Quote:1Clem 42:1
The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus
Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God.
1Clem 42:2
So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both
therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order.

It became heretical when the church evolved to its silly trinity doctrine.

(June 27, 2017 at 10:02 am)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(June 27, 2017 at 8:31 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Where do you see that in chapter 42?  It seems a stretch, to connect your quote cited, with the unquoted part.  Where is he complaining that there is no historical mention of Jesus?

Seems to me, that moreso, he is complaining about the difficulty of debating history with the selective hyperskeptic, and those who throw the baby out with the bath water. Apt for the discussion, but not for the reasons you imply.

Well then look into book 2, ch 33 maybe it'll make you clearer that Origen never ever encountered TF http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04162.htm
there Celsus asks him what miracles Jesus performed, Origen answers that Jesus' life was indeed full of striking and miraculous events, "but from what other source can we can furnish an answer than from the Gospel narratives?"

Origen could have quoted TF which contains: "...for he was a doer of wonderful works... as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him". But since he never heard of TF he stated only the Gospels.

Not just that but back in book 1 ch 47 he claims that Josephus never mentioned Jesus "Antiquities of the Jews" (the very same book that today contains TF) because he was a Jew:

For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless— being, although against his will, not far from the truth— that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),— the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice.

And yet in TF Josephus apparently had no problem to say that it was because of Jews that Jesus was hanged, from TF: And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross

(June 27, 2017 at 10:02 am)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(June 27, 2017 at 8:31 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Where do you see that in chapter 42?  It seems a stretch, to connect your quote cited, with the unquoted part.  Where is he complaining that there is no historical mention of Jesus?

Seems to me, that moreso, he is complaining about the difficulty of debating history with the selective hyperskeptic, and those who throw the baby out with the bath water. Apt for the discussion, but not for the reasons you imply.

Well then look into book 2, ch 33 maybe it'll make you clearer that Origen never ever encountered TF http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04162.htm
there Celsus asks him what miracles Jesus performed, Origen answers that Jesus' life was indeed full of striking and miraculous events, "but from what other source can we can furnish an answer than from the Gospel narratives?"

Origen could have quoted TF which contains: "...for he was a doer of wonderful works... as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him". But since he never heard of TF he stated only the Gospels.

Not just that but back in book 1 ch 47 he claims that Josephus never mentioned Jesus "Antiquities of the Jews" (the very same book that today contains TF) because he was a Jew:

For in the 18th book of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus bears witness to John as having been a Baptist, and as promising purification to those who underwent the rite. Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless— being, although against his will, not far from the truth— that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),— the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice.

And yet in TF Josephus apparently had no problem to say that it was because of Jews that Jesus was hanged, from TF: And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross

And yet the TF would not have answered his question... and even then, it's still quite difficult to make a case from silence. Just because he may have read something, doesn't mean he may recall or think to use it in every circumstance. I'm sure people have read a lot better arguments, then what I'm seeing here. But kudos for providing me something!

Quote: and even then, it's still quite difficult to make a case from silence.

No it isn't.  Not in this case because we haven't decided that we NEED the TF to be TRUE so you can pump some air into your deflated historical godboy.

I agree that there is no convincing you because you do not want to be convinced and if fucking jesus came down here, smacked you in the mouth, and said "it's not real, asshole" you still wouldn't buy it.  This is your problem.  Not ours.

No jesus freak writer before Eusebius ever heard of it.  Yet, when Eusebius announced it ( TA-DAH!  LOOKY HERE!!!) it was in all its glory not any watered down version which still would have solved Origen's problem better than what he was forced to do in the absence of the TF.  That's okay, RR.  You are very limited by your book.  Perhaps you should put it down and read something else?

(June 27, 2017 at 3:54 pm)Secular Elf Wrote:

(June 22, 2017 at 12:21 pm)Minimalist Wrote: It's all well and good to assert that there are 7 authentic pauline epistles except we know they have been tampered with.

http://vridar.org/2017/05/26/why-many-in...ry-likely/



But, perhaps even worse....

https://www.umass.edu/wsp/alpha/texts/pa...tions.html

This notes the detected interpolations but the old adage "when one lie is detected a thousand must be suspected" comes into play.

Where does the "authentic" part come in?

One of the more interesting aspects of New Testament literature, is that not all of the supposed authors of these books were actually written by the men who were said to author them. When scholars apply the principles of textual criticism and redaction, comparisons of lines within and between texts, etc. etc., there are doubts and even certainties that books like First Epistle of Peter (1 Peter) were not actually written by Peter the Apostle. To quote from the Wikipedia article on First Epistle of Peter, it says that " Many scholars are convinced that Peter was not the author of this letter because the author had to have a formal education in rhetoric/philosophy and an advanced knowledge of the Greek language."

This is especially true of writings alleged to be written by Paul. Out of all the writings attributed to Paul, some are judged to not actually been written by him.

It has been my understanding that has this has been under contention for quite some time. 1st and 2nd Peter where two of the books that where debated when the canon was formed....and part of that debate, was that they where not written by Peter.

---

(June 27, 2017 at 11:28 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote: and even then, it's still quite difficult to make a case from silence.

No it isn't.  Not in this case because we haven't decided that we NEED the TF to be TRUE so you can pump some air into your deflated historical godboy.

I agree that there is no convincing you because you do not want to be convinced and if fucking jesus came down here, smacked you in the mouth, and said "it's not real, asshole" you still wouldn't buy it.  This is your problem.  Not ours.

No jesus freak writer before Eusebius ever heard of it.  Yet, when Eusebius announced it ( TA-DAH!  LOOKY HERE!!!) it was in all its glory not any watered down version which still would have solved Origen's problem better than what he was forced to do in the absence of the TF.  That's okay, RR.  You are very limited by your book.  Perhaps you should put it down and read something else?

It's your claim.... why shift the burden onto me.... and by that same reasoning, the mythicist position is silent until about the 18th century.....

The conspiracy theory that you are proposing, is that Eusebius need a source that he didn't have, so he forged one into Josephus, cited it, and then no one noticed (or was silent concerning it) and he somehow got rid of all other copies. My tin foil hat is currently in the wash... but you will need to make a better case, to convince me of this tale.

The whole tying people to stakes and burning them might have had something to do with the silence of the mythicist position, don't you think RR?  

However, you're completely wrong, as usual.  The mythicist position was being espoused before "jesus" was a twinkle in "pauls" eyes (as far back as 600bce).....right next door, in hindu tradition. The greeks undercut the magic man claim before it ever expressed itself in christianity, and the romans, alleged contemporaries - seem to have recognized it for a scam.

Strange how all of that changes as soon as they assume the power of a state...and strange how it stays that way until they -cede- power to nascent secular states. Probably just a coincidence.

(June 27, 2017 at 11:44 pm)Khemikal Wrote: The whole tying people to stakes and burning them might have had something to do with the silence of the mythicist position, don't you think RR?  

However, you're completely wrong, as usual.  The mythicist position was being espoused before "jesus" was a twinkle in "pauls" eyes (as far back as 600bce).....right next door, in hindu tradition.

I think you are talking about something different.

Yeah, I know, you've all thought that, throughout all time.  

"My myths aren't myths...those guys aren't talking about my religion being based on silly myths and the people who create and sell them"

They were. Here's an excerpt from a summary of a body of work in hindu philosphy, espousing a position that is much older than the christian faith.

Quote:There is no other world other than this;
There is no heaven and no hell;
The realm of Shiva and like regions,
are invented by stupid imposters.

I can't add anything to it, RR. They seemed to know what everyone else at the time knew - ignorant believing rabble excluded. They seemed to know what Carrier, for example, goes to great lengths to express, what we had to rediscover in the 18th century after that little christian crackdown on heretics that forms the backdrop of christian establishment and history finally ended; as the bickering factions of christ strangled each other to death - and in so doing lost the power to reliably punish people for resuming work on the mythicist position, lol.

Such, is the silence, of the mythicist position. That silence -only- existed during the time of the greatest control and greatest atrocities of the christian faith. The mythicist position had to be actively stamped out by the early church. They took to the task with zeal.

(June 27, 2017 at 11:28 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: so he forged one into Josephus, cited it, and then no one noticed

wow! Big fucking deal. Just look at the gospels and acts they're contradicting each other and yet nobody noticed that. Sometimes they're parallel universes to one another. If Jesus was so real why don't you tell us some basic stuff like when he was born? Oh wait you can't because Matthew has him born during Herod the Great's reign, which is sometime before the year 4 BCE, but Luke's nativity story has to take place sometime after the Roman annexation of Judea in 6 CE. Or when he died? Or where he was born? Some say Bethlehem some say Nazareth. Or when he was crucified? Or from what place did he ascend to heaven and so on. But wait you can't because Jesus' life is a fairy tale.

That's how Christians work: they just pick and choose what they like and pretend what they don't like that it doesn't exist. It's also called delusion.

(June 27, 2017 at 11:28 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: .....The conspiracy theory that you are proposing, is that Eusebius need a source that he didn't have, so he forged one into Josephus, cited it, and then no one noticed (or was silent concerning it) and he somehow got rid of all other copies. My tin foil hat is currently in the wash... but you will need to make a better case, to convince me of this tale.

If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Quote:In a single paragraph (the so-called Testimonium Flavianum) Josephus confirms every salient aspect of the Christ-myth:
1. Jesus's existence 2. his 'more than human' status 3. his miracle working 4. his teaching 5. his ministry among the Jews and the Gentiles 6. his Messiahship 7. his condemnation by the Jewish priests 8. his sentence by Pilate 9. his death on the cross 10. the devotion of his followers 11. his resurrection on the 3rd day 12. his post-death appearance 13. his fulfillment of divine prophecy 14. the successful continuance of the Christians.
In just 127 words Josephus confirms everything – now that is a miracle!

Kenneth Humphreys

Keep in mind that Josephus remained an orthodox Jew throughout his life. It'd be like if a couple of centuries from now, one of Hovind's descendants - horrible thought, I know - were to 'find' a draft of God Is Not Great with a passage about how amazing Jesus is.