Continuing ..........May 4 2008 at 7:53 PM
Vince (Login MoxiFox)
Response to Oh, c'mon Vince...
Pope-> [ You appear to be latching onto trash like this...
Among them are a quote from Origen, saying that his arch-rival Celsus had heard from a Jew in Jerusalem that "Jesus Ben Pantera" was born of Mary as the result of a rape by a Roman soldier named Pantera, and had borne the baby in secret
And then, you ignore the tag line...
(most scholars now regard this claim to be a first-century legend resulting from misinterpretation of the facts). ]
No, I didn't ignore the tag line. In fact I bolded and blued it .... because it seemed significant to me! Evidently and obviously Celsus DID use the JBP story in his criticisms. He didn't make the story up because if he had made up the "facts/details" they would have been laughed off as being ridiculous. Just as if I was to make up a story about George Bush being the illegitimate son of ....... oh ....... say ........ John Wayne. In order to have any effect, Celsus' charges HAD to contain information commonly accepted by Christian believers at the time Celsus was writing ..... to be true.
Now, as you pointed out ........... Celsus and Origen were NOT contemporaries. Origen may have written his stuff in 170 AD. Celsus then, would have written HIS criticisms around 90 AD. That puts Celsus pretty much out of the loop insofar as knowing any personal details about Jesus' life as well. The "first century legend" (about JPB) therefore, could WELL have been a "misinterpretation of facts." Where formerly it might have been believed that JPB lived in the first century, scholars now agree that there never was such a fellow in the first century. And ............ if Jesus was indeed, JPB ....... Christians too ........ are under a misguided idea that such a guy existed in the first century. The Gospel writers too, misinterpreted the facts and attributed his existence to the first century (because of the writings they found dating to that time, pertaining to him) but .............. Jews steadfastly maintain that NO such character is recorded as having existed in that time frame because their own scriptures show no such indication.
HOWEVER .............. such a character DID exist in Hebrew scripture (as I pointed out) but ................ about 100 years earlier!
Ok, so ........... you have Celsus integrating "information" about this character into his criticisms. It can only make people mad if they accept his premise as (possibly) true. You have Origen -70+ years later- reluctantly taking on the task of writing a rebuttal to Celsus and needing over 300 pages to do it!~ If no one took Celsus seriously, why would Origen have wasted his precious time rebutting? Just trying to stretch his intellectual muscle?
Now, Origen probably didn't believe the story of Pandera ..... BUT....... he also didn't know anything historical about Jesus either, or he wouldn't have needed to waste so MUCH writing material on creation of counter arguments against Celsus "absurd" charges.
That proves the point I was trying to make in the first place that NEITHER Origen or Irenaeus knew ANYTHING about Jesus Christ except from hear-say. They merely evaluated what they heard by comparing it with what they believed prophesy dictated about him and "reasoned" out ....... whether the information fit in with their own perceptions.