Freethought & Rationalism Archive

No Robots · 04-25-2012, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

The threads in this section are about the Bible and its characters. You may need to go elsewhere for discussion of non-Biblical characters.

Surely, in the interest of appearing disinterested, we should demonstrate the general applicability of our methods.

Toto · 04-25-2012, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juststeve

Toto:

Please list for me the other figures from ancient history whose very existence is being currently questioned on FRDB. There are scores of threads currently on this site arguing that Jesus never existed. How many for other figures?

Steve

Since this is BCH, the focus is on a key debate in that area, the historical Jesus.

You will find archived threads that compare the evidence for Jesus to that for Alexander, Caesar, Apollonius of Tyana, Socrates, and probably others. (Of course, Alexander and Caesar are not comparable, but Christians have actually claimed that there is more evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great.)

But nobody really cares one way or another whether Socrates existed, or even Alexander (except for some crazy Balkan nationalists...) The only reason the existence of Jesus is an item of controversy is that Christians make his historical existence an item of dogma, and recite his existence as part of their creed.

I don't really care one way or another whether Jesus existed. The issue has been perpetuated in this forum primarily by Christians.

aa5874 · 04-25-2012, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

...But nobody really cares one way or another whether Socrates existed, or even Alexander (except for some crazy Balkan nationalists...)...

Of course people care if Socrates and Alexander existed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

.... The only reason the existence of Jesus is an item of controversy is that Christians make his historical existence an item of dogma, and recite his existence as part of their creed.

I don't really care one way or another whether Jesus existed. The issue has been perpetuated in this forum primarily by Christians.

There is an INTERNATIONAL QUEST for an Historical Jesus by Scholars so it is NOT only Christians who are looking for a Human Jesus.

People ALL over the world are LOOKING ALL OVER for a real Jesus because NT Jesus don't look real to them. Hope they find him soon. Well, they probably never will.

MrMacSon · 04-25-2012, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Surely, in the interest of appearing disinterested, we should demonstrate the general applicability of our methods.

There should be application of the historical method -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compara...rical_research

http://www.gslis.utexas.edu/~palmqui...historical.htm

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/e...08-3010-e.html

No Robots · 04-25-2012, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

There should be application of the historical method

By all means, please provide a demonstration, show how the application of the historical method resolves the question of Christ's historicity.

MrMacSon · 04-25-2012, 06:07 PM

Briefly, the inability to clarify the few sources as primary or even secondary, along with the context of dozens, if not thousands, of gospel stories being around at and before the time the key stories were canonised, shows embellished myth development over many generations.

No Robots · 04-25-2012, 08:15 PM

Great. Now do Hillel.

sotto voce · 04-27-2012, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juststeve

The phrase extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence was popularized by Carl Sagan although not original to him. I think most skeptics would agree with the formulation but how does it apply to the Historical Jesus?

The first thing to notice is that there are many extraordinary claims made about Jesus none of which is supported by extraordinary evidence. For example, the claims that he walked on the water, brought people back from the dead, and rose from the dead himself are extraordinary claims.

Are they? Is it extraordinary that a creator would draw attention to his presence in his creation by rational means?

Vorkosigan · 04-27-2012, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Great. Now do Hillel.

What exactly should we do, NR? What textual/historical problem calls for Hillel-mythicism?

Vorkosigan

Selsaral · 04-27-2012, 05:25 AM

The OP seems to imply that you can take a mythological text, remove all of the magic and myth, and be left with history.

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

04-25-2012, 06:07 PM	#16
MrMacSon Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: South Pacific Posts: 559	Briefly, the inability to clarify the few sources as primary or even secondary, along with the context of dozens, if not thousands, of gospel stories being around at and before the time the key stories were canonised, shows embellished myth development over many generations.

04-25-2012, 08:15 PM	#17
No Robots Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Edmonton Posts: 5,679	Great. Now do Hillel.

04-27-2012, 05:25 AM	#20
Selsaral Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan Posts: 3,095	The OP seems to imply that you can take a mythological text, remove all of the magic and myth, and be left with history.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.