DW
Only if the beliefs are wrong.
Steefen
The beliefs are very wrong. Jesus is a composite character of historical fiction, and in that fiction, he was a false prophet who turned atheist. Jesus ran afoul of Leviticus 17:10. In the post-war fiction (where the wars were the First Jewish-Roman War and the Jewish Civil War), Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. See Deut. Chapter 18, verses 20-22 for how prophets are to be judged. As an apocalyptic prophet there was 1) prepare ye the way of the lord, repent and get baptized, 2) tribulation in Jerusalem (First Jewish-Roman War and Jewish Civil War), 3) Judgement by Son of Man, 4) Son of Man, king of the glorious kingdom of Heaven/God/Righteousness. // #3 and #4 did not happen, hence, apocalypticism is a failed hypothesis and the apocalyptic prophets Jesus and Paul were false prophets. (See Historical Accuracy by Steve Campbell (available on amazon dot com and bn dot com) if you want information that backs this up.
DW
What historical records say Jesus was an atheist?
Steefen
I said Jesus turned atheist.
Apocalypticism was, in a way, a last hope. “Why do bad things happen after God was on our side with Ancient Egypt and Moses?
There was the Babylonian exile. It could no longer be a result of disobedience. Then Antiochus IV Epiphanes came with Hellenism. So Apocalypticism developed: God is going to bring Judgment and a New Kingdom.
Judea and Galilee was put under the Roman Empire. But the Apocalypse and a Messiah was coming. Jesus thought he was the Holy One, the Son of Man. After the beginning of his mission, when everything was going well (this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, etc.), God gave him the parable of the Wicked Tenants, foreshadowing that God was going to let the Apocalyptic Prophet be killed. So, Jesus became an atheist.
He looked through scripture to end it all. How can I get God to turn away from me and his people. I’ve got it: Leviticus 17:10-11. At the last supper, I will offer my body and blood, metaphorically (in gospel of John, literally is the insistence). That will be an atheistic stance against God. Then we will not have to worry anymore about obedience, but still, punishment. Add Psalm 106:38, Jeremiah 19: 3-9, Deuteronomy 28: 53-57 and 49-57, Lamentations 4:10. Jesus, however, did not avoid the fate of the son of the Vineyard Owner. Then he cried, Father why have you forsaken me? God saw that he had already did his Last Supper/Holy Communion.
Not only did the son of the Vineyard Owner, Jesus, the Son of Man die, but historically, Apocalypticism failed when the Jewish Revolt failed with
1) the Jewish Civil War breaking out, and just as the other verses said, like Lamentation 4:10 and Jeremiah 19:3-9, the rebel leaders blocked the food supply or destroyed the food and some people did turn to cannibalism (read Wars of the Jews by Josephus) a mother named Mary cooked her son and ate half of him;
2) the Jewish Revolt was put down, the Temple was destroyed, people lost faith not only in Temple Judaism but the Jewish Apocalypse as well.
DW
What you’re describing Jesus thinking about the crucifixion doesn’t match what we see in the biblical texts. Do you have any other texts you are looking at?
Steefen
The historical interpretation is based on people losing their faith in AD70: 1) loss of faith in the Jewish rebels winning the war with Rome, 2) loss of faith in the Apocalypse because the Jews were not bringing an apocalypse to Rome but Rome was bringing an apocalypse to Galilee (where Jesus and his mariners lost the Battle of Galilee) and Rome was bringing an apocalypse to Jerusalem. The rebels had to be honest with themselves and admit there is no victory with Jesus of Galilee–there was no victory with the high priest Jesus of Gamala who was killed with the high priest Ananus, there was no victory with James, brother of the Lord who was killed, there was no victory with the messiah/rebel leaders, there was no victory with their understanding of God.
Better than other texts, look at the Temple Mount today. If you need more texts than are in Leviticus, Psalms, Jeremiah, the gospels, read Wars of the Jews by Josephus.
Stephen said
Steefen does your system of thought contain a provision for self-critique? To put it another way, how would you know if you were wrong?
Ask a faculty advisor for college debate teams.
Ask a faculty advisor for college speech teams.
Consult Toastmasters.
Consult professors of investigative journalism.
Ask honor students who know what wrong answers on exams are.
Ask college Philosophy professors who teach Logic and Reasoning.
Ask the professor who taught the Great Courses class on Argumentation.
Ask college professors and continuing education instructors who teach composition.
Etc.
Steefen
The historical interpretation is based on people losing their faith in AD70: 1) loss of faith in the Jewish rebels winning the war with Rome, 2) loss of faith in the Apocalypse because the Jews were not bringing an apocalypse to Rome but Rome was bringing an apocalypse to Galilee (where Jesus and his mariners lost the Battle of Galilee) and Rome was bringing an apocalypse to Jerusalem. The rebels had to be honest with themselves and admit there is no victory with Jesus of Galilee–there was no victory with the high priest Jesus of Gamala who was killed with the high priest Ananus, there was no victory with James, brother of the Lord who was killed, there was no victory with the messiah/rebel leaders, there was no victory with their understanding of God.
Better than other texts, look at the Temple Mount today. If you need more texts than are in Leviticus, Psalms, Jeremiah, the gospels, read Wars of the Jews by Josephus.
DW
Jesus lost the Battle of Galilee? What are you talking about?
Steefen
The Jewish Rebels attacked Legion XII Fulminata of Rome and defeated them at the beginning of the Jewish Revolt.
Nero sent General Vespasian to put down the Jewish Revolt.
General Vespasian went to Agrippa II territory where there was a rebel leader, Jesus of Galilee.
General Vespasian sent a diplomatic envoy to Jesus and his followers to negotiate a surrender.
Jesus stole their horses.
So, not accepting peace. Jesus chose battle with Rome.
Now, this Jesus of Galilee never referred to the composite character of historical fiction, the Jesus in the Gospels.
Agrippa II did not talk about the “don’t mess with Rome” sentiment of Jesus in the Gospels.
General Vespasian and his diplomatic envoy did not speak of Jesus in the Gospels–because he did not exist.
The Roman soldiers were setting up their military positions and Jesus taunted them.
The battle began. Jesus and his soldiers could not beat the Romans on land. Jesus and his soldiers ran from the land fight by trying to escape by boat into the Sea of Galilee. Rome defeated them on the water, as well.
This account is from Josephus and it appears in my book, Historical Accuracy by Steve Campbell.
Josephus translated by William Whiston. The Wars of the Jews, Book 3, Chapter 9, Sections 7-8, 443 – 459
and Chapter 10, Sections 1, 4-7 and 9-10, 463, 466-469. 494, 497-498, 501-502, 505, 508, 522-532 [edited for brevity], ps 659-664.
DW
one of the most certain facts of the life of Jesus, according to almost all historians, is that Jesus of the Gospels was certainly crucified sometime around 30 AD (or within 3-4 years of that).
The historian in Judea and Galilee in AD60-AD70, Josephus says that made up account was a sad calamity to exploit the pious.
Steefen said
Stephen said
Steefen does your system of thought contain a provision for self-critique? To put it another way, how would you know if you were wrong?
Ask a faculty advisor for college debate teams.
Ask a faculty advisor for college speech teams.
Consult Toastmasters.
Consult professors of investigative journalism.
Ask honor students who know what wrong answers on exams are.
Ask college Philosophy professors who teach Logic and Reasoning.
Ask the professor who taught the Great Courses class on Argumentation.
Ask college professors and continuing education instructors who teach composition.
Etc.
No you misunderstand. These are all examples of external critiques. Certainly necessary. That’s why you put out ideas to invite such critiques. But I’m asking you to describe your method to interrogate your own conclusions. I’m asking you to describe your own thinking process.
Stephen said
No you misunderstand. These are all examples of external critiques. Certainly necessary. That’s why you put out ideas to invite such critiques. But I’m asking you to describe your method to interrogate your own conclusions. I’m asking you to describe your own thinking process.
I am just guessing, but I think it involves copious amounts of very exotic mushrooms. That would certainly explain quite a lot.
Stephen said
Steefen said
Stephen said
Steefen does your system of thought contain a provision for self-critique? To put it another way, how would you know if you were wrong?
Ask a faculty advisor for college debate teams.
Ask a faculty advisor for college speech teams.
Consult Toastmasters.
Consult professors of investigative journalism.
Ask honor students who know what wrong answers on exams are.
Ask college Philosophy professors who teach Logic and Reasoning.
Ask the professor who taught the Great Courses class on Argumentation.
Ask college professors and continuing education instructors who teach composition.
Etc.
No you misunderstand. These are all examples of external critiques. Certainly necessary. That’s why you put out ideas to invite such critiques. But I’m asking you to describe your method to interrogate your own conclusions. I’m asking you to describe your own thinking process.
Politely, I say, I pass.
Stephen
No you misunderstand. These are all examples of external critiques. Certainly necessary. That’s why you put out ideas to invite such critiques. But I’m asking you to describe your method to interrogate your own conclusions. I’m asking you to describe your own thinking process.
Steefen
Answer the question for yourself.
Answer the question for Adrian Keith Goldsworthy, author of Caesar, author of Augustus, author of Pax Romana.
Answer the question for Albet Schweitzer, author of The Quest for the Historical Jesus.
Probably, then, there will be no misunderstanding to your question.
JAS said
Stephen said
Sure. I make no demands. I have to say though that how we arrive at our conclusions is as important as our conclusions.
And I would say much more important when those conclusions are bad ones.
Yes poor conclusions are usually indicative of poor thinking. This is why a warning buzzer always go off for me when someone with a deeply held conviction is unable to explain their thought process that led to that conclusion. Of course it is still possible to think well and be mistaken, but how rare it is to think badly and be correct!
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert