Jesus of History and Myth

[Steve Petersen]

I think there are obvious examples of how legends grow around historical figures. I suspect that this also occurred around a historical Jesus. Verses purporting to show that his life was foretold by the prophets are all post-facto fictions. Even the gospels differ on the chronology of his life and ministry.

All that said, the stories are powerful and penetrate to the core of our consciences, setting an example of love and bringing to us the unique idea that God cares intimately for humanity.

 

[Erik Nelson]

I think there are obvious examples of how legends grow around historical figures. I suspect that this also occurred around a historical Jesus. Verses purporting to show that his life was foretold by the prophets are all post-facto fictions. Even the gospels differ on the chronology of his life and ministry.

All that said, the stories are powerful and penetrate to the core of our consciences, setting an example of love and bringing to us the unique idea that God cares intimately for humanity.

That would require that the Old Testament was written after the New Testament?

 

[Tom 1]

I think there are obvious examples of how legends grow around historical figures. I suspect that this also occurred around a historical Jesus. Verses purporting to show that his life was foretold by the prophets are all post-facto fictions. Even the gospels differ on the chronology of his life and ministry.

All that said, the stories are powerful and penetrate to the core of our consciences, setting an example of love and bringing to us the unique idea that God cares intimately for humanity.

There's an interview here that touches on these issues: Opinion | Professor, Was Jesus Really Born to a Virgin?
It's a big discussion that needs to be pretty broad to be worthwhile. If you're relying on Richard Carrier type narrow views for the legend idea then maybe it's not worth getting into. Bart Ehrman makes a much better attempt at trying to deal with the evidence, so that might be worth discussing.

 

[Steve Petersen]

That would require that the Old Testament was written after the New Testament?

No, only that someone wrote a Jesus narrative based on prophecies.

 

[inquiring mind]

I think there are obvious examples of how legends grow around historical figures. I suspect that this also occurred around a historical Jesus.

Probably so, it’s only human nature to do that sort of thing, but we can’t forget the Bible itself is Divinely inspired.

Verses purporting to show that his life was foretold by the prophets are all post-facto fictions.

There were probably eyewitnesses remaining at the time of Mark’s writing. You would think there would have been a lot of disagreement if this was the case.

Even the gospels differ on the chronology of his life and ministry.

I understand what you’re saying, but it’s well-known that details regarding accounts of events differ. If they are from different perspectives it doesn’t necessarily make one right and one wrong, especially if the overall consensus is the same.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Probably so, it’s only human nature to do that sort of thing, but we can’t forget the Bible itself is Divinely inspired.

This is only a given if you are Christian.

There were probably eyewitnesses remaining at the time of Mark’s writing. You would think there would have been a lot of disagreement if this was the case.

It is not certain who the gospel writers were. They are not named specifically in the text. Attribution comes later from tradition.

I understand what you’re saying, but it’s well-known that details regarding accounts of events differ. If they are from different perspectives it doesn’t necessarily make one right and one wrong, especially if the overall consensus is the same.

It certainly casts doubt on inerrancy of the gospels. So, what other things are the gospels in error about? (rhetorical question only.)

 

[inquiring mind]

It certainly casts doubt on inerrancy of the gospels. So, what other things are the gospels in error about? (rhetorical question only.)

As I said, different perspectives regarding events aren't necessarily contradictions, if the general consensus is the same. In fact, there would most likely be accusations of collusion between authors if they were identical.

 

[Tom 1]

As I said, different perspectives regarding events aren't necessarily contradictions, if the general consensus is the same. In fact, there would most likely be accusations of collusion between authors if they were identical.

It was quite a task the writers had I think - on the one hand trying to summarise and make sense of Jesus’ 3 years of public teaching, and clarify what they understood to be the most important of them, and also to paint a picture of Jesus’ character and their own fumbling attempts to follow him, and on the other trying to recall or discover small details as authentically as they could. Quite a task! I do think the gospels have ‘personality’ though, and any later revisions or additions don’t take much away from that, I think.

 

[Steve Petersen]

It was quite a task the writers had I think - on the one hand trying to summarise and make sense of Jesus’ 3 years of public teaching, and clarify what they understood to be the most important of them, and also to paint a picture of Jesus’ character and their own fumbling attempts to follow him, and on the other trying to recall or discover small details as authentically as they could. Quite a task! I do think the gospels have ‘personality’ though, and any later revisions or additions don’t take much away from that, I think.

So how do the stories of Jesus' life differ from other hagiography?

 

[Tom 1]

So how do the stories of Jesus' life differ from other hagiography?

They don’t seem hagiographic to me - I can’t remember the author’s name but the book Zealot - a biography of sorts of Jesus by a Muslim writer - puts the humble state Jesus chose to be born into a 1st C perspective quite well. Jesus’ intense struggle in gethsemane, his frequent frustrations with the disciples, hanging out with ‘sinners’, his humiliating arrest, torture and death; not the elements of a hagiography.

 

[inquiring mind]

So how do the stories of Jesus' life differ from other hagiography?

His is regarded as 'The Greatest Story Ever Told.'

 

[Tinker Grey]

His is regarded as 'The Greatest Story Ever Told.'

By ....

 

[inquiring mind]

By ....

Well, it was the first book printed... no small distinction.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Saying that a Christian story is revered by Christians as the greatest story ever told doesn't really answer the question: "So how do the stories of Jesus' life differ from other hagiography?"

 

[inquiring mind]

Saying that a Christian story is revered by Christians as the greatest story ever told doesn't really answer the question: "So how do the stories of Jesus' life differ from other hagiography?"

Post #10 offered another perspective.

 

[cvanwey]

I think there are obvious examples of how legends grow around historical figures. I suspect that this also occurred around a historical Jesus. Verses purporting to show that his life was foretold by the prophets are all post-facto fictions. Even the gospels differ on the chronology of his life and ministry.

All that said, the stories are powerful and penetrate to the core of our consciences, setting an example of love and bringing to us the unique idea that God cares intimately for humanity.

I've touched on this very topic from time to time, and received little response in the past.

Take for instance... Mark 16:8 - (the original ending point). Then take the later 'addition' of Mark 16:9-20, (as even acknowledged by staunch believers/editors). Then begin to compare the two other synoptics of Luke and Matthew. Then read John. It seems to demonstrate a clear path of growing legend, over time.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I think there are obvious examples of how legends grow around historical figures. I suspect that this also occurred around a historical Jesus. Verses purporting to show that his life was foretold by the prophets are all post-facto fictions. Even the gospels differ on the chronology of his life and ministry.

All that said, the stories are powerful and penetrate to the core of our consciences, setting an example of love and bringing to us the unique idea that God cares intimately for humanity.

This is not Christian (and is false) , so I am uncertain it belongs in Christian Apologetics . << EDIT IN : never mind. Someone explained ...... >>

Who knows ? Is Christian Apologetics for non-Christian thinking ?

 

[cvanwey]

They don’t seem hagiographic to me - I can’t remember the author’s name but the book Zealot - a biography of sorts of Jesus by a Muslim writer - puts the humble state Jesus chose to be born into a 1st C perspective quite well. Jesus’ intense struggle in gethsemane, his frequent frustrations with the disciples, hanging out with ‘sinners’, his humiliating arrest, torture and death; not the elements of a hagiography.

Um, you left out the part where He was claimed to raise the dead, heal the sick, and rise from the dead Himself. Last I checked, the term 'hagiography' means something along the lines of...

'a very admiring book about someone or a description of someone that represents the person as perfect or much better than they really are, or the activity of writing about someone in this way'

Furthermore, I trust you acknowledge that being a martyr does not lend to the truth of a claim.

 

[inquiring mind]

I've touched on this very topic from time to time, and received little response in the past.

Take for instance... Mark 16:8 - (the original ending point). Then take the later 'addition' of Mark 16:9-20, (as even acknowledged by staunch believers/editors). Then begin to compare the two other synoptics of Luke and Matthew. Then read John. It seems to demonstrate a clear path of growing legend, over time.

If what you are suggesting was true, why wouldn't some of the first century historians like Josephus have 'called out' the NT accounts regarding Jesus' supernatural status?

 

[cvanwey]

His is regarded as 'The Greatest Story Ever Told.'

And therefore it is true? How is the makings of great story relevant to truth?