Freethought & Rationalism Archive

PhilosopherJay · 07-06-2008, 12:03 PM

Hi James,

Congratulations on you Ph.D. Your advice to mythers is good.

Ten years ago, when I got my Ph.D. in Philosophy, I found only the slightest traces of the idea that Jesus did not exist on the internet. I think Earl Doherty might have had an early version of his site up at that time, but proposing that Paul did not know a human Jesus was still not quite proposing that Jesus did not exist. A few copies of G.A. Wells books making the claim were available on Amazon, but that was about it. Burton Mack and Robert Price were also just beginning to make some noise in that direction.

There was simply not enough people who held the position to be able to talk about "Jesus Mythers" as a group. There would have been absolutely no reason to write a book opposing them. That they are today a recognizable group of people holding a position worthy of being attacked and denounced, even if only by apologists, shows progress.

Quote:

"Theories have four stages of acceptance: i) this is worthless nonsense;
ii) this is an interesting, but perverse, point of view; iii) this is
true, but quite unimportant; iv) I always said so.
-J.B.S. Haldane, 1963

Quote:

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Hannam

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLD

Looks like more of the same polemical crap that we get from McDowell and Strobel. I'll check it out at the local B&N.

I'd really like to see a good response to Doherty and other MJ'ers from a serious atheist (or at least non-religious) scholar. I think Bart Ehrman is an HJ'er and certainly not a religious believer.

The trouble is, rightly or wrongly, almost all real scholars think the Jesus Myth not worth bothering with. That's why only apologists get involved.

Contrary to what Jay says, the main debate is not whether Jesus existed and at this rate never will be. That's why the only substantial rebuttals come from JP Holding and his ilk. Real scholars can't be bothered. This situation will remain unchanged until Mythers get off their arses, get PhDs and get to grips with the field. That's what I did in the history of science. When I first started posting here, I was an amateur. Now I am Dr Hannam. Mythers need to realise they need to do the same and up their game.

Best wishes

James

Read the first chapter of God's Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science absolutely free.

aa5874 · 07-06-2008, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

And, you don't have to get a PHD to recognise folklore and legendary tales. Achilles was accepted as a myth universally, the son of a sea-goddess.

Nonsense. Folklore develops around even historical people. How do you tell the difference, aa? By the way, I recommend you post on the Rational Response Squad, your natural home.

"You don't have to get a PHD to recognise folklore and legendary tales" is a true statement and you can confirm the veracity.

Are you claiming that folklore and legendary tales are the criteria for determining figures of history?

Then, Achilles, son of a sea-goddess, is a figure of history?

GakuseiDon · 07-06-2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Are you claiming that folklore and legendary tales are the criteria for determining figures of history?

No, I'm claiming that folklore and legendary tales are not the criteria for determining figures of history.

Are you claiming that folklore and legendary tales are the criteria for determining figures of history?

aa5874 · 07-06-2008, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Hannam

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Now, if a person has come to the realisation that the NT is mythical folklore and legendary tales, in what would you recommend for him to get a PHD?

Well, you start by learning Koine Greek. Two years should do it. For me it was Latin, but same difference. Take whatever the university entrance exam is in your country as a private student so you have a bit of paper to wave.

Next, you need an Masters (I assume you have a bachelors). The best bet would be in an Ancient Near East Studies department or else Classics if they have someone interested. I did history. You'd do a dissertation whcih should be on say, one or two of the would-be Messiahs in Josephus or perhaps 1st century Platonism if you a Dohertian.

Then, the big one. You should do the PhD in whichever subject (and probably the department) you did the MA. Your PhD thesis will be on what you regard as the most important foundation that the historical Jesus has. You will not claim he does not exist, but you will knock down his biggest support.

The write a book based on your PhD and pose the question in the epilogue.

Then you are a Dr and even Jeffrey Gibson will have to take you seriously

.

Best wishes

James

Read the first chapter of God's Philosophers: How the Medieval World Laid the Foundations of Modern Science absolutely free.

A juror does not need to be an expert in any field, just to examine the evidence and form an opinion.

The information as supplied by the NT, Church writers and external non-apologetic sources have led to me to conclude that Jesus was indeed a Myth, a legendary tale believed to be true after being written by unknown authors.

I don't need to read Koine or Latin to fully understand that Matthew 1.18 and Acts 1.9 are folklore.

Toto · 07-06-2008, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Hannam

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLD

Looks like more of the same polemical crap that we get from McDowell and Strobel. I'll check it out at the local B&N.

I'd really like to see a good response to Doherty and other MJ'ers from a serious atheist (or at least non-religious) scholar. I think Bart Ehrman is an HJ'er and certainly not a religious believer.

The trouble is, rightly or wrongly, almost all real scholars think the Jesus Myth not worth bothering with. That's why only apologists get involved.

Contrary to what Jay says, the main debate is not whether Jesus existed and at this rate never will be. That's why the only substantial rebuttals come from JP Holding and his ilk. Real scholars can't be bothered. This situation will remain unchanged until Mythers get off their arses, get PhDs and get to grips with the field. ...

Richard Carrier has his PhD, and is researching a book as we speak. We been over the tired canard that real scholars are all convinced that Jesue existed before.

I don't think I'm willing to spend $20 to read a rehash of arguments that I've been reading on this board since the year 2000, without some indication that the book breaks some new ground.

aa5874 · 07-06-2008, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Are you claiming that folklore and legendary tales are the criteria for determining figures of history?

No, I'm claiming that folklore and legendary tales are not the criteria for determining figures of history.

Well, the stories about Jesus' conception, birth, temptation, miracles, transfiguration, resurrection and ascension are all fundamentally mythical folklore and this information indicate that Jesus was a myth.

All mythical entities have mythical folklore and legendary tales written or told about them. Jesus, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, and Achilles, the son of a sea-goddess, are prime examples of mythical figures.

Sheshonq · 07-06-2008, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

No need to invoke the Evil Atheist Conspiracy as an explanation for this error, Layman.

And the fact that you chose to do so says more about yourself than about any deficiency of this discussion board.

I think hasty conclusions based on bias is a better explanation than a conspiracy.

What hasty conclusion?

The mistake in question (Toto's) was one of simply not reading a previous post where the book was identified by title. Simple human error. But instead of just letting a simple error pass, you used it as an opportunity to indict the discussion quality of this board:

Which I think provides a cautionary note for learning about the new book on this discussion board.

You mentioned hasty conclusions based on bias? Physician, heal thyself.

judge · 07-07-2008, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Hannam

The trouble is, rightly or wrongly, almost all real scholars think the Jesus Myth not worth bothering with. That's why only apologists get involved.

Contrary to what Jay says, the main debate is not whether Jesus existed and at this rate never will be. That's why the only substantial rebuttals come from JP Holding and his ilk. Real scholars can't be bothered. This situation will remain unchanged until Mythers get off their arses, get PhDs and get to grips with the field. ...

Richard Carrier has his PhD, and is researching a book as we speak. We been over the tired canard that real scholars are all convinced that Jesue existed before.

I for one would be interested in reading a book by a real scholar who thinks the Jesus myth is worth bothering about. Can anyone recommend a title that is avaliable?

everettf · 07-07-2008, 06:29 AM

I've mention this before. How come there has never been a portrait of Jesus. You would think that someone that charismatic, there would have been a drawing, a sketch or a painting of someone as popular as Christians claim.
here is a website that has some information about art 2000+ years ago.
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/675/he2.htm

Clivedurdle · 07-07-2008, 01:57 PM

And the very interesting arguments for example in Michael Woods Myths and Heroes about Jason, Queen of Sheba and Arthur etc seem to have been ignored, as has the huge story telling tradition highlighted by Bible Unearthed.

And don't forget a certain prison at Megiddo with fish and mention of the god Jesus Christ....

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

07-07-2008, 06:29 AM	#59
everettf Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: orange county,ca Posts: 630	I've mention this before. How come there has never been a portrait of Jesus. You would think that someone that charismatic, there would have been a drawing, a sketch or a painting of someone as popular as Christians claim. here is a website that has some information about art 2000+ years ago. http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/675/he2.htm

07-07-2008, 01:57 PM	#60
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	And the very interesting arguments for example in Michael Woods Myths and Heroes about Jason, Queen of Sheba and Arthur etc seem to have been ignored, as has the huge story telling tradition highlighted by Bible Unearthed. And don't forget a certain prison at Megiddo with fish and mention of the god Jesus Christ....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.