Historical Jesus

[Juma]

It suited Constantin perfectly so what are you whining about?

We are not talking about the existence of Constantine, but of the central figures of the religion he was able use to save his Empire. Or do you believe he somehow made it up?

We know that it is made up: by selecting what texts are the canonical and by outright forgeries.

 

[iolo]

a movement sprang up and took over the Roman Empire within an incredibly short time

300 years (from the time of the alleged Ministry to Constantine) is not an "incredibly short time". And even then, it was another 70 years before Xianity "took over the Roman Empire", in that it became the official religion under Theodosius. 300 years ago, people moved around by horse power or by foot; today we fly across oceans in a matter of hours. Maybe things moved slower in Antiquity, but 300 years is still a hell of a long time for a belief system to develop.

It is, to anyone with any knowledge of history at all, an incredibly short time. It was from being unheard of, through being persecuted to replacing all the old Roman bilge.

- - - Updated - - -

We are not talking about the existence of Constantine, but of the central figures of the religion he was able use to save his Empire. Or do you believe he somehow made it up?

We know that it is made up: by selecting what texts are the canonical and by outright forgeries.

Like the rest of history, doubtless - Caesar, for instance.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

It is, to anyone with any knowledge of history at all, and incredibly short time.

Are you quite sure you're being condescending enough there? I can assure you of two things, that I'm quite well-versed in history, and that a lot can happen in 300 years - and a hell of a lot did happen in the 300 years under discussion.

It was from being unheard of, through being persecuted to replacing all the old Roman bilge.

Even at the time of Constantine, Xians made up only about 10% of the population of the Roman Empire, so it was still relatively "unheard of". It gained a boost from Constantine's endorsement, and even more so from Theodosius declaring it the state religion in the 380's ... yet it was another century, and several bouts of persecution of polytheists/pagans before it fully replaced "the old Roman bilge". Not exactly the lightning-fast conversion you seem to imply.

 

[iolo]

Are you quite sure you're being condescending enough there? I can assure you of two things, that I'm quite well-versed in history, and that a lot can happen in 300 years - and a hell of a lot did happen in the 300 years under discussion.

It was from being unheard of, through being persecuted to replacing all the old Roman bilge.

Even at the time of Constantine, Xians made up only about 10% of the population of the Roman Empire, so it was still relatively "unheard of". It gained a boost from Constantine's endorsement, and even more so from Theodosius declaring it the state religion in the 380's ... yet it was another century, and several bouts of persecution of polytheists/pagans before it fully replaced "the old Roman bilge". Not exactly the lightning-fast conversion you seem to imply.

Are you making any serious points here? To work out percentages of guessed-at religious persuasions in a guessed-at population is pointless, surely? And if I'm not condescending enough, I do hope I can becomes so! I find American fundamentalists quite peculiarly silly.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

Are you making any serious points here?

I'm simply pointing out that your earlier claim that Xianity "took over the Roman Empire within an incredibly short time" is, at best, extremely subjective. 300 years is not "an incredibly short time" in this historical context.

To work out percentages of guessed-at religious persuasions in a guessed-at population is pointless, surely?

I didn't work it out, nor did I guess at it. I'm going by the concensus of most historians of the period - at least, the ones I've read. And again, the percentage is relevant, as it shows that, 300 years post-facto, Xianity was far from having taken over the Empire.

And if I'm not condescending enough, I do hope I can becomes so!

I'm sure you can.

I find American fundamentalists quite peculiarly silly.

Yes, me too. Is this relevant to anything I said?


Incidentally, just for clarity, I have no dog in the fight of the original question in this thread. I sincerely couldn't care less whether there was an original Jesus who gave rise to the myths and legends that grew up around him, or whether they were totally made up, without an historical figure at the root of the tales. Either way, there certainly wasn't any "Son of God" walking the Earth back in the day, so the historicity or not doesn't affect my disbelief one way or the other.

 

[iolo]

I'm simply pointing out that your earlier claim that Xianity "took over the Roman Empire within an incredibly short time" is, at best, extremely subjective. 300 years is not "an incredibly short time" in this historical context.

To work out percentages of guessed-at religious persuasions in a guessed-at population is pointless, surely?

I didn't work it out, nor did I guess at it. I'm going by the concensus of most historians of the period - at least, the ones I've read. And again, the percentage is relevant, as it shows that, 300 years post-facto, Xianity was far from having taken over the Empire.

And if I'm not condescending enough, I do hope I can becomes so!

I'm sure you can.

I find American fundamentalists quite peculiarly silly.

Yes, me too. Is this relevant to anything I said?


Incidentally, just for clarity, I have no dog in the fight of the original question in this thread. I sincerely couldn't care less whether there was an original Jesus who gave rise to the myths and legends that grew up around him, or whether they were totally made up, without an historical figure at the root of the tales. Either way, there certainly wasn't any "Son of God" walking the Earth back in the day, so the historicity or not doesn't affect my disbelief one way or the other.

Well, Christianity still took over the Roman Empire in an incredibly short time, and was strong enough to make it worth Constantine's pretending to believe in it, Roman paganism being intellectually bankrupt . As I said early, I think the silly denials by so many Americans of history if it happens to be 'Christian' is simply the twin of the American bible-fundamentalism it mirrors. If we compare the rise of capitalism and its attendant liberalism to the rise of Christianity and the destruction of the slave society in the West, I think the time arguments become clear. Too many persons on here seem to be living back in the 1850's, and it is difficult to converse with such, which was my main point.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

Well, Christianity still took over the Roman Empire in an incredibly short time,

Nope, I still don't agree that 300 years is "an incredibly short time". I'd also dispute the claim that "Christianity still took over the Roman Empire", come to think of it. I'd say it was the other way round, i.e. that the Roman Empire took over Christianity, changing it from an obscure successor of the Greek Mystery Cults into a state-sponsored one-size-fits-all instrument of control.

 

[iolo]

Well, Christianity still took over the Roman Empire in an incredibly short time,

Nope, I still don't agree that 300 years is "an incredibly short time". I'd also dispute the claim that "Christianity still took over the Roman Empire", come to think of it. I'd say it was the other way round, i.e. that the Roman Empire took over Christianity, changing it from an obscure successor of the Greek Mystery Cults into a state-sponsored one-size-fits-all instrument of control.

The only way a bankrupt system could survive was to get some new ideas and new support, and try to influence these. The mystery cults would have been as useful as the cat's arse - the only other possibility was Mithras, and that would do only for the incredibly expensive army.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

The only way a bankrupt system could survive was to get some new ideas and new support, and try to influence these.

Exactly. Constantine saw the need for unity in an Empire that had been tearing itself apart at regular intervals from the 2nd Century on. Why he chose Xianity as the unifying belief, I don't know (maybe because it was still relatively obscure, thus easier to control than paganism or Mithraism, maybe because of the symbolic value of its monotheism?), but that unity was the central idea.

The mystery cults would have been as useful as the cat's arse

Agreed, although I would argue that the cat's arse, being a conduit for expelling excrement, is quite useful. To the cat, at least. The Mystery Cults were elitist groups, and had remained pretty stagnant over the 1000+ years of their existence.

- the only other possibility was Mithras, and that would do only for the incredibly expensive army.

I have to admit to not knowing too much about Mithraism, but one of its drawbacks must have been that it was an imported religion, beginning as it did in the Persian Empire. Better for the Romans to have their own home-grown faith to oppose to one that came from the outside.

 

[Horatio Parker]

When evidence and history become "Christian evidence" and "Christian history", the conclusions are assumed before inquiry begins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[angelo]

We are not talking about the existence of Constantine, but of the central figures of the religion he was able use to save his Empire. Or do you believe he somehow made it up?

We know that it is made up: by selecting what texts are the canonical and by outright forgeries.

Many scholars agree that xtianity was a manufactured religion, all of them are!

 

[DBT]

It's still a question of whether there was an actual Rabbi or self styled miracle worker/preacher going by the name Yeshua Ben Yoseph upon whom the supernatural myth was built. I'm inclined to think that there was.

 

[none]

It's still a question of whether there was an actual Rabbi or self styled miracle worker/preacher going by the name Yeshua Ben Yoseph upon whom the supernatural myth was built. I'm inclined to think that there was.

Inclined?

 

[DBT]

It's still a question of whether there was an actual Rabbi or self styled miracle worker/preacher going by the name Yeshua Ben Yoseph upon whom the supernatural myth was built. I'm inclined to think that there was.

Inclined?

Not a fixed position. My view may change if new information comes along.

 

[angelo]

There may have been any number of weirdos running around the country side preaching. Some my even have been arrested by the Romans as nuisances.
Romans as meticulously keepers of records never mentioned a single weirdo by name. Surely they would've done had this particular weirdo had followers.

 

[Learner]

There may have been any number of weirdos running around the country side preaching. Some my even have been arrested by the Romans as nuisances.
Romans as meticulously keepers of records never mentioned a single weirdo by name. Surely they would've done had this particular weirdo had followers.

He had followers and the movement was spreading. These 'nuisances' were becoming dangerous. To the traditional faith of the Jews and the traditions of the Romans and empire. It is best sense to those traditions politcally,religiously that this particular person..rebel,martyr teacher, leader,rabbi, 'not be mentioned.'

Roman conscripts converting to christianity were refusing to fight and higher levels were being discharged,this was spreading throughout.

 

[DBT]

Romans as meticulously keepers of records never mentioned a single weirdo by name. Surely they would've done had this particular weirdo had followers.

That objection is flawed. Roman records from that time and place are far from complete. There's not much to be found on any of the presumably numerous troublemakers that were executed by the Roman Governor, so it isn't significant.

 

[iolo]

We know that it is made up: by selecting what texts are the canonical and by outright forgeries.

Many scholars agree that xtianity was a manufactured religion, all of them are!

Meaningless.

 

[iolo]

There may have been any number of weirdos running around the country side preaching. Some my even have been arrested by the Romans as nuisances.
Romans as meticulously keepers of records never mentioned a single weirdo by name. Surely they would've done had this particular weirdo had followers.

Big Brother didn't have enough people working for him, particularly in hostile or obscure colonies. The Imperial Civil Service was comparatively minute, the Roman's didn't give a twopenny about the lower orders except insofar as their doings might affect their own careers, and only a very few records survive anyway. You try finding out about Roman Britain sometime.

 

[Horatio Parker]

It's still a question of whether there was an actual Rabbi or self styled miracle worker/preacher going by the name Yeshua Ben Yoseph upon whom the supernatural myth was built. I'm inclined to think that there was.

I think there could've been a genre of morality or inspirational stories/anecdotes/proverbs about a sage interacting with various characters. Perhaps they were believed in some cases to possess the power to come back from the dead. The author of gMark collects these stories, combines them with some bits from the Pauline letters and presto...