U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-22-2019, 07:41 PM
 
124 posts, read 37,650 times
Reputation: 230

Advertisements

It's interesting how Jesus was supposedly a real person in the Galilee are who had 1,000s of eye witnesses and yet there is practically no archeological evidence of the religion existing in that region of eminating from it. The Gospels were written in Greek and the early Christian church blomossomed out of Rome.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-22-2019, 08:27 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
16,305 posts, read 7,686,038 times
Reputation: 1729
I think you could use a stronger foundation in church history
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2019, 09:33 PM
 
39,278 posts, read 10,931,096 times
Reputation: 5104
It's a sound point, and one I've noticed myself. Whatever the origins of Jewish Christianity, Paul took that particular ball and ran with it and it became the most successful Roman religion of all. it would probably have beaten Isis, Mithraism and the Imperial Sungod- cult combined. And whatever Christianity was in Judea was stamped out by the Latin church.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2019, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Coastal New Jersey
56,324 posts, read 54,765,930 times
Reputation: 66861
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallbuilder View Post
It's interesting how Jesus was supposedly a real person in the Galilee are who had 1,000s of eye witnesses and yet there is practically no archeological evidence of the religion existing in that region of eminating from it. The Gospels were written in Greek and the early Christian church blomossomed out of Rome.
What nateswift said.

The Mar Thoma (St. Thomas) Christians in Kerala, India, still use Syriac, a dialect related to Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke), in their liturgy. Rome didn't even know they were there until the Portuguese arrived in the 15 century and were shocked to find Christians already there, albeit the wrong kind of Christians according to the Catholic Church.

There is plenty of archeological evidence of early Christianity in the Middle East, as well as what had been Jewish trade routes to the east, and northern Africa.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 12:12 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,177 posts, read 965,562 times
Reputation: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallbuilder View Post
It's interesting how Jesus was supposedly a real person in the Galilee are who had 1,000s of eye witnesses and yet there is practically no archeological evidence of the religion existing in that region of eminating from it. The Gospels were written in Greek and the early Christian church blomossomed out of Rome.
The earliest records we have, Paul's letters, puts Christianity from Jerusalem, through the Turkey, then Greece, to Rome. Despite Christian assertions, Christianity did not look to be that popular (Pliny the Younger knew nothing about it around 110 AD), so it is no surprise there is no evidence from that time that we can clearly date.

In the second and third century AD, most of the major Christian writers did not live in Rome. Even at the start of the fourth century AD, Arianism, the major threat to the dominant version of Christianity, came from Alexandria, in Egypt.

As others have said, your history does seem to be a simple version of what happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 01:04 AM
 
Location: Central Florida
748 posts, read 532,382 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
The earliest records we have, Paul's letters, puts Christianity from Jerusalem, through the Turkey, then Greece, to Rome. Despite Christian assertions, Christianity did not look to be that popular (Pliny the Younger knew nothing about it around 110 AD), so it is no surprise there is no evidence from that time that we can clearly date.

In the second and third century AD, most of the major Christian writers did not live in Rome. Even at the start of the fourth century AD, Arianism, the major threat to the dominant version of Christianity, came from Alexandria, in Egypt.

As others have said, your history does seem to be a simple version of what happened.



It was an era before mass communication- new religions spread gradually.


Almost all scholars and historians believe Jesus really existed, but there is some uncertainty about many of the details of his life, and what exactly his message was. However, we should not jump to the extreme conclusion that we can know nothing about the historical Jesus and early Christian movement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 02:00 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,177 posts, read 965,562 times
Reputation: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
It was an era before mass communication- new religions spread gradually.
Clearly they do not spread gradually if Paul is writing to people across half the Roman empire. We do not know how popular they were, but we do know it was widespread, and appears to have spread very quickly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
Almost all scholars and historians believe Jesus really existed, but there is some uncertainty about many of the details of his life, and what exactly his message was.
Almost all scholars and historians are not experts in this area, and follow the consensus, which is based on Christian developed 'criteria' not used in other historical studies. When we look at historians who ARE expert, then we find a larger proportion who accept Jesus did not exist, or think it is a possibility that he did not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
However, we should not jump to the extreme conclusion that we can know nothing about the historical Jesus and early Christian movement.
Of course we should not jump to such conclusions, as we have copies of Christian documents from that time. Unfortunately they say Jesus was an angel (Paul); like Adam, he was made, not born (Paul); and that he was a divine being revealed in OT scripture (Paul, Hebrews) and that Jesus was a priest in a heavenly temple (Hebrews) and that he never walked the earth (Hebrews).

The problem is that the 'historical' Jesus is found in the fictional, allegorical gospels, which may all date from the early 2nd century AD. They MAY be based on earlier documents or teachings, but we do not know this. But many of the stories are clearly invented allegories.

And what documents we have are filtered through the beliefs and practices of the winning sect of Christianity, so we know there were other sects, we just do not know in detail what they believed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 02:36 AM
 
Location: Central Florida
748 posts, read 532,382 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
Clearly they do not spread gradually if Paul is writing to people across half the Roman empire. We do not know how popular they were, but we do know it was widespread, and appears to have spread very quickly.



Almost all scholars and historians are not experts in this area, and follow the consensus, which is based on Christian developed 'criteria' not used in other historical studies. When we look at historians who ARE expert, then we find a larger proportion who accept Jesus did not exist, or think it is a possibility that he did not.



Of course we should not jump to such conclusions, as we have copies of Christian documents from that time. Unfortunately they say Jesus was an angel (Paul); like Adam, he was made, not born (Paul); and that he was a divine being revealed in OT scripture (Paul, Hebrews) and that Jesus was a priest in a heavenly temple (Hebrews) and that he never walked the earth (Hebrews).

The problem is that the 'historical' Jesus is found in the fictional, allegorical gospels, which may all date from the early 2nd century AD. They MAY be based on earlier documents or teachings, but we do not know this. But many of the stories are clearly invented allegories.



Most historians don't consider the Gospels to be fiction per se. They are very similar to other ancient histories, which often contain stories that may seem absurd to many people today, but are the basis for much of our knowledge of the ancient world.


Academic historians of the ancient world do not work from dogmatic religious presuppositions, yet most do not believe Jesus was a fictional character. Even ones like Bart Ehrman, who is an atheist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 03:35 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,177 posts, read 965,562 times
Reputation: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
Most historians don't consider the Gospels to be fiction per se.
Many relevant historians do. They admit the problem is deciding just how much is fiction and allegory. Again you are relying on what the majority believes instead of looking at the actual evidence I have talked about, the genuine letters of Paul and Hebrews.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
They are very similar to other ancient histories, which often contain stories that may seem absurd to many people today, but are the basis for much of our knowledge of the ancient world.
Except the gospels have nothing in common with histories written at that time. They are anonymous; they do not include the author in the text; they do not name their sources; they do not discuss contradictions from different sources; important characters appear and then disappear when their role in the story is done; and miracles are common but not discussed as they are in histories.

They do follow a structure found in Greek fiction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
Academic historians of the ancient world do not work from dogmatic religious presuppositions, yet most do not believe Jesus was a fictional character.
No, but academic historians do use faulty criteria invented by Christians, but used nowhere else in the study of history. And they are often unaware their evidence may be later interpolations. Some of them will surprise you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DT113876 View Post
Even ones like Bart Ehrman, who is an atheist.
Yet he has pointed out that Paul calls Jesus an angel in Galatians 4:14. the question is, was Jesus historical, very quickly made into a god, before the gospels reinvented him as a man; or was he a god made into a man? The first is possible, but the evidence we have is for the second.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 04:10 AM
 
Location: Central Florida
748 posts, read 532,382 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
Many relevant historians do. They admit the problem is deciding just how much is fiction and allegory. Again you are relying on what the majority believes instead of looking at the actual evidence I have talked about, the genuine letters of Paul and Hebrews.



Except the gospels have nothing in common with histories written at that time. They are anonymous; they do not include the author in the text; they do not name their sources; they do not discuss contradictions from different sources; important characters appear and then disappear when their role in the story is done; and miracles are common but not discussed as they are in histories.

They do follow a structure found in Greek fiction.



No, but academic historians do use faulty criteria invented by Christians, but used nowhere else in the study of history. And they are often unaware their evidence may be later interpolations. Some of them will surprise you.



Yet he has pointed out that Paul calls Jesus an angel in Galatians 4:14. the question is, was Jesus historical, very quickly made into a god, before the gospels reinvented him as a man; or was he a god made into a man? The first is possible, but the evidence we have is for the second.



So are you saying the people behind the Jesus Seminar (Westar) are biased by religious dogma? Do you really take that notion seriously? The Jesus Seminar has people from all different religious orientations- some are atheists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top