[ALB]

DaveB, you say that Celsus didn't employ the jesus was a myth argument as he wouldn't have been taken seriously. But why not?  Wasn't this the argument that Christians used to debunk the Greek and Roman gods? According to my Oxford Classical Dictionary someone called Eusebiu did this but you are the expert on these early christian polemicists. 

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Quote:

The name "Jesus" means saviour and christianity originated as a saviour religion

not so sure about that. There were on record many Jesuses from that period so not quite a satisfactory defence.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_(name)"The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua ) otherwise known as Yehoshua (Yeshua) bin Nun (‘Jesus of the fish’). Since the name Jesus (Yeshua or Yeshu in Hebrew, Iesous in Greek, source of the English spelling) originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves’) probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure sporting this moniker, among others."[so saviour or freedom fighter?] "Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel"http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/surfeit.htmWere they all fictitious because of their name?Should i endow your own name with some religious significance Adam = hebrew "man" or my own =  either "little rock" or "handsome"

The fact that Jesuses, claiming to be saviours and/or messiahs, were 10 a penny in the area at the time (or at least 3 or 4 a penny) strengthens the Jesus is a myth view. Why do think a new saviour cult/sect would name its mythical founder "Jesus". And, no, it doesn't mean everybody called Jesus in the period was fictitious.(Actually, "Adam" does have a religion significance in the context of Northern Ireland where my father was from. There it indicates a Protestant as opposed to a Catholic, not quite so much as Samuel, though)

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

As i said and it is reinforced each week on Time Team – absence of evidence does not equate with proof of absence. 

True, but "absence of evidence" is at least evidence of absence though not proof of it. Otherwise your mind would be so open that anything or everything could pass through it.

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Your citation showed that for a quite a senior provincial Roman official, there was no hard proof except hearsay and Josephus until 1961 so a very much younger ALB could easily have been on this forum asserting he did not exist.

You have missed the point. Roman claimed that there was as little evidence for the existence "Ponteous (sic) Pilate" as for his "Jesus". I merely countered by saying that there was more evidence in the form of this artefact. Even before it was discovered, however, there sufficient evidence of his existence, in the writing of Philo of Alexandria as well in Josephus. In 1961 the younger ALB had already read Grant Allen's The Evolution of the Idea of God, published in 1897. I still remember that one of his arguments that what was in the Ark of the Covenant was a huge phallic symbol. Just checked and see he was also sceptical about the historical existence of Jesus. His argument on christianity is that it was just one saviour religion among others that flourished in the Eastern Mediterranean coast at the time (and that proved to win out in the Darwinian struggle for existence among them). Here's what he wrote in one passage:

Quote:

I am not such a "gross and crude Euhemerist" as to insist dogmatically on the historical existemce of a personal Jesus. Of the Christ himself, if Christ there were, we know little or nothing. The account of his life which has come down to us in the Gospels is so devoid of authority, and so entirely built up of miraculous fragments, derived from elsewhere, that we may well be excused for gravely doubting whether he is not rather to be numbered with St. George and St. Catherine, with Perseus and Arthur, among the wholly mythical and imaginary figures of legend and religion.

Don't ask me what a "Euhemerist" is. I have just looked it up and see that in this discussion you are one. It's not an insult, by the way.

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Do you dispute the existence of John the Baptist, another only mentioned by Josephus and the Gospels yet lacking artifact proof?

Actually, there's more evidence for his existence than there is of Jesus, which would be why the gospel-writers would have been keen to include a reference to him so as to lend credibility to their myth, just as they did with Pontius Pilate. I'm not saying that you have to have artefact evidence to prove someone existed but it is a clincher.What clinches the argument that "Jesus" was a mythical figure is:1. That he is claimed to be the son of a god. That's a common feature of all myths, especially ones in that part of the world.2. The name "Jesus" means saviour and christianity originated as a saviour religion in which a god-figure sacrifices themself to save his or her followers (and to some extent still is with its talk of Redemption, Salvation, Blood, etc)3.  Paul, the earliest christian to write about Jesus, portrays him as such a saviour-god and not at all as a historical person.As to the early christians, there would have beem more like today's Jehovah's Witnesses, expecting that the "end of the world is nigh" and not interested in changing the world down here, than communistic revolutionaries.

[ALB]

roman wrote:

Spartacus, for one, has MUCH less evidence for his historicity than Jesus. All second hand accounts, no one from his actual community, and, all accounts after his death. I'm not sure what source criticism has been done on the Sparticus account, but I'm quite sure there are probably only one or two sources which the ancient historians used.The High Priest Ciaphas, Ponteus Pilate, and so on.We would expect MUCH MORE evidence for those guys than we would for Jesus (given that during his lifetime Jesus was just another rabble rousing prophet, most of whome we don't know anything about, and a few who get a passing mention in Josephus).For Jesus we have many indepentant sources (Q, Mark, Paul, John, Matthew and Lukes individual sources) with varying degrees of historicity all of which agree on the basics, and the basics fit with everything else we know about second temple Judaism.

Maybe Spartacus did not exist but then no-one is creating a song and dance about it like christians do about their supposed founder. For the record, here's the evidence for the historical existence of a Roman official called Pontius Pilatus:

Quote:

The only physical, archaeological evidence that confirms the existence of Pilate is the Latin inscription found on a limestone block relating Pilate's tribute to Tiberius.[11] The artifact, sometimes known as the Pilate Stone, was discovered in 1961 by an archaeological team led by Antonio Frova.[12] It was found as a reused block within a staircase located in a semicircular structure behind the stage house of the Roman theatre at Caesarea, the city that served as Rome's administrative centre in the province of Judaea. Roman governors were based in Caesarea and only visited Jerusalem on special occasions, or in times of unrest. The artifact is a fragment of the dedicatory inscriptions of a building, probably a temple, which was constructed, possibly in honour of the emperor Tiberius,[13][14] dating to 26–36 AD.[11] The dedication states that Pilate was prefect of Judaea, read praefectus Iudaeae. The early governors of Judaea were of prefect rank, the later were of procurator rank, beginning with Cuspius Fadus in 44 AD. The artifact is currently housed in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem,[15][16] while a replica stands at Caesarea.[17]The remaining text reads (conjectural letters in brackets):[11][DIS AUGUSTI]S TIBERIÉUM[…PO]NTIUS PILATUS[…PRAEF]ECTUS IUDA[EA]E[…FECIT D]E[DICAVIT]The translation from Latin to English for the inscription reads:To the Divine Augusti [this] Tiberieum…Pontius Pilate…prefect of Judea…has dedicated [this]

He also figures in a list of Roman governors of Judea drawn up by Josephus, presumably on the basis of consulting original Roman archives. Of course the christians also refer to his existence as a key part of their crucifiction story. No better way of lending some credibility to a myth than by throwing in a historical fact or two..Got to laugh at the authors of the "New Testament" being described as "independent sources" (not that for Paul Jesus was a historical person, just an idea). All the historical record establishes is the existence of a religious sect called "christians"and their beliefs but not that of their supposed founder any more than it does of the supposed founders of other saviour cults that existed in the same historical period.

[ALB]

roman wrote:

The evidence for the historicity of Jesus is as good as anyone else in the ancient world, we have more than we would expect. 

Who are these other figures in the ancient word the evidence for whose existence is as "good" (or as flimsy) as Jesus's. A few names please. Thanks.

[ALB]

When announcing yet another troop surge in Afghanistan Trump say they were going there not to "nation-build" but to "kill terrorists".It has long be obvious that this is their policy in Syria and too bad if they also kill the family members of terrorists and innocent by-standers. They think that Hezbollah and the Lebanese Army should have simply killed the ISIS terrorists rather than transport them.I'm sure there'll be some something in the Geneva Convention against this but then this convention is just a scrap of paper anyway.

[ALB]

Balanced aericle on automation here:https://www.wired.com/2017/08/robots-will-not-take-your-job/Productivity just doesn't increase that fast because it's not the effect of automation at the last stage of production that counts but the total labour cost in producing a commodity from start to finish. As the article points out, if automation was that profitable (the criterion by which capitalist firms decide whether or not to invest in it) then capitalist firms would be investing more in it than they currently are.

[ALB]

Thanks. We should store these links somewhere so they don't have to be tracked down again. I think the same person had a Spanish version of the site too but I wouldn't know how to start finding it.Bataille socialiste has not disappeared into the archives like the other one. It still exists. It's just that nothing more is being added to it. The sympathiser who used to run it is still around, occasionally "liking" something on our facebook page.

[ALB]

I thought you were a computer whizz-kid. Anyway here's what you were trying to post:

Quote:

An enquiry from Facebook:"Hi there. I've been reading an issue of the Socialist Standard (February 2017) and I've just read one of your articles on Amadeo Bordiga ("Early Bordiga and electoral activity"). The quotes in the piece will be very very helpful for my dissertation that I'm writing on the revolutionary left and corbyn (i talk about your stance on him). But the problem is I search the quote on google and I can't find it anywhere – it just links me back to the article. But if it's to be taken seriously academically I'll need to find the original source.Is there any possibility that you could either get me in touch with the author or find out where they got their references from? i'd be very appreciative, thanks."

Only took me 30 secs. He is being put in touch with the Italian comrade who wrote the article and translated the quotes.

[ALB]

This will be a reference to a French-language site run by someone who agreed with us 100%, i.e. more than a sympathiser, between 2001 and 2008 or 2009. The link is: http://www.democratie-socialiste.org but you'll have to use the Way Back Machine to see it. We've got a paper version anyway and some of the material is in the French-language section of the World Socialist Movement site. It was a one-man show and stopped when he felt he could no longer carry on. I might contact him to see if he can be revived.There are a number of other sympathisers in France not connected with this, in particular the person who runs this site and page:https://bataillesocialiste.wordpress.com/limpossibilisme-anglo-saxon/

[ALB]

MBellemare wrote:

Not an anarchist…lol! Just pick up "The structural-anarchism manifesto" at Amazon.UK. 

Yes, but what sort of anarchist? Are you a "communist anarchist" who wants to see the means of production owned and operated in common, with the abolition of production for sale, money, banks, credit, etc? Or are you one of those anarchists who envisage the abolition of the state but the continuation of a market economy in some form?

[ALB]

There was a light-hearted programme on BBC Radio 4 this morning about Lucian, including a mention of his satire on the christians of his day and a claim that this was an earlier version of The Live of Brian:http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0910n6sHe was a good bloke who should be better known.

[ALB]

Each capitalist firm making the same rate of profit is also of course an "equilibrium" position, tending to be brought about as capital flows in search of higher profits flows out of one industry and into another,  but it's one which is never reached as things are changing all the time. Nevertheless it's  the tendency.

[ALB]

Thanks. He emailed us to say he'd just tweeted the article. Can someone be their own fan boy?

[ALB]

Excuse my ignorance, but what's a fan boy account?

[Author]

Posts