FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page Blog entry on mythicism by James McGrath
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 25 of 50 « First 152324 25 262735 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-16-2010, 02:26 AM   #241
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default
Update re the debate.


Quote:
Did Jesus exist on youtube? Dismantling the “evidence” presented by James McGrath

2010/02/16 by neilgodfrey

The following is presented by Dr James McGrath on his Did Jesus Exist Youtube video as fundamental evidence for the historical existence of Jesus. It is a standard line, almost a “historicists’ creed”, and it is factually false and and logically fallacious.

http://vridar.wordpress.com/
maryhelena is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 02:46 AM   #242
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
Default
I'll say it again. As much as some want to deride the mythicist position, at least mythicists don't have to simply make shit up...
dog-on is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 09:34 AM   #243
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default
Update re the debate....


Quote:
Tuesday, February 16, 2010

More Mythicist-Creationist Parallels: Messiahs, Wisdom and Jesus

I am grateful that Neil Godfrey reminded me in a recent post of yet more parallels between mythicism and creationism. First, it seems that one can never successfully keep one's denial of mainstream scholarship limited to one specific, narrow field. Knowledge is so intertwined that one cannot deny biological evolution without challenging our conclusions about geology, for example. And one cannot deny the existence of Jesus without also challenging (among other things) what we know about ancient Judaism and the variety of "messianic" beliefs and ideas found in ancient Jewish literature.


http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/
maryhelena is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 10:53 AM   #244
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Latin America
Posts: 4,066
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryhelena View Post
Wow - that is one great question from Neil - re whether the Christian idea is big and strong enough to survive the loss of a historical Jesus.

So there we have the whole issue in a nutshell. Is the Christian 'idea' really an 'idea' about a historical Jesus - or is the Christian 'idea' more credible than that assumption. And if so - then having a historical Jesus is neither here nor there - an add-on that can be discarded when its outdated baggage becomes just too heavy to be worth the bother of repairing its ever widening holes...
Haven't we already reached that point? In fact, we reached it a long long time ago. I think that is what Schweitzer was saying. The Christ we believe in is a theological construct, not a historical one. The Quests for a historical Jesus was about trying to find the historical part of the theological construct. If no historical core can be found, I can't see what difference that would make.
Agreed, the absence of evidence is not a problem. Besides, Christ exists in the poor and needy of this world and believers are called to minister to Him.
arnoldo is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 01:25 PM   #245
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon View Post
Haven't we already reached that point? In fact, we reached it a long long time ago. I think that is what Schweitzer was saying. The Christ we believe in is a theological construct, not a historical one. The Quests for a historical Jesus was about trying to find the historical part of the theological construct. If no historical core can be found, I can't see what difference that would make.
Agreed, the absence of evidence is not a problem. Besides, Christ exists in the poor and needy of this world and believers are called to minister to Him.
Well put, arnoldo.
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 01:28 PM   #246
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
Default
I thought Krishna existed in the poor and needy :huh:
show_no_mercy is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 01:39 PM   #247
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
I thought Krishna existed in the poor and needy :huh:
Sure, I'm not surprised that many of these ideas exist across cultures.
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 06:57 PM   #248
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryhelena View Post
Wow - that is one great question from Neil - re whether the Christian idea is big and strong enough to survive the loss of a historical Jesus.

So there we have the whole issue in a nutshell. Is the Christian 'idea' really an 'idea' about a historical Jesus - or is the Christian 'idea' more credible than that assumption. And if so - then having a historical Jesus is neither here nor there - an add-on that can be discarded when its outdated baggage becomes just too heavy to be worth the bother of repairing its ever widening holes...
Haven't we already reached that point? In fact, we reached it a long long time ago. I think that is what Schweitzer was saying. The Christ we believe in is a theological construct, not a historical one. The Quests for a historical Jesus was about trying to find the historical part of the theological construct. If no historical core can be found, I can't see what difference that would make.
But, this so contradictory. Everything has been turned on its head.

Incredibly we are NOW told that HJers had already reached the point where they believed Jesus was a theological construct. But once HJers have already admitted that Jesus was a theological construct, then they have agreed that the Jesus they believe in was NOT historical but of a mythological CORE.

It is amazing how HJers can transfigure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gakudeison
"The Quests for a historical Jesus was about trying to find the historical part of the theological construct"...
NO, NO, NO......NO, you are dead wrong.

You may be suffering from Amnesia.

HJers were supposed to show and demonstrate that Jesus was of an HISTORICAL CONSTRUCT with trimmings of MYTHOLOGY or Theology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gakudeison
....If no historical core can be found, I can't see what difference that would make.
Am I dreaming or what? You are in Amnesia again.

Well, I can see your problem, you really can't see. Once there was no historical core to Jesus, he was not seen.

And that is exactly what is to be expected with no historical core. The history of Jesus is no different to his mythological or theological construct.

No contemporary of Jesus wrote that they personally saw Jesus alive before he died, in Nazareth, Galilee or Jerusalem.

But, when your history is no different to your mythological or theological construct, then supposed contemporaries will testify truly that Jesus was SEEN after he was raised from the dead. And not one, but over 500 according to a PAULINE WRITER..
aa5874 is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 09:03 PM   #249
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 11,525
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon View Post
Haven't we already reached that point? In fact, we reached it a long long time ago. I think that is what Schweitzer was saying. The Christ we believe in is a theological construct, not a historical one. The Quests for a historical Jesus was about trying to find the historical part of the theological construct. If no historical core can be found, I can't see what difference that would make.
Most Christians are rational and actually believe Jesus really existed, really performed miracles, etc. If they were to be convinced that the man never actually existed, that the miracles are mere poetic license, that there was no resurrection...etc., I do not believe Christianity would survive in any significant sense.

Yes, there would still be Christians, but they would be a tiny fraction of the population.

None of this has anything to do with whether or not a man reasonably similar to the gospel Jesus actually existed, of course.
spamandham is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 09:05 PM   #250
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 11,525
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryhelena View Post
McGarth has now tried another tactic with his mythicist slur re creationists - he simply turns it around - oh, well, seems the man wants to continue with his attempted demeaning of the mythicist position.

Quote:
Sunday, February 14, 2010

Young-Earth Creationists Are Like Mythicists

I thought I'd reverse the comparison and say "Young-earth creationists are a lot like mythicists."

This is just an experiment. I'm curious whether young-earth creationists will get as upset about the comparison as mythicists have...

Posted by James F. McGrath
http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.c...-are-like.html
Someone who cares might consider pointing out to McGrath that YECers are universally HJ enthusiasts.
spamandham is offline  
 
Page 25 of 50 « First 152324 25 262735 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:05 PM.

Top

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