Clivedurdle

I understand the mj ideas as very wide ranging attacks on many fronts on the idea of an hj.

Probably from habit the mj fj positions have not been looked at that carefully.

If we look at the history of oral traditions and Q and similar they can be seen as artificial quite recent attempts to link the presumed hj with certain documents.

But it is quite legitimate to ask is Mark some form of religious fiction, might it be a propaganda weapon, what is similar for example about Hercules.

The Passion scenes do have strong theatrical elements - plays may have fictional cores.

When you bring in psychology, sociology, anthropology, neurology and the geopolitical reality of the time, phrases like oriental cult make sense. Zarathustra and gnosticism look as if they might be very important.

A starter human is not needed. Herge's Adventures of Jesus make a lot of sense.

There are very diverse arguments against a starter human, and many clear possibilities of other ways these phenomena of xianities evolved.

We see as in a glass darkly, but we don't see a bigbang Jesus who has some relationship to these gospels.

Dave31

So what does JP Holding mean in his new book when he says "profile"? He apparently has profiles on Doherty, Wells, Freke and Gandy, Acharya, Harpur, Kenneth Humphreys, Robert Price, Richard Carrier etc.

I will tend to agree with Toto:

And others as well. When I'm in the mood for a good knee-slapping laugh I'll read Holdings "Zeitgeist Heist" section.

I don't see Holding writing anything worthwhile on Josephus, Tacitus, Lucian and Pliny the Elder etc. Acharya and others has dealt with them quite handily already.

Holding most likely won't address these:

Pliny, Tacitus and Suetonius: No Proof of Jesus
http://www.truthbeknown.com/pliny.htm

The "Historical" Jesus?
http://www.truthbeknown.com/historicaljc.htm

Her book "Who Was Jesus?" explains many of the Gospel issues. Soon, "Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection" will be available.

James Hannam

As it happens, I don't think the book is really aimed at people like Toto who have followed the debate from the start. But it might be useful as a ready reference if you can't find the thread where Don demolished diabolical mimicry or the claim Nazareth never existed gets trashed.

The book is really for people who have come across the Jesus Myth and mistake it as some sort of position held by serious scholars rather than amateurs and a few mavericks. You might, at first blush, make the mistake of taking conspiracy theorists like Acharya S or the Zeitgeitz team seriously. The book quickly demolishs stuff like that so you can move onto something more productive.

Carrier's book is setting the terms of the debate, I believe, but he has always been quite careful not to come down firmly on either side.

Best wishes

James

No Robots

I can confidently assert that I am now a mythicist.--Richard Carrier

Layman

I thought you were Jeffrey Gibson?

Layman

This could swing either way to the uninitiated, but having read your contribution I must admit that you are a handsome man.

Layman

Well, while Holding has written something worthwhile on Josephus (and Tacitus, Lucian and Pliny the Elder), I am the author of the chapter about Josephus in Shattering the Christ Myth. I have to admit that I overlooked Acharya's work in this field. I did, however, address arguments by Early Doherty, G.A. Wells, Peter Kirby, Steve Mason (though he accepts partial authenticity of the TF) and Ken Olson. Of course, anyone who worries about addressing Acharya when these other commentators' arguments are addressed will likely choose not to be influenced by anything further on the subject.

Dave31

Acharya's work has been very under-estimated by many. Mostly by folks who've never actually studied it at all.

Enjoy the book titled, "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" - here's a video description - http://www.truthbeknown.com/videos.html

Enjoy the detailed excerpt from her forthcoming book, Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/luxor.html

Also found here in post 4 - http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=100965

A general broad stroke dismissal of her work will not suffice.

In the book description, I see Holding admits:

Dave31

It appears JP Holding & clan are keeping a close eye on this thread here at IIDB and doing the usual trash talk about anyone who disagrees with their views. Why am I not surprised?

Post 511 by Holding:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...&postcount=511

Toto

Holding's comment about Richard Carrier is treading close to libel, if it hasn't crossed that line. You don't make remarks like that if you actually have an intelligent argument. What does he think he is accomplishing?