FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-09-2011, 08:48 AM   #11
Moderator - History of Non Abrahamic Religions, General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Latin America
Posts: 6,620
Default

I find it incredibly ironic that someone espousing "Jesus Christ's true message" can be so skeptical about Gautama Buddha.

Or am I the only one?
Perspicuo is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 08:54 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

And I find the converse quite ironic: the iron-willed Jesus mythers turn all dewy-eyed and credulous when it comes to Buddha. It makes one suspect there's some kind of hidden agenda here that precludes the accurate reading of the literature.
No Robots is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 10:00 AM   #13
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

I have to invent a word called overgeneralizationism, describing a disease seen lurking around this forum.
spin is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 10:47 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
And I find the converse quite ironic: the iron-willed Jesus mythers turn all dewy-eyed and credulous when it comes to Buddha. It makes one suspect there's some kind of hidden agenda here that precludes the accurate reading of the literature.
I believe both the Buddha and Jesus were historical figures.
Von Bek is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 11:20 AM   #15
Talk Freethought Staff
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Toronto, eh
Posts: 42,293
Default

Of course Buddha was real. I've seen statues of him. You can't make statues of people who weren't real.
Tom Sawyer is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 12:26 PM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,779
Default

Gday,

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
The earliest archaeological evidence of Buddha appears about three hundred years after his (supposed) birth by the Indian warlord Ashoka.
Oh please.

Suspect claims and preaching from 3 centuries later are NOT "archeological evidence" for Buddha.


Kapyong
Kapyong is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 12:31 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,779
Default

Gday all,

Here is quick list for comparison, based purely on my opinions :

Adam, Noah : certainly myth
Abraham : almost certainly a myth
Jesus : probably a myth

Hercules, Aesculapius, Dionysus, Apollo et al : all myths
Lao Tzu : almost certainly a myth
Krishna : almost certainly a myth
Buddha : probably a myth

Mohamed : almost certainly historical


Kapyong
Kapyong is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 12:46 PM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

It should be noted that there are reputable scholars who argue that there is no evidence for the historical existence of Mohammed. I don't necessarily agree with them. However, just for the record ...
stephan huller is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 01:57 PM   #19
avi
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Location: eastern North America
Posts: 1,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapyong
Mohamed : almost certainly historical
Ok, so then, do you have a reference to the camel drivers' theft of the loot transported by caravan from Istanbul, at the terminus of the silk route, to Medina (or Mecca)?

Lao Zi, whose name you have misspelled, was not a myth, he was a government official, living roughly at the same time as Siddhartha, and a contemporary of KongZi, known in the west as Confucius. There are some ancient sources in ZG (ZhongGuo, aka China) which claim that KongZi and LaoZi met and discussed various subjects.... (a stele is a stone slab)
Quote:
Originally Posted by message
Historical: Stele Date: 4th. day of 3rd. mo. of 1st. year of Jianhe,
Eastern Han Dynasty (147).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Justin Martyr, a philosophical defender of Christianity who wrote around 160 AD claimed that the myth of Asclepius foreshadowed rather than served as a source for claims of Jesus's healing powers
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller
...there are reputable scholars who argue that...
Gosh, I wonder if there are also disreputable "scholars", who rob graves, and commit theft, and forgery, and nevertheless continue to hold prestigious positions at various universities.....?

avi
avi is offline  
Old 03-09-2011, 06:10 PM   #20
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapyong View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
The earliest archaeological evidence of Buddha appears about three hundred years after his (supposed) birth by the Indian warlord Ashoka.
Oh please.

Suspect claims and preaching from 3 centuries later are NOT "archeological evidence" for Buddha.
Suspect claims and preaching from 3 centuries later seem to be still working very very well for [the (supposed) birth of] Jesus.

The vacuum of evidence for pre-4th century Christianity
mountainman is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:47 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.