Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gnosis92 · 05-10-2007, 12:54 PM

Christ-mythicists, do you think dissimilarity is a valid criteria of historical study?

Toto · 05-10-2007, 01:01 PM

The criteria of dissimilarity is one of those made-up tests that the historical Jesus scholars have invented. It only applies if you accept that there was a historical Jesus and want to try to separate the legendary accretion from the historical core in the gospel stories.

I have never seen this criteria used in any other branch of study.

gnosis92 · 05-10-2007, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The criteria of dissimilarity is one of those made-up tests that the historical Jesus scholars have invented. It only applies if you accept that there was a historical Jesus and want to try to separate the legendary accretion from the historical core in the gospel stories.

I have never seen this criteria used in any other branch of study.

Tell that to Susan Smith.

Toto · 05-10-2007, 03:48 PM

Who is Susan Smith? or should I say, which Susan Smith?

I should clarify. There are branches of engineering and social science that compute indices of dissimilarity. But there is no other area of history that uses a criterion of dissimilarity the way NT studies does, to try to judge historical validity.

Biff the unclean · 05-10-2007, 04:01 PM

I am a Jesus-fictionalist. I think that the overwhelming similarity to pre-existing myth is exactly what you would expect from such poor writers as the gospel authors.

Malachi151 · 05-10-2007, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The criteria of dissimilarity is one of those made-up tests that the historical Jesus scholars have invented. It only applies if you accept that there was a historical Jesus and want to try to separate the legendary accretion from the historical core in the gospel stories.

Agreed. This presumes that the writers of the fiction wouldn't introduce any of their own original ideas. This is the problem that I always get into when discussing the usage of prior texts by writers. A good example is the flood story, which is based on a similar story that existed among the cultures of the region prior to the writing of the Torah, as evidences by the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Clearly the Biblical story is based on something like the EoG, if not the EoG itself., yet due to the differences many Christians try to deny this, as though when a story teller reinvents a story they don't reinterpret it and make changes

Malachi151 · 05-10-2007, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

I am a Jesus-fictionalist. I think that the overwhelming similarity to pre-existing myth is exactly what you would expect from such poor writers as the gospel authors.

I wouldn't call the Gospel writers poor, especially not the writers of Mark and John.

Biff the unclean · 05-10-2007, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

I wouldn't call the Gospel writers poor, especially not the writers of Mark and John.

Were they better writers they wouldn't have had to lift so much from mythology.

Toto · 05-10-2007, 04:29 PM

This is how the criterion of dissimilarity is used and justified:

The Search for the Historical Jesus: Why start with the sayings? (emphasis added)

Quote:

On the assumption that the sayings of Jesus were repeated and interpreted time after time, thus forming layers of tradition, Norman Perrin argued in Rediscovering the Teachings of Jesus that the tradition-history of each saying must be written in order to discover its "most primitive form." He used three main criteria in his study to determine the tradition-history of Jesus' sayings:

the criterion of dissimilarity, on the grounds that a saying which differs in its emphasis both from Jesus' background and from the foreground of the church was preserved because it was authentic
the criterion of coherence which judges materials to be authentic if they are consistent with those judged authentic in terms of the first criterion
the criterion of multiple attestation which takes materials to be authentic if they stem from most or all the pre-Synoptic sources.

There is also a criterion of double dissimilarity - the sayings of Jesus that were dissimilar to both the Jewish and Hellenistic cultures of the time.

Malachi151 · 05-10-2007, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

Were they better writers they wouldn't have had to lift so much from mythology.

I disagree. I don't view it as "lifting". I think that the Gospel of Mark is genius, it is incredibly sophisticated, and its use of scripture does not come from weakness, it is it's strength.

View Poll Results: Christ-mythicists, do you think dissimilarity is a valid criteria of historical study
I am a Christ-mythicist, and yes I think dissimilarity is a valid criteria for ascertaining history	1	5.88%
I am a Christ-mythicist, but no, I do not think dissimilarity is a valid criteria	7	41.18%
I am NOT a Christ-mythicist, and yes I think dissimilarity is a valid criteria.	2	11.76%
I am NOT a Christ-mythicist, and no, I do not think dissimilarity is a valid criteria	6	35.29%
What the hell is the criteria of dissimilarity? I can't find it in wikipedia.	1	5.88%
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

05-10-2007, 12:54 PM	#1
gnosis92 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: usa Posts: 3,103	Christ-mythicists, do you think dissimilarity is a valid criteria of historical study Christ-mythicists, do you think dissimilarity is a valid criteria of historical study?

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

05-10-2007, 01:01 PM	#2
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The criteria of dissimilarity is one of those made-up tests that the historical Jesus scholars have invented. It only applies if you accept that there was a historical Jesus and want to try to separate the legendary accretion from the historical core in the gospel stories. I have never seen this criteria used in any other branch of study.

05-10-2007, 03:48 PM	#4
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Who is Susan Smith? or should I say, which Susan Smith? I should clarify. There are branches of engineering and social science that compute indices of dissimilarity. But there is no other area of history that uses a criterion of dissimilarity the way NT studies does, to try to judge historical validity.

05-10-2007, 04:01 PM	#5
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	I am a Jesus-fictionalist. I think that the overwhelming similarity to pre-existing myth is exactly what you would expect from such poor writers as the gospel authors.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.