It has been Bermejo-Rubio who has invited warmly me to read Karl Kautsky the first time, and only after the reading I knew the reason of this unexpected invitation:
the reading of Kautsky had to be, in the intentions of the prof, someway "therapeutic" when made by a mythicist (I use a medical expression because I feel that, as mythicist, was treated as a crazy).
The reason is that Kautsky was a Jesus historicist, and a proponent of the Seditious Jesus Hypothesis, with the important clarification:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsk ... 13b.htm#s4
Do you see it? Kautsky was a historicist despite of the his recognition that the Testimonia Flaviana are total interpolations. It requires a real courage the profession of a historicist belief based only on the Gospels.
But how many Karl Kautsky can we find today? Not even Bermejo-Rubio rejects entirely Josephus. And who rejects totally Josephus, is like Chrissy Hansen, i.e. minimalist historicists, not at all proponents of the Seditious Jesus Hypothesis.
the reading of Kautsky had to be, in the intentions of the prof, someway "therapeutic" when made by a mythicist (I use a medical expression because I feel that, as mythicist, was treated as a crazy).
The reason is that Kautsky was a Jesus historicist, and a proponent of the Seditious Jesus Hypothesis, with the important clarification:
Although Jesus usually appears as gentle and submissive, occasionally he says something of a quite different nature which suggests that whether he really existed or is only an imaginary, ideal figure, he lived as a rebel in the original tradition, one who was crucified for his unsuccessful uprising.
We may grant, if we have to, the probability that Jesus lived and was crucified, probably because of an attempted rebellion; but that is all that can be said of him. What is said about his teaching is so devoid of evidence, so contradictory and so unoriginal, such a collection of general moral commonplaces that were on everyone’s lips at that time, that no part of it can be traced back to any genuine doctrine of Jesus’.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsk ... 13b.htm#s4
Do you see it? Kautsky was a historicist despite of the his recognition that the Testimonia Flaviana are total interpolations. It requires a real courage the profession of a historicist belief based only on the Gospels.
But how many Karl Kautsky can we find today? Not even Bermejo-Rubio rejects entirely Josephus. And who rejects totally Josephus, is like Chrissy Hansen, i.e. minimalist historicists, not at all proponents of the Seditious Jesus Hypothesis.
Statistics: Posted by Giuseppe — Sat Feb 10, 2024 9:32 am