Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Solo · 11-01-2009, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The lack of external corroboration for Jesus is not funny.

Was it meant to be ?

Paraphrasing Yogi Berra : if people don't want to write about Jesus nobody can stop them.

Jiri

jgoodguy · 11-01-2009, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The lack of external corroboration for Jesus is not funny.

Was it meant to be ?

Paraphrasing Yogi Berra : if people don't want to write about Jesus nobody can stop them.

Jiri

E E Doc Smith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lensman_series wrote such a disclaimer in his works.

Paraphrasing Churchill Never in the field of human investigation was so much written by so many with so few facts.

aa5874 · 11-01-2009, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Please read what I wrote. I asked you if the disclaimer would be in the 4000 year copy of Gone with Wind.

Again, would there be a disclaimer?

Now, if an author places a disclaimed in his book then whether you think it is 0% imagination is actually irrelevant. You simply cannot guess such things.

I sure hope someone does not find only a Spiderman Comic book 2000 years from now without a disclaimer, based on your views.

The disclaimer is not from the author, but from the publisher. The disclaimer allows the use of historical facts and persons.

A Spiderman comic book from my childhood and teen hood contained no
disclaimer which came into use after. A 2000 year old comic could be missing the disclaimer.

A Spiderman comic contains some historical facts including fashion, construction features, political views and perhaps historical events and people.

Therefore a historian without anything else could extract historical facts from the comic. That said, I remember an ancient Mad Magazine description of an excavation of a 1960s motel 2000 years or so in the future and it was very amusing.

How can you be sure that a person reading a comic would reliably categorise unconfirmed information as historical facts?

If gMark or any single Gospel was the only source to determine historical facts of antiquity, then it would be extremely difficult to reliably extract or reliably determine what really was the true state of affairs in antiquity.

Solo · 11-01-2009, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Was it meant to be ?

Paraphrasing Yogi Berra : if people don't want to write about Jesus nobody can stop them.

Jiri

E E Doc Smith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lensman_series wrote such a disclaimer in his works.

Paraphrasing Churchill Never in the field of human investigation was so much written by so many with so few facts.

And no doubt you want to express, as Churchill did, that you (we ?) owe them a debt of gratitude.

Jiri

jgoodguy · 11-01-2009, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

E E Doc Smith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lensman_series wrote such a disclaimer in his works.

Paraphrasing Churchill Never in the field of human investigation was so much written by so many with so few facts.

And no doubt you want to express, as Churchill did, that you (we ?) owe them a debt of gratitude.

Jiri

No such expression was implied or intended. :huh:

My

at the numerous verbose Historical Jesus theories and the amount of real and virtual ink needed to make the mythical Jesus case.:constern01:

:banghead:

Maybe a united theory will combine both into a verbose theory using a large amount of virtual and real ink.

andrewcriddle · 11-02-2009, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Can you offer some other illustrations of important, newsworthy figures or activities, from that era, which Philo neglected to recount?

For example the high priests Annas and Caiaphas are not mentioned by Philo.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle · 11-02-2009, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

For example the high priests Annas and Caiaphas are not mentioned by Philo.

Andrew Criddle

Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee during the ministry of Jesus) is not mentioned either.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874 · 11-02-2009, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

For example the high priests Annas and Caiaphas are not mentioned by Philo.

Andrew Criddle

Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee during the ministry of Jesus) is not mentioned either.

Andrew Criddle

But, the books that mention the history of Herod Antipas did NOT write one single thing about any ministry of Jesus of Nazareth.

The people who wrote about the high priests Annas and Caiaphas did NOT write one single thing about Jesus of Nazareth.

It is just highly absurd to argue that Jesus did exist or was very likely to exist even though Philo or any-one else did NOT mention him.

Josephus mentioned persons called Jesus from a MAD-MAN, ROBBER, to HIGH PRIEST but not Jesus of Nazareth, the supposed Messiah and creator of the world.

Why would Philo mention Jesus once he did not exist or was unknown?

Historicity cannot be successfully argued without historical evidence.

EarlDoherty · 11-02-2009, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PZ

Earl, while we all appreciate the feel and appearance of hard-copy books, postage kills overseas sales. I faced buyer resistance because of the total cost and time delay in receipt till I offered E-books. Then, sales took off. Think about it.

Listen, I'm still working on bringing my website design into the 21st century (with the help of a sister). E-books, maybe in another decade!

I've heard a rumor that Jeffrey Gibson has reappeared here in order to shoot down my new book (which of course he hasn't read), but I don't see him on this thread, so maybe I've got my rumor wrong. Anyway, I thought I would take the opportunity to quote from Robert Price's review of the new book (which he has read). (I never pass up a chance to quote positive words on my behalf!):

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert M. Price

"Earl Doherty is a masterful writer and an indefatigable scholar who leaves no relevant stone unturned. Any critic who seeks (desperately) to write him off because he writes without establishment academic credentials only demonstrates how far he himself falls short of recognizing real scholarship when he sees it....Earl Doherty's masterpiece."

Now, if Jeffrey would like to rebut that, I'd be happy to send him a free copy of my new book (which I promised him at the same time as I promised a free copy to every member of The Jesus Project--now a promise I don't have to fulfill since it's gone belly up).

Incidentally, I have a new piece up on my website called "Some Thoughts on the Demise of The Jesus Project". It concludes with some reaction to Hoffmann's derogatory comments on my work which were discussed here some time ago (which have of course been inserted by someone--wonder who--into the Wikipedia article on myself) and on Gibson's eager support on IIDB last year of those comments.

If anyone is in a position to add Price's above comments to that Wikipedia article, I would appreciate it, though I have no idea what would be involved in doing so.

All the best,
Earl Doherty

badger3k · 11-02-2009, 06:42 PM

I'll have to try this again later - going to read through the rest before I reply, if it's worth it. My kids have better arguments, and they're still in high school.

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

11-02-2009, 06:42 PM	#200
badger3k Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Killeen, TX Posts: 1,388	I'll have to try this again later - going to read through the rest before I reply, if it's worth it. My kids have better arguments, and they're still in high school.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.