spin

I do counsel someone wearing the name "Metacrock" not to play with other people's names.


spin

Metacrock

I want to first point out that historians never assumed aurthar existed, because we have no text by people who can be clealry validated as real, who claimed to know him. BTW I just got through looking into the historicity of Author for grins. I conclude that there was a guy named Aurthar who was some sort of "war chief" (not a king) and was famous for surviving lots of battles. But he may or may not be the basis for the legond.

I think most historians have tended to assume Jesus was real because historians have always accept it and no evidence has ever been produced to justify doubting it, and because there are a few sources which link to historical figures who are principle to the Jesus story; mainly Peter, James, John the B.



What evidence are you talking about? If you mean Trypho, it is fairly obvious he was not questioning the historical existence of Jesus of Nazerath. They are just turning a clealry worded stament about the title Messiah into a proper name. it's obvious he was saying You invented a Messiah, not that they invented the guy they said was Messiah. Is that blather? I think its' pretty clear.



No but he may have existed. You are losing sight of the point.There's a historical probalbity that Jesus existed and there's no reaosn to assume otherwise and they can't offer any kind of evidence to back the assertion and type the scale in favor of doubting it.


Besides just blantly ignoring about 15 sources that say he did within the first two centuries,some of them based upon personal knowledge of his deisciples.


I did not say that! this is just typical of you guys changing the spin on my comments. I never said that, and in fact in an early post I said he is intelligent. I don't think of him as stupid. I think some of the assumptions he makes are stupid, I'm sure he thinks the same of me. That is not a reason to think of him as stupid. He's just on a soap box. I've been there too.

Metacrock

Ok you are letting them set the Metacrock! :wave:

Really, skeptics have made so much out of my name nothing would schock me now. But my own dyslexia has gotten the better of me. I've called myself everything from Meatcorck to Metacock.

Metacrock

I've been considering doing that.



I'm considering doing that

Intelligitimate

For the love of Christ, Meta, come off your little martyr complex...

You don't engage Doherty in any critical way. Your 'critique' is superficial and doesn't deal with Doherty's arguments. For example, you cite 1 Cor.3 as an example of what Paul knew of a historical Jesus, as if Doherty has nothing to say about it. You don't ever try to engage Doherty's reading of certain Epistles like Hebrews. You just don't ever engage Doherty's ideas in a meaningful way. So there is little reason to care what you have to say about it.

And this certainly isn't the case for all Christians. Check out Bede's page:

http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusindex.htm

Notice anything different about your critique and Chris Price's? Like his being relevant and yours not? Notice how he constructively engages Doherty's ideas and you don't?

Yes, he does say stuff in his book that he doesn't on his webpage (and vice versa). And his ideas in the book are easily followed. Besides, it doesn't appear that you've read much of his web site anyway, so who cares?

spin

:notworthy


spin

Sven

OK, Arthur was a bad example.

Here you have it: tradition.

Was there any evidence which let us to doubt Gilgamesh's existence?

So what? I don't see your point, sorry.

As I said: I know little about the topic, but your responses indeed looked like evasions to me. It may be only an uneducated opinion, but it's the opinion that perhaps more lurkers share.

So what? Nobody claims that it's impossible that Jesus existed. He also may have existed, so the analogy is a good one, I think.

Same for Gilgamesh who reportedly also had some god-like abilities (if I remember correctly).

Sorry, I paraphrased what I got from your writings about him. So there's even more reason to doubt that everything from his book is on his website (according to Intelligitimate, it isn't).

spin

Let me reiterate an example I use, which may be more useful.

A certain Ebion, who was the founder of the Ebionite movement in early xianity, or so thought Tertullian, Hippolytus, Jerome, etc. The name ebionaioi is a transliteration of an Aramaic/Hebrew word, ebion, meaning "poor". This hasn't stopped the early xian fathers from disseminating all sorts of information about this invented figure. Epiphanius tells us where he was born. Jerome cites from his writings!

Fortunately the Ebionites died out, otherwise who knows what sort of fanciful stuff would have been cooked up?


spin

Toto

What would you call most of the Hebrew Scriptures? Jonah and the Whale? The story of Job? The Exodus?

Toto

If you want to follow Doherty's ideas, read his web site ( www.jesuspuzzle.com ) and his book. Many of Doherty's critics have not bothered to read or understand what he writes, and just have an overwhelming emotional reaction against the idea of a mythical founder of Christianity.