Freethought & Rationalism Archive

maryhelena · 12-10-2009, 02:15 PM

http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/love3141509.shtml

Quote:

Love and Chairs: On Not Finding the Historical Jesus

The reality of Jesus is the reality of a historicized, rather than a historical Jesus, but one whose attraction was fundamentally linked to his this-worldly interests and existence as it was preached by his followers in language many seem to have found appealing.

Is this a step away from the position that holds that there was probably a historical Jesus of Nazareth but his existence can't be historically established?

Quote:

Historically, then, the reality of Jesus cannot be indubitable because his existence does not meet the high standard of proof we set for other historical figures. That statement may seem naïve to New Testament scholars who have staked their scholarly careers on tomes promising to uncover what Jesus really said or who Jesus really was. But in fact, their work, to a book, suffers from confusing love and chairs, feelings and facts.

Some straight talking here!

wordy · 12-10-2009, 02:25 PM

He is or was part of the "The Jesus Project" and was part of the Secular Humanism or Center for Inquiry but seems to be a bit critical now on them.

He has his own blog expressing his views. Like many academics he loves to tease the others in the same field. witty or what to call that behavior.

My english is too poor to really follow him.

There have been other threads about him here in FRDB if you are interested in many others views on him.

spamandham · 12-10-2009, 09:15 PM

...HJ proponents will simply counter such scholarly dissent with a vague reference to a scholarly opinion poll that doesn't exist to show that the vast majority of scholars accept an HJ....and then they'll continue trying to figure out if that HJ was a poor wandering preacher, a wealthy high priest, a fisherman, or a carpenter, whether his body was stolen from the tomb, or he pulled a switcheroo, or simply swooned, whether the star in the east was a supernova, a conjunction of planets, or a comet, and wonder why Jesus' primary language was Greek, considering he was a Hebrew who grew up in Egypt.

maryhelena · 12-10-2009, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

...HJ proponents will simply counter such scholarly dissent with a vague reference to a scholarly opinion poll that doesn't exist to show that the vast majority of scholars accept an HJ....and then they'll continue trying to figure out if that HJ was a poor wandering preacher, a wealthy high priest, a fisherman, or a carpenter, whether his body was stolen from the tomb, or he pulled a switcheroo, or simply swooned, whether the star in the east was a supernova, a conjunction of planets, or a comet, and wonder why Jesus' primary language was Greek, considering he was a Hebrew who grew up in Egypt.

Perhaps Hoffmann should get more publicity....

I've just had a look at another of his websites - and am most intrigued by another article he recently wrote involving the book 'The Myth of God Incarnate', edited by John Hick, 1977.

Quote:

http://www.bibleinterp.com/opeds/hoff357903.shtml

Does Christology Rest on a Mistake?

...It was a far more radical project than anyone (with the possible exception of Maurice Wiles and Don Cupitt) recognized at the time. I for one missed the point entirely.

...It's sad in a way that the Myth seminar was doomed to be overshadowed by the gnostic gospels craze and other, equally important trends in New Testament Studies. Sad because the Myth seminar reminded scholarship beyond theology that the New Testament does not put itself forward as the story of a simple Galilean peasant who got himself godded through the reminiscences of his "community."

...Let me end with a recommendation. That in between the enormous mound of things we have to read, write, grade and skim every day, you take a look (if you have it) at the invitatory essay by Wiles in a book that is enjoying a deserved injection of new popularity: "Does Christology Rest on a Mistake?" The Myth of God Incarnate (London: SCM, 1977). I hope in my next post to have a stab at the question I was then too thoughtless and inexperienced to answer.

This is the book that set me going down the mythical path many years ago......though I can't find the chapter by Maurice Wiles that Hoffman is referencing. The two chapters by Wiles in the 1977 copy of my book are : Christianity without Incarnation? and Myth in Theology.

So, Hoffmann says he will be writing a follow up - that he missed the point of the book 'entirely' - well now - I'll be keeping watch for his upcoming article...

wordy · 12-10-2009, 10:39 PM

Mary Helena
maybe you like this text?

http://www.vary.freeuk.com/learning/...gypaper11.html

The Impact of The Myth of God Incarnate (1977)

I have not read it but the writer discuss that book with Theology STudents? Maybe he is their teacher?

wordy · 12-10-2009, 11:09 PM

I find the following text interesting.
http://www.vary.freeuk.com/learning/...gypaper11.html

Quote:

... we should never forget that if the Christian gospel had moved east, into India, instead of west, into the Roman Empire, Jesus' religious significance would probably have been expressed by hailing him within ...

Mahayana Buddhism that was then developing in India as a Bodhissatva, one who has attained to oneness with Ultimate Reality but remains in the human world out of compassion for mankind and to show others the way of life. (1977, 176)

But note how he ends this piece:

These would have been the appropriate expressions, within these cultures, of the same spiritual reality. (1977, 176)

I know too little about Mahayana Buddhism but has looked into one of it's many schools named Jodo Shinshu Buddhism that has this relation to Amida (Amitabha in Sanskrit?)

Amida is supposed to be an ordinary human Monk. Okay maybe he was a King or a Prince or a bit higher up than ordinary but totally human and by meditating he achieved to build karmic merit that he could use to establish a kind of "Pure Land" or spiritual realm in the West much like when Christians talk of "Kingdom of God" or similar places or metaphors for places where one can visit to meet God.

Now these Jodo Shinshu they don't see Amida as God but as Ultimate Reality or infinite life and light and as infinite compassion.

Expressed as a wish to save every sentient being to become a savior of the world kind of. Infinite in that Amida will not give up on anybody. The bad karma of the attached person is worked upon by the compassion of Amida and thus everybody will in the end get saved.

One can be saved now if one entrust oneself to the vows of Amida and show gratitude. But the catch 22 is that one can not do this mechanically. One need to listen deeply to the message and then by the grace of Amida's compassion one feel grasped by the vows as true and feel that Amida does include oneself in those vows to save every sentient being and the result is that one also wants to become a savior after ones death.

Some of them see this as a metaphor for here and now. The Pure Land is here and now and when one entrust oneself to the vows then ones ego dies and one are reborn as a savior wannabee but with much of ones earlier attachment still there but the difference is that one knows that Amida has grasped me to never abandon me ever. They name that realization and feeling with a technical term Shinjin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinjin

I am bad to retell this Amida thing but it is interesting that a claimed atheistic "life philosophy" like Buddhism has ideas so close to Christian faith. And even more interesting is that they have the same debate over the "mythic" or "literal" reading of the story.

Was Amida really the Monk that lived so many thousands years ago or was he a myth? The literalists think he really exists and still exists in a spiritual realm while the mythicists maybe think that all these words are about something we have no words for but which is true by experience.

Compare with Sam Harris who meditated and experienced things that he hopes that science can confirm to be significant truths about us being at one with ultimate reality.

The Christians and the Buddhists only express their stories slightly different.

One wonder if they did learn from each other?

maryhelena · 12-11-2009, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldly

I find the following text interesting.
http://www.vary.freeuk.com/learning/...gypaper11.html

Quote:

... we should never forget that if the Christian gospel had moved east, into India, instead of west, into the Roman Empire, Jesus' religious significance would probably have been expressed by hailing him within ...

Mahayana Buddhism that was then developing in India as a Bodhissatva, one who has attained to oneness with Ultimate Reality but remains in the human world out of compassion for mankind and to show others the way of life. (1977, 176)

But note how he ends this piece:

These would have been the appropriate expressions, within these cultures, of the same spiritual reality. (1977, 176)

I know too little about Mahayana Buddhism but has looked into one of it's many schools named Jodo Shinshu Buddhism that has this relation to Amida (Amitabha in Sanskrit?)

Amida is supposed to be an ordinary human Monk. Okay maybe he was a King or a Prince or a bit higher up than ordinary but totally human and by meditating he achieved to build karmic merit that he could use to establish a kind of "Pure Land" or spiritual realm in the West much like when Christians talk of "Kingdom of God" or similar places or metaphors for places where one can visit to meet God.

Now these Jodo Shinshu they don't see Amida as God but as Ultimate Reality or infinite life and light and as infinite compassion.

Expressed as a wish to save every sentient being to become a savior of the world kind of. Infinite in that Amida will not give up on anybody. The bad karma of the attached person is worked upon by the compassion of Amida and thus everybody will in the end get saved.

One can be saved now if one entrust oneself to the vows of Amida and show gratitude. But the catch 22 is that one can not do this mechanically. One need to listen deeply to the message and then by the grace of Amida's compassion one feel grasped by the vows as true and feel that Amida does include oneself in those vows to save every sentient being and the result is that one also wants to become a savior after ones death.

Some of them see this as a metaphor for here and now. The Pure Land is here and now and when one entrust oneself to the vows then ones ego dies and one are reborn as a savior wannabee but with much of ones earlier attachment still there but the difference is that one knows that Amida has grasped me to never abandon me ever. They name that realization and feeling with a technical term Shinjin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinjin

I am bad to retell this Amida thing but it is interesting that a claimed atheistic "life philosophy" like Buddhism has ideas so close to Christian faith. And even more interesting is that they have the same debate over the "mythic" or "literal" reading of the story.

Was Amida really the Monk that lived so many thousands years ago or was he a myth? The literalists think he really exists and still exists in a spiritual realm while the mythicists maybe think that all these words are about something we have no words for but which is true by experience.

Compare with Sam Harris who meditated and experienced things that he hopes that science can confirm to be significant truths about us being at one with ultimate reality.

The Christians and the Buddhists only express their stories slightly different.

One wonder if they did learn from each other?

Thanks for the link to the article re The Myth of God Incarnate.

The article takes me back many years with its mention of the other books that followed the 'Myth' book. I have not looked at them in years....

As to all things Indian - I'm not up on the ins and outs of all of that - suffice to say that once the incarnation storyline is deemed to be mythical - the horse has bolted and everything is up for a re-think.

From the author of the article on the webpage you referenced:

Quote:

My own view is that trying to make Jesus supreme above all others lacks data on Jesus and all others, so beyond some imposed and doctrinal mechanics of God preserving Jesus's status, Jesus himself passes into the relativity of all history, persons and religion. This is what the book exposed as probable, using myth, which is why it had the reaction it had, and why subsequent developments might see this book as being as far as Jesus-confessional theology can go before it gives up the confession. And, indeed, Michael Goulder gave up the confession, and many years after so did Don Cupitt.

It's rather interesting to me, that after all these years, that 'The Myth of God Incarnate' might be having a bit of a revival of interest...

wordy · 12-11-2009, 12:26 AM

What is our atheist views on myths? Do we have a know atheist view on myths?

I wonder about myth in relation to fictional stories like Star Wars, StarGate, Star Trek, Babylon 5, BattleStar Galactica, and all the other sci-fi or Fantasy stories.

Even as light weight entertainment they can say not truths but make some comment on who we see each other.

The faked and imaginative made up false stories still say things that are true about how we see ourselves as humans here and now.

Captain Kirk and Spock and Data and all the others. Or Luke Skywalker and Yoda and so on.

Totaly made up but still true enough in that they show basic human needs like being true to a collective that one want to support, that one are alone even admist others that are friends, that relations are important,

maryhelena · 12-11-2009, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by worldly

What is our atheist views on myths? Do we have a know atheist view on myths?

I wonder about myth in relation to fictional stories like Star Wars, StarGate, Star Trek, Babylon 5, BattleStar Galactica, and all the other sci-fi or Fantasy stories.

Even as light weight entertainment they can say not truths but make some comment on who we see each other.

The faked and imaginative made up false stories still say things that are true about how we see ourselves as humans here and now.

Captain Kirk and Spock and Data and all the others. Or Luke Skywalker and Yoda and so on.

Totaly made up but still true enough in that they show basic human needs like being true to a collective that one want to support, that one are alone even admist others that are friends, that relations are important,

I don't think there is any particular atheist take on myth - and really, at the end of the day, why should there be....

This is a basic starting point on myth, taken from 'Myth in Theology' by Maurice Wiles, in the book 'The Myth of God Incarnate (or via: amazon.co.uk)'.

Quote:

Myth relates primarily to pre-history. But the English word 'myth' belongs to comparatively recent history. Mythology, mythological, mythical - all these go back many centuries, but 'myth' itself is less than 150 years old.

Modern day usage does seem to have downgraded myth - as in urban legends, urban myths type of use. Well, at least on the one hand - yet, on the other hand, millions of Christians, for instance, still uphold, for example, the incarnation.

Perhaps mythology is a bit like having a picture book - like a picture it can capture and retain more than a thousand words.....One can keep the picture in ones mind while not having to be concerned with all the difficulties with mere words - which are so often inadequate. And the power of the picture over words - well, just consider how there is a whole industry out there making huge amounts of money just building up and sustaining all sorts of images, products, personalities etc. Image, it seems, is everything today.

wordy · 12-11-2009, 10:14 AM

A reliable image of Jesus standing between his mother and father would be a show stopper.

I am even unsure of if Paul existed. If Marc and John and the other Espistles are written by anonymous pretending to written by patriachs then why could nto Paul had been written by competing groups? I find it obvious that they competed like nowadays Microsoft and Apple and Linux does.

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

12-10-2009, 02:25 PM	#2
wordy Contributor Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sweden, Europe Posts: 12,091	He is or was part of the "The Jesus Project" and was part of the Secular Humanism or Center for Inquiry but seems to be a bit critical now on them. He has his own blog expressing his views. Like many academics he loves to tease the others in the same field. witty or what to call that behavior. My english is too poor to really follow him. There have been other threads about him here in FRDB if you are interested in many others views on him.

12-10-2009, 09:15 PM	#3
spamandham Contributor Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 11,525	...HJ proponents will simply counter such scholarly dissent with a vague reference to a scholarly opinion poll that doesn't exist to show that the vast majority of scholars accept an HJ....and then they'll continue trying to figure out if that HJ was a poor wandering preacher, a wealthy high priest, a fisherman, or a carpenter, whether his body was stolen from the tomb, or he pulled a switcheroo, or simply swooned, whether the star in the east was a supernova, a conjunction of planets, or a comet, and wonder why Jesus' primary language was Greek, considering he was a Hebrew who grew up in Egypt.

12-10-2009, 10:39 PM	#5
wordy Contributor Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sweden, Europe Posts: 12,091	Mary Helena maybe you like this text? http://www.vary.freeuk.com/learning/...gypaper11.html The Impact of The Myth of God Incarnate (1977) I have not read it but the writer discuss that book with Theology STudents? Maybe he is their teacher?

12-11-2009, 12:26 AM	#8
wordy Contributor Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sweden, Europe Posts: 12,091	What is our atheist views on myths? Do we have a know atheist view on myths? I wonder about myth in relation to fictional stories like Star Wars, StarGate, Star Trek, Babylon 5, BattleStar Galactica, and all the other sci-fi or Fantasy stories. Even as light weight entertainment they can say not truths but make some comment on who we see each other. The faked and imaginative made up false stories still say things that are true about how we see ourselves as humans here and now. Captain Kirk and Spock and Data and all the others. Or Luke Skywalker and Yoda and so on. Totaly made up but still true enough in that they show basic human needs like being true to a collective that one want to support, that one are alone even admist others that are friends, that relations are important,

12-11-2009, 10:14 AM	#10
wordy Contributor Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sweden, Europe Posts: 12,091	A reliable image of Jesus standing between his mother and father would be a show stopper. I am even unsure of if Paul existed. If Marc and John and the other Espistles are written by anonymous pretending to written by patriachs then why could nto Paul had been written by competing groups? I find it obvious that they competed like nowadays Microsoft and Apple and Linux does.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.