No Robots

Christ birthers.... I like it!

No Robots

Look, no hard feelings. You guys have generously provided me with a forum to expound and develop my views, and goof off at work. Seriously, thanks.

bacht

If anything there has been a conspiracy to reject scientific analysis of the meager evidence that has survived from two millenia ago.

It's a bit like the UFO people: 'abductees' provide such sincere testimony that they just can't be wrong, ergo all the probabilities of physics are thrown out the window. It seems as basic as objective versus subjective reportage, and subjectivism is more popular.

Thinking like a child is easier and more emotionally satisfying, I think we can all recognize that.

jgoodguy

The only scientific analysis of the 2000 YO meager evidence that I know of is that there is no evidence. This takes both the HJer and JMer arguments out of scientific analysis and puts them into literary analysis informed by history, archeology, sociology and anthropology.

After all, just saying there is no evidence is so unsatisfying.

andrewcriddle

This seems to be referring to what happens subsequent to Christ's death. See verse 12. Christ enters the heavenly tabernacle/temple on the basis of his (previous) suffering and death.

Andrew Criddle

No Robots

Well, I would say that literary analysis is scientific, but you are correct that what we are dealing with here is indeed literary analysis. Such analysis, done correctly, with due consideration for history, archeology, sociology and anthropology, leads conclusively, in my view, to the assertion of Christ's historicity. But let's start out slowly by looking at a comparable figure. What are the criteria that allow us to determine that Hillel is historical, and how does this compare with the case of Christ?

bacht

Yes, I didn't express my thought very clearly. We're all familiar with the literalist and inerrantist approaches to these texts. Treating them as human artifacts the same as others is a relatively new idea.

aa5874

Archaeology is a SCIENCE related field.

Scientific analysis has ALREADY been applied to the HJ/MJ arguments but it is just that HJers REFUSE to accept the results.

All Scientific dating analysis so far have failed to show that there are any writings about Jesus in the first century before the Fall of the Temple.

You seem to forget that if Jesus did NOT exist that there would be NO credible historical evidence of his existence and that is PRECISELY the case.

A theory is Good once there is supporting DATA.

1. Jesus was described as MYTH. See Matthew 1.18

2. Jesus ACTED as MYTH. See Mark 6, Mark 9 and Mark 16

3. The PRIMARY goal of Jesus was to PERFORM a mythological act, the resurrection. See 1 Cor 15 and Mark 16

4. Jesus vanished from earth by a mythological act, the ascension. See Acts 1.9

5. There is NO credible historical evidence from antiquity for Jesus. See ALL the extant writings of antiquity from the 1st century.

Jesus satisfies the MYTH criteria perfectly.

Even Scientific analysis of all writings so far have not been able to show that any writings about Jesus Christ was KNOWN in the 1st century BEFORE the Fall of the Temple.

jgoodguy

McGraft has new post up Blogging about Jesus Mythicism: The story so far and promises more reviews of 'Earl Doherty’s tome, Jesus: Neither God Nor Man – The Case for a Mythical Jesus'.

jgoodguy

McGraft has Chapter 6 of Earl Doherty’s Jesus: Neither God Nor Man Up.,