FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-19-2003, 03:00 PM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Aliet
GDon >>>Marcion believed in a HJ, but just not a human one.<<<

Angels are mythical beings - just like dragons. And the IPU.
OTOH, you could define what a "historical figure" means.
In this case: someone who interacted with the physical world at some point in history. What is your definition?

Quote:
GDon >>>You said, "[Theophilus] ridicules pagans for believing dead men could resurrect". Well... no. From this link, you can see he is ridiculing pagans for not believing!<<<

Does he state categorically that Jesus rose from the dead?
No, he doesn't use the word "Jesus". Do you still maintain that he was ridiculing pagans for believing that a dead man could rise, as you said? Or was he ridiculing them for NOT believing? I.e. was your statement correct or incorrect?

Quote:
My argument was that he doesnt mention Jesus. Because (a)he knew of no Jesus or (b) he disbelieved the story of Jesus.

A Christian apologist arguing about Christianity without mentioning Jesus is very suspicious indeed. Its only comparable to someone talking about a wedding without mentioning the bride / groom.
Can you not see the problem in your reasoning??? Athenagoras is a Christian apologist whether he is a HJer or MJer. Either way, he doesn't mention the names "Jesus" or "Christ"... why isn't this a problem for the MJers?
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 12-19-2003, 09:20 PM   #22
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 9,159
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Layman
Ah, the retreat from Doherty begins. That didn't take long.
I was referring to an author that wrote about the Jesus Myth 100 years before Doherty. How could he be retreating from something that hadn't been written yet?
rlogan is offline  
Old 12-19-2003, 09:27 PM   #23
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 9,159
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Layman



Are you trying to understand my points? Just as Mt. Sinai was a place of God's revelation, so too were the places were God revealed his Son to the apostles. Places of God's holy revelation should have been venerated according to the JM. Yet even the JM fails to explain its own lack of veneration.
Where is Mout Sinai?
Quote:

My answer is that belief in a historical Jesus is not necessarily synonymous with interest in relics and site veneration. The evidence is simply overwhelming that many many Christians who JMers and HJers agree affirmed belief in a HJ were not interested in such things. Or at least left behind no evidence of such interest.
You answer with a part hypothetical/part tautology and have the gumption to criticize the direct answer that there is nothing to venerate?

Goodness.

edited to add: There is a key point - so dreadfully key - that i do not see the HJ crowd contending with. What year, exactly, was jesus crucified?


All those witnesses. Big deal "trial" by the Sanhedrin and Pilate. Statements about the day - but not the year. Such a momentous event. The fulfillment of prophesy Christ himself purportedly asserted was necessary.

The crucifixion proponents cannot point to any real evidence that it happened. The first article should be "when".

Why no year? Because the event, as described, did not occur.
rlogan is offline  
Old 12-19-2003, 10:08 PM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Quote:
edited to add: There is a key point - so dreadfully key - that i do not see the HJ crowd contending with. What year, exactly, was jesus crucified?
Dude, I say this in the nicest way possible: read some books. An exact chronology of Jesus' life and all the problems involved in such a reconstruction are a dime a dozen.

If you do not see HJers dealing with this issue it only serves to show that you don't read much literature here. Start with Volume 1 of Meier's Marginal Jew series. He offers a chronology and a great overview of the relevant issues.

Personally, I favor 30 C.E. for the year of Jesus' death but I am fine with ca. 30 C.E. Knowing the exact date is hardly a "key" and negelcted issue as you seem to caricature it as.

Your argument that there is no evidence for a when is just bankrupt. I thoroughly trashed this in point 15 of the Historical Jesus Skepticism FaQ:

http://www.after-hourz.net/ri/jesusfaq.html

I even provided the relevant pages from Meier on the chronology.

It would serve you and everyone else well here to read and familiarize yourselves with the pro-HJ comments in my Jesus FAQ.

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 12-19-2003, 10:26 PM   #25
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 9,159
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Vinnie
Dude, I say this in the nicest way possible: read some books. An exact chronology of Jesus' life and all the problems involved in such a reconstruction are a dime a dozen.

If you do not see HJers dealing with this issue it only serves to show that you don't read much literature here. Start with Volume 1 of Meier's Marginal Jew series. He offers a chronology and a great overview of the relevant issues.

Personally, I favor 30 C.E. for the year of Jesus' death but I am fine with ca. 30 C.E. Knowing the exact date is hardly a "key" and negelcted issue as you seem to caricature it as.

Your argument that there is no evidence for a when is just bankrupt. I thoroughly trashed this in point 15 of the Historical Jesus Skepticism FaQ:

I even provided the relevant pages from Meier on the chronology.

It would serve you and everyone else well here to read and familiarize yourselves with the pro-HJ comments in my Jesus FAQ.

Vinnie
You just proved my point. And I do read literature. I happen to have Crossan's "Histortical Jesus" in front of me at the moment. He can't do it either. Nor does Meier.

The best you HJ wallflowers can do is try to give a range by throwing out one of the two contradictory birth dates, appeal to the "about thirty years old" ministry reference, the year of John the Baptist's work, and count passovers.

Nobody, anywhere in this period can say what the year was. Nobody. Dates were referenced by the year of whoever was reigning. "15th year of so-and-so"

That was a pretty snide remark cloaked with patronizing garb about "read some books". I think Toto made a pretty good point some time ago - when you don't have facts to offer you have only insults to offer.

So now, Vinnie - tell me exaclty what year Christ was Crucified according to a source that actually cites the year. Not one wherin someone tries to extrapolate inderectly from contradictory sources.

I know you cannot - because I do read Vinnie. "Favor" 30 C.E. is not a source. What does Matthew say? Mark? Luke? Epistles? Josephus? Anyone? Nobody.

I dug something up in Tertullian and asked for help pegging it to the A.D. dates and nobody offered help.

What the HJer's are not dealing with is exactly what I said: Why does no author say "Jesus was Crucified in year X of Pilate". Now deal with that.
rlogan is offline  
Old 12-19-2003, 10:41 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,505
Default

[Mod Mode]

Vinnie: Please refrain from the "read some books" type of rhetoric.

rlogan: Please refrain from namecalling like wallflowers.

Thanks guys,

-Mike...
mike_decock is offline  
Old 12-19-2003, 11:58 PM   #27
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by rlogan
You just proved my point. And I do read literature. I happen to have Crossan's "Histortical Jesus" in front of me at the moment. He can't do it either. Nor does Meier.

The best you HJ wallflowers can do is try to give a range by throwing out one of the two contradictory birth dates, appeal to the "about thirty years old" ministry reference, the year of John the Baptist's work, and count passovers.
Rlogan, this thread is called "Challenging Doherty". It would be good to keep this thread on-topic. It's too easy for the focus to get split away.

Of course, you're welcome to start a new thread on off-topic subjects. Dating Christ's birth would be a good one.
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 12-20-2003, 01:15 AM   #28
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 9,159
Default

GD, you aren't the moderator.

Do I actually have to preface my Doherty specific points with "Doherty Says", and then Quote him? Very well.

Here's what "Doherty Says":

"Even Paul, this man so emotional, so full of insecurities, who declares (Philippians 3:10) that "all I care for is to know Christ, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings," "

Paul is sure expressing a powerful want here.
It isn't something that he wants to do. It is all he wants to do.(Share in his sufferings)

So how can anybody be arguing that paul doesn't want to share in his suffering? That would be the crucifixion. If it happened.

So it looks like it didn't happen.

Doherty goes on at length about lack of evidence for crucifixion, and with the perverse logic of the HJers:

"Paul's faith is centered on the crucifixion. What bizarre mental processes could have led him to disembody it, to completely detach it from its historical time and place, from the life which culminated on Calvary?"

Well no kidding. So when did it happen?

Doherty goes on about the complete lack of evidence of a date in the contemporary historical record. He even considers the Christian assertions of darkness or earthquakes that could triangulate the year of crucifiction - and there's nothing there.

The fact that there is no year given for crucifiction is precisely relevant to Doherty.

The veneration theme is precisely relevant to Doherty.

I have reviewed some parts of Doherty and he incorporates by reference literature from 200 years of "Jesus Myth" writings.

So for you to suggest disqualifying me from mentioning such writings as if they did not pertain to Doherty at all is not a very fair tactic.

You want me to disqualify you from, say, quoting the Bible?
rlogan is offline  
Old 12-20-2003, 01:41 AM   #29
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Speaking as a moderator, I see little hope of keeping this thread on a narrow topic. It started after a previous thread on Fredriksen v. Doherty was closed, and that thread was split twice to try to keep on topic. And there are THREE active threads on mythicism vs historicism going right now, with topics spread over all of them.

All we can ask is that the sniping and insults be kept down, and that posts should be substantive.
Toto is offline  
Old 12-20-2003, 01:51 AM   #30
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Regarding Marcion, I posted this in another thread:

Marcion claimed by Jesus Mythers
Toto is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:10 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.