|
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
12-15-2006, 09:10 AM
|
#1 |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
Frankenstein's Monster
Is this actually a better model for Jesus than historicism or hercules or osiris or whatever? Something created from various odds and ends, like a heath robinson creation?
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 09:13 AM
|
#2 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
|
Where else is it a good model?
-- Peter Kirby |
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 09:18 AM
|
#3 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Washington, DC (formerly Denmark)
Posts: 3,789
|
Sounds like syncretism to me, not a new concept.
Julian |
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 09:34 AM
|
#4 |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretism
Who ever said this was a new concept? Is not Jesus as the result of a syncretic process more likely than a big bang historical figure? Who exactly disproved Jesus is a result of syncretic processes? When where? |
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 09:43 AM
|
#5 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
|
Who coined "big bang" in reference to Jesus? Was it Earl? It's a brilliant piece of puffery, probably intended with the same rhetorical force as the original by Sir Fred Hoyle in reference to the universe's origin. But has it been adopted by the scholarly community, as it once was adopted by the astronomical community?
In any case, would St. Joseph be the one responsible for this "big bang"? -- Peter Kirby |
|
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 10:01 AM
|
#6 | |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 10:39 AM
|
#7 |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
I've been using it for a while - probably around model jesi thread time, can't be original, it is too obvious!
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
