the Holy Sepulchre, Syrian Orthodox are junior associates like the Copts.

I'm not after a row, but frankly, there's so many ways to see The Story of Jesus and so many unknown things happened so long ago, to bring it to us, that I think it's interesting to look at any possibility that springs up. Members of the Flavius family touched Christianity in key ways, even had opportunities to mould it - indeed the last and arguably greatest of them supervised the actual creation of the actual Bible. I don't know where 'conspiracy' comes into it; just look at well-documented historical events, there are Flavian hands all over Christianity.

 

[tim]

Fuck me, historically it has done extraordinarily well.

And it still does very well in many parts of the world at controlling, for instance, children's education and women's reproductive rights.

Does it? It's quite influential in Poland, but even there still very much as an organisation co-opted by the politicians in power in the same way that the Russian Orthodox Church is in Russia. It's increasingly irrelevant in in most of the rest of Europe and the Americas and it's competing in a crowded market in much of Africa. As to reproductive rights the rapidly falling birthrate in most of the world would suggest otherwise.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Does it? It's quite influential in Poland, but even there still very much as an organisation co-opted by the politicians in power in the same way that the Russian Orthodox Church is in Russia. It's increasingly irrelevant in in most of the rest of Europe and the Americas and it's competing in a crowded market in much of Africa. As to reproductive rights the rapidly falling birthrate in most of the world would suggest otherwise.

This map hides a multitude of nuances such as term limits or funding issues, but broadly yellow and green are countries with reasonable access to abortion while orange and red are countries without reasonable access to abortion.

With some exceptions, such as Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand (Buddhism is also very hostile to abortion), the orange and red countries are overwhelmingly those colours due primarily to the influence of one or both of the two largest organised religions in the world - Christianity and Islam. In Latin America, it's specifically Roman Catholicism. Ireland, Uruguay and Argentina changed their laws only in the last couple of years.

Orthodoxy and doctrine. Developed and enforced to control people's lives.

 

[Humberto]

This is what he said:

Heaven and Earth may pass away but my words will not.

 

[JimW]

This map hides a multitude of nuances such as term limits or funding issues, but broadly yellow and green are countries with reasonable access to abortion while orange and red are countries without reasonable access to abortion.

With some exceptions, such as Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand (Buddhism is also very hostile to abortion), the orange and red countries are overwhelmingly those colours due primarily to the influence of one or both of the two largest organised religions in the world - Christianity and Islam. In Latin America, it's specifically Roman Catholicism. Ireland, Uruguay and Argentina changed their laws only in the last couple of years.

Orthodoxy and doctrine. Developed and enforced to control people's lives.

Is that map right lbj? It's got the 32 counties as all more liberal than England Scotland and Wales.

 

[8ball]

Is that map right lbj? It's got the 32 counties as all more liberal than England Scotland and Wales.

Ooh - Mr Eagle Eyes over there...

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Is that map right lbj? It's got the 32 counties as all more liberal than England Scotland and Wales.

Yeah I noticed that. It's from a human rights group. I guess the UK falls down cos of the two doctors rule. Some of the green countries there have 12-14-week limits as well. In practice, the UK (well, strictly as you say, Britain) has more liberal abortion rights than many of the green countries.

 

[8ball]

As to reproductive rights the rapidly falling birthrate in most of the world would suggest otherwise.

Interesting point, though surreptitious contraception is a much easier and safer affair than surreptitious abortion.

 

[Combustible]

The stories must necessarily have existed in oral traditions for many decades before they were written down. The most enthusiastic Jesus follower we know of, Paul, thought he knew Jesus from visions. How many of the other authors of the New Testament had similar convictions about what they thought they knew?

Paul claims that all his knowledge of Jesus was from visions and that he never met Jesus in his lifetime, but he did meet Peter and Jesus's brother James (who is also attested by Josephus). Their presence is actually a sore point for Paul, since he disagreed with them, and hence he was at pains to point out that he didn't learn about Jesus from them but that he was on an equal level of authority. Paul would hardly want to make up a fictional brother of Jesus who undermines his authority (and who's existence anyway appeared to already be a given for the communities Paul was writing to). So the Jesus myth theory would require having James together with Peter somehow making up a fictional brother who was recently crucified by the Romans, which is a much more convoluted proposal with little motivation (being crucified and resurrected was hardly in-line with messianic expectations). Whereas it is known that the Romans did crucify a number of aspiring messianic figures and other perceived leaders of rebellions, the difference this time is that some of his followers came to believe he was resurrected.

Richard Carrier accepts that Paul recognizing James as Jesus's actual brother would be strong evidence for the existence of Jesus, but he claims that Paul is not referring to a biological brother. Funnily enough this is one of the arguments used by Christian apologists, who want to claim that Mary was an eternal virgin and therefore Jesus couldn't have siblings, whereas secular scholarship supports Paul (and the gospels) referring to a biological brother.

If you require the existence of first-hand sources or eye witness accounts you would need to throw away an awful lot of historical knowledge. Even for much more prominent figures like Alexander the Great there are no surviving contemporary accounts. For an itinerant preacher who was executed by the Romans, a lack of first hand evidence is entirely expected.

 

[Dom Traynor]

Dreamtime flood myths have been traced back to real floods, some of which took place thousands of years ago.

Have they?

Until last week my partner thought Sherlock Holmes was real and a genuine British hero. She's a pretty smart person. So I don't think post contemporary accounts of Jesus indicate whether he was real or not.

 

[Santino]

Have they?

Until last week my partner thought Sherlock Holmes was real and a genuine British hero. She's a pretty smart person. So I don't think post contemporary accounts of Jesus indicate whether he was real or not.

Checkmate

 

[Carl Steele]

Until last week my partner thought Sherlock Holmes was real and a genuine British hero. She's a pretty smart person.

Some people think Sherlock fell into a waterfall and died but I used to live near Baker Street and I saw him coming out of 221B several times.

 

[tim]

Some people think Sherlock fell into a waterfall and died but I used to live near Baker Street and I saw him coming out of 221B several times.

I saw him in his sherlock cape and deerstalker collecting his other sherlock cape from dry-cleaners in Baker Street Station.

 

[Serge Forward]

Some people think Sherlock fell into a waterfall and died but I used to live near Baker Street and I saw him coming out of 221B several times.

He did die at the Riechenbach Falls but, due to popular demand, he was resurrected by Conan Doyle, his maker.

 

[tim]

It's probably softened my view that the bible was written in some form as a device to control the people.
The idea that it was easier at some point to teach stupid people that what was going on was literal (so they could get them into it) but further down the line explain the allegorys.

Why do you think people in the past were stupider than they are now?

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Why do you think people in the past were stupider than they are now?

I don't, and never said that. . . but it is rather a shame that there are people that uneducated today.

 

[tim]

My old yoga teacher did say that Paul was just as happy persecuting Christians as he was later trying to convert to Christianity.

Yes, that's what Paul himself said, perhaps they are one and the same. Anyway, just imagine the absurd claims we'll get from littlebabyjesus after he's had he's been struck temporarily blind on the road to Damask Green, Herts.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Is Jesus Mythicism the OG QAnon?

 

[Pickman's model]

Some people think Sherlock fell into a waterfall and died but I used to live near Baker Street and I saw him coming out of 221B several times.

some say the devil is dead and buried in killarney. others say he rose again and joined the british army

 

[tim]

This map hides a multitude of nuances such as term limits or funding issues, but broadly yellow and green are countries with reasonable access to abortion while orange and red are countries without reasonable access to abortion.

With some exceptions, such as Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand (Buddhism is also very hostile to abortion), the orange and red countries are overwhelmingly those colours due primarily to the influence of one or both of the two largest organised religions in the world - Christianity and Islam. In Latin America, it's specifically Roman Catholicism. Ireland, Uruguay and Argentina changed their laws only in the last couple of years.

Orthodoxy and doctrine. Developed and enforced to control people's lives.

Clearly, not a particularly accurate map as the USA is all in green and practical access to abortion in parts of the USA is extremely limited, and given the current make-up of the Supreme Court, likely to become more so. The move against abortion in the USA is spearheaded by US evangelicals, who whilst able to unite politically, belong to a myriad of conflicting sects, so clearly not led by some religious eminence grise. It's also worth remembering the fact that in Latin America Evangelical Christianity, is a more dynamic force than Roman Catholicism. Bolsonaro, for example, is from a Catholic background but worships in a Baptist Church. I'm sure there is a link between the legal status of abortion and those societies where organised religion, be it: Buddism, Islam, or Christianity. That doesn't prove that those societies are under the control of conspiratorial religious elites, although they are often governed by socially conservative political parties. The Latin American Juntas that dominated the region in the last half of the Twentieth Century didn't seem to find it difficult to persecute troublesome priests whilst simultaneously restricting women's right to choose. As to Islam, outwith Iran and, for the moment in a not particularly systematic way, Afghanistan religious elites are controlled and sanctioned by the state. In Saudi Arabia, the Princes have always been keen to encourage their favoured sect, but both in the present and in the past have had no compunction about punishing its members when they overstep the mark. The Mullahs, Gurus and Priests are part of the boot; they are not the foot.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You seem to have an extremely binary view of this, which is one of the reasons we're talking past one another. Control and influence don't have to be absolute to exist. I at no point implied that they did. But it is very much my contention that the restriction of women's reproductive rights across the world right now can be best understood as having come about under the very strong influence of the dogmas of various organised religions. That's it. Doesn't dismiss the idea that there are dissenting views within those religions nor any other things you seem to have read into my post. Doesn't imply that I think there is some single controlling force either. Control doesn't have to work like that.

Another reason we're talking past one another is that I don't really give a shit whether or not a historical Jesus existed. My interest is far more in the social functions that are performed by organised religions such as Christianity, whose interests those functions serve, and the ways in which the religions' teachings have been shaped in order to perform those social functions. Controlling reproduction has long been central to those social functions.

 

[Pickman's model]

Another reason we're talking past one another is that I don't really give a shit whether or not a historical Jesus existed.

surprised to see you on this thread then

 

[AmateurAgitator]

Paul claims that all his knowledge of Jesus was from visions and that he never met Jesus in his lifetime, but he did meet Peter and Jesus's brother James (who is also attested by Josephus). Their presence is actually a sore point for Paul, since he disagreed with them, and hence he was at pains to point out that he didn't learn about Jesus from them but that he was on an equal level of authority. Paul would hardly want to make up a fictional brother of Jesus who undermines his authority (and who's existence anyway appeared to already be a given for the communities Paul was writing to). So the Jesus myth theory would require having James together with Peter somehow making up a fictional brother who was recently crucified by the Romans, which is a much more convoluted proposal with little motivation (being crucified and resurrected was hardly in-line with messianic expectations). Whereas it is known that the Romans did crucify a number of aspiring messianic figures and other perceived leaders of rebellions, the difference this time is that some of his followers came to believe he was resurrected.

Richard Carrier accepts that Paul recognizing James as Jesus's actual brother would be strong evidence for the existence of Jesus, but he claims that Paul is not referring to a biological brother. Funnily enough this is one of the arguments used by Christian apologists, who want to claim that Mary was an eternal virgin and therefore Jesus couldn't have siblings, whereas secular scholarship supports Paul (and the gospels) referring to a biological brother.

If you require the existence of first-hand sources or eye witness accounts you would need to throw away an awful lot of historical knowledge. Even for much more prominent figures like Alexander the Great there are no surviving contemporary accounts. For an itinerant preacher who was executed by the Romans, a lack of first hand evidence is entirely expected.

Despite coming from a very religious family, I'm no kind of know all about all this stuff, but this and Pilates' account of the 'Christos' (where the Christians got their name) does appear to be very convincing evidence of a historical Jesus/Yeshu. Not that I for one second believe that he was the actual 'messiah' or that he could perform actual miracles etc. I do not believe in the supernatural at all.

And the Jesus myth theory did make sense to me for some time. Maybe it is still possible that he was a character made up from different rebellious Rabbis though? Especially if it was a group of Roman picked men that wrote the Bible.

 

[Humberto]

I like his humanity. 'You will crucify me for it'... but? Did it anyway. And the alternative, nibbled to death by cockroaches.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

This is what he said:

Heaven and Earth may pass away but my words will not.

There’s a few logical fallacies contained within that statement.

 

[Raheem]

Pilates' account of the 'Christos' (where the Christians got their name) does appear to be very convincing evidence of a historical Jesus/Yeshu.

I don't believe any account of anything by Pilate survived much beyond his lifetime.