Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Spanky · 03-14-2006, 04:17 PM

Quote:

I don't know why people keep repeating it. The truth is favorable enough to the atheist position, and there is no need to make up stories like this. But people really like clear, easy stories that paint things in bright colors, with uncomplicated messages of good vs evil. That's how religions probably started.

Maybe we are just trying to prove a point how a myth can start and grow!

Chris Weimer · 03-14-2006, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanky

If it is BS then where the hell did it come from and why did it get there?

Is it some vast atheistic conspiracy?

ETA: I see this stuff in atheist literature everywhere. If it is wrong and misleading, I would like to know. It means nothing to me nor my disbelief in the whole jesus thing. I just prefer to know the truth. Again, if it is BS, why do we rehash it and why is it "propagandised" in our writings?

I've tried to contact various people who have written about this, and yet, I can never reach original source material. Only books which cite books which cite books. Actually, I just don't find it interesting anymore to try to refute them (thus my standard "This is BS" or "This is poor scholarship"). Perhaps the most famous example is jesusneverexisted.com or the various links at American Atheists (some of which is true, some of which is false). It's hard separating the wheat from the chaff, but always try to look at the references cited. Usually, if the article refuses to deal with the original source material, don't believe it.

Ultimately, that's the difference: scholars deal with primary sources.

Roger Pearse · 03-15-2006, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Roger - note Richard Carrier's comment on Kersey Grave's 13 Crucified Saviors written in 2003:

In the meantime, the claim that Jesus is really Mithras or Krishna lives on, despite all of our efforts to set the record straight without overreacting.

Interesting -- thank you. I think RC's comments are useful indeed and I am very glad to see them.

One of his comments I would query:

Quote:

On the other side of the coin, consider his emphasis on the December 25 birth date as a common feature. This is one of the things he gets right, at least regarding Greco-Roman religion: all gods associated with the sun shared the sun's "birthday," erroneously identified as December 25(it is actually the 21st).

I have been corresponding with a scholar of Roman solar myths and celebrations about Dec. 25, and it is by no means clear to either of us that any official celebration of Dec. 25th as the 'dies natalis solis invicti' predates the Christian celebration of Christmas. It would be useful if RC would write some more on this. But it may be that he has seen the assertion in older scholarly literature, of a perfectly respectable kind, without going into the detail. The detail actually seems to be lacking. (I don't feel that I have full details myself yet, so if anyone knows better, I'm all ears).

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 03-15-2006, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

It's hard separating the wheat from the chaff, but always try to look at the references cited. Usually, if the article refuses to deal with the original source material, don't believe it.

I have come to take the same view. Not that people are deliberately lying; but most normal people just repeat material that they have seen written somewhere, in the belief that other people have checked it. On matters of politics and religion, sadly, this belief is unfounded.

Quote:

Ultimately, that's the difference: scholars deal with primary sources.

Well... one would hope so! But primary sources are ever more available today online in English, and often the raw data about some topic is quite limited, and perfectly possible for the amateur to master. So I would encourage everyone reading this to do the same thing, and seek out the sources.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.