Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ApostateAbe · 01-22-2012, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abe

I read the first few pages of your book (The Jesus Puzzle), I was unhappy with it, and I ignored the rest of it, so I think a negative appraisal of the whole book is fair.

If you really think that this is a legitimate analogy to what I said about my review of The Christ Conspiracy, it shows that you need to exercise your critical thinking habits beyond the confines of your simplistic appeals to authority.

I read the entire Christ Conspiracy and judged that the final part of it (or the objectionable elements within it) were irrelevant to the case she made in the preceding bulk of the book. You, on the other hand, did not read The Jesus Puzzle beyond the first few pages, which is hardly the same thing.

And I have no doubt you were "unhappy with it," since it ran up against your set-in-concrete opinions and your prejudice against anything worthy being written by someone outside established academia.

Again, pathetic.

Earl Doherty

My opinion of The Christ Conspiracy was very heavily affected by the very large array of false claims sourced from myths found only in modern literature. For me, it is especially relevant, because I see those same false claims repeated time and again on the web by mythicists, propagated in their documentaries, books, debates and pamphlets. A big reason I grant more respect for Richard Carrier is that he is willing to call out that kind of serious bullshit. He and I represent the sort of thinkers who care about truth enough to do that. You can understand, then, why your half-endorsement and Price's condemnation-turned-endorsement of Acharya S rubs me the wrong way. Is it about the truth, or is it about marketing allies? If it is about the truth, then why not stand with Richard Carrier against those false claims?

aa5874 · 01-22-2012, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

....... A big reason I grant more respect for Richard Carrier is that he is willing to call out that kind of serious bullshit. He and I represent the sort of thinkers who care about truth enough to do that. You can understand, then, why your half-endorsement and Price's condemnation-turned-endorsement of Acharya S rubs me the wrong way. Is it about the truth, or is it about marketing allies? If it is about the truth, then why not stand with Richard Carrier against those false claims?

How is it possible that you care about the truth when you have REJECTED the Jesus stories and have written your own Gospel from Guesswork, imagination and Unreliable sources?

You have stated on a number of times that Jesus in the NT was an apocalyptic preacher when it has been pointed out to you that that your claim is erroneous.

Even Ehrman has claimed the Gospels and the sources for the Gospels are not historically reliable yet you use the NT without corroboration.

I really don't know what you call the truth.

In the earliest gMark, Jesus preached the Good NEWS of the Kingdom of God.

Mark 1

Quote:

14 Now after that John was put in prison , Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying , The time is fulfilled , and the kingdom of God is at hand : repent ye , and believe the gospel...

Jesus did NOT give the Jews the BAD NEWS of an Apocalypse only the GOOD NEWS of the Kingdom of God.

Now, please tell us the Truth?

Did NOT Jesus in gMark have a PRIVATE discussion about the Apocalypse with FOUR disciples, named John, James, Andrew and Peter? See Mark 13.3

In the earliest Jesus story in gMark Jesus did NOT publicly declare that Jerusalem would be destroyed and that no stone would be left upon one another.

Cognoscenti324 · 01-23-2012, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I think we should wait until March 20 and see what Ehrman writes before either praising or condemning him. There's a lot going on in the world in the meantime that is more important and entertaining than this issue.

What?? Withhold judgement until he actually presents his case? That's just crazy talk......

EmmaZunz · 01-23-2012, 10:35 AM

Earl - this Ehrman book could be a big moment. Might expose your work to a whole new crowd of people?

Hope so.

Wishing you all best

EZ

andrewcriddle · 01-23-2012, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

By the way, is Ehrman's book still due to be available only in electronic form? If so, any response I make (by myself or in concert with others) will be in trouble. I have just spent three frustrating months trying to convert my Jesus: Neither God Nor Man to Amazon Kindle, and have failed. Numerous communications with the "Kindle Team" (all located in India, apparently, unless all the tech people in the U.S. happen to have Indian names!) have failed to solve the problems I have run into. They seem incapable of anything but stock responses and offering links to explanatory material which doesn't explain or requires a degree in Rocket Science to interpret. (Nobody thinks linearly these days, I guess, and the instructions are all over the map.) Among other things, I have run into unsolvable indentation problems, and most important, Kindle's apparent inability to support even the simplest special characters (the "o" and "e" letter with a bar over them in transliterated Greek words)--despite the fact that they declare such characters *are* supported, but can't explain why my conversion doesn't do so. So much for outsourcing. I can't seem to get around this India team and reach anyone in the U.S. who might know a little more about the system.

Hi Earl

This may be quite useless, but there is a site kindleformatting.com which provides advice about formatting for kindle and sells a book giving detailed instructions.

Whether it is any good I don't know.

Andrew Criddle

judge · 01-24-2012, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

These two methods would make any theory you can possibly imagine consistent with the evidence. There is nothing wrong with those two methods as long as one supplies a strong argument. If they are mere possibilities proposed to make the theory fit, then they are mere ad hoc. Earl Doherty does this all throughout his literature. For example, he explains the passage in Josephus about "James, the brother of Jesus, called Christ," as interpolation, where "called Christ" did not originally exist. The evidence seems to stand against this, as it would leave "Jesus" unidentified until a few lines later (at best), breaking a consistent pattern of Josephus, but it is still a possibility, and Earl Doherty writes as though the mere possibility is enough to save his case. In history, though, anything is possible. Making a case should be about probability, and, typically, the theory with the least number of improbable ad hoc explanations is the winner.

There is no evidence against the idea that "called Christ" is an interpolation.

Abe just explained what he thought the evidence was.

Quote:

The evidence seems to stand against this, as it would leave "Jesus" unidentified until a few lines later (at best), breaking a consistent pattern of Josephus,

You need to explain why this is not evidence if you want to deal with the content of Abe's post

Steve Weiss · 01-24-2012, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Steak.

I don't eat garbage.

The historical Jesus is the product of forgeries, fraud and fiction.

Jesus of Nazareth is without corroboration and is found in historically unreliable sources.

100% and to the point. Anyway, I prefer chocolate to crackers any day.

aa5874 · 01-24-2012, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

The evidence seems to stand against this, as it would leave "Jesus" unidentified until a few lines later (at best), breaking a consistent pattern of Josephus,

You need to explain why this is not evidence if you want to deal with the content of Abe's post

Abe presented NO evidence just an opnion.

Secondly it is a Presumption that Jesus called Christ in Antiquities 20.9.1 was from Nazareth, a presumption he was dead, a presumption that his mother's name was Mary. a presumption that he lived in Galilee and baptized by John.

Again, HJers have made Presumptions Without evidence and want others to accept their imagination.

ApostateAbe does NOT accept the Jesus story in the Canon and want people to BLINDLY accept what he IMAGINES happened.

I find this extremely disturbing because the Four Canonised Gospels seem to have been INVENTED using the same methodology of HJers.

ApostateAbe seems to think Whatever is imagined is true, the best dreamer is the winner or people who dream the same things are right.

We cannot be constantly going the same debunked claims by HJers.

No writer in the NT Canon claim Jesus of Nazareth was human with a human father and No non-apologetic source mentioned a character called Jesus of Nazareth.

There is NO data in antiquity for the character called HJ of Nazareth who was an Obscure preacher.

The phrase "Jesus called Christ" cannot be a biography or a historical account.

The phrase "Jesus called Christ" does NOT explain anything about Christianity.

Let us stop wasting our time with people who do NOT understand what evidence of antiquity is needed to show that there was an historical Jesus of Nazareth who was an Obscre preacher.

HJers NEED a credible source with an ACTUAL BIOGRAPJY of HJ of Nazareth that was an Obscure preacher.

No such document exists today.

judge · 01-24-2012, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I think we should wait until March 20 and see what Ehrman writes before either praising or condemning him. There's a lot going on in the world in the meantime that is more important and entertaining than this issue.

Yes, we should wait until the book is out before we condemn him. :devil1:

Steve Weiss · 01-24-2012, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

There is no evidence against the idea that "called Christ" is an interpolation.

Abe just explained what he thought the evidence was.

Quote:

The evidence seems to stand against this, as it would leave "Jesus" unidentified until a few lines later (at best), breaking a consistent pattern of Josephus,

You need to explain why this is not evidence if you want to deal with the content of Abe's post

The miraculous claims of the OT and NT establish those books as fiction on the face of it. It is ludicrous to even consider these books seriously.

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

01-23-2012, 10:35 AM	#54
EmmaZunz Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: UK Posts: 98	Earl - this Ehrman book could be a big moment. Might expose your work to a whole new crowd of people? Hope so. Wishing you all best EZ

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.