Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
05-23-2012, 03:14 PM | #81 | ||||||||||||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[Attempted bait and switch on credentialism omitted] Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||
05-23-2012, 03:51 PM | #82 | |||||
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Wells in particular has been criticized for having a PhD in the wrong field. |
|||||
05-23-2012, 04:26 PM | #83 | ||||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 692
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
A larger issue, however, is to lump the enormous amount of diverse scholarship behind historical Jesus studies together in the way one can with the better mythicists. There are a handful of authors like Price who, while in the extreme minority, are nonetheless of a qualititatively different sort than Freke and Gandy. I find their methods to be quite flawed, but whereas (for example) The Jesus Mysteries simply compares Christ to Mithras without alerting the reader that the mystery cult version likely dates after the gospels, Doherty does say "Although Mmithras was an ancient Persion god, the form his cult took in Hellenistic times is a Greek version. Some scholars locate its inception in Asia Minor about 100 BCE, others as late as the latter first century CE." (p. 116). However, the historicists are far, far more diverse as far as their historical approaches and skill are concerned. More importantly, even if any attempt at reconstructing the historical Jesus is doomed to fail, it is quite a different thing to say he never existed. The former can be a statement about the problems with determining what is historical in our sources (or is a statement that no such elements exist). The latter requires an alternate explanation for the origins of christianity which do not result from a historical person who became shrouded in myth and legend by the time anything substantial was written about him. It is here that even those most skeptical and critical of the whole quest for the historical Jesus break from the mythicists. They regard the quest as futile because no methods are capable of seperating fact from fiction in the gospels, and thus we are left with the bare skeleton of some guy Jesus who inspired a following and was executed, and whatever else might be accurate in what we have too inexorably tied into the myth to be recovered. Quote:
Quote:
2) According to many, history is as much a novel construction as it is a re-construction. Quote:
|
||||||||
05-23-2012, 04:38 PM | #84 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 692
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
05-23-2012, 05:30 PM | #85 | |||||||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
05-23-2012, 05:35 PM | #86 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
Why do you constantly Bait and Switch??? An early Paul destroys ALL CLAIMS that Jesus was mythologised LONG after he was dead. Paul supposedly preached Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God, in the likeness of God, was LORD, and was RAISED from the dead for over 17 years. An EARLY Paul suggests that Jesus was MYTH from the very start. If Paul was early then he claimed his Jesus was NOT human since 37-41 CE. If Paul was early then he claimed Jesus was RESURRECTED since 37-41 CE. If Paul was early then he claimed the resurrected Jesus VISITED him since 37-41 CE. Please, no more Bait and Switch. Jesus was MYTH and falsely shrouded in history. Early Paul claimed Jesus was God's own Son. See Galatians 4.4 |
|
05-23-2012, 05:44 PM | #87 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Quote:
Anglican Theological Review" is a quarterly journal of theological reflection. In the spirit of sound learning that has been the hallmark of Anglican divinity, our aim is to foster scholarly excellence and thoughtful conversation in and for the church." Quote:
|
||
05-23-2012, 07:55 PM | #88 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 692
|
Clearly.
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
05-23-2012, 08:14 PM | #89 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
Quote:
The usual. i.e is there a secure and unambiguous christian archaeological relic dated before the 4th century? |
|||
05-23-2012, 09:51 PM | #90 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 692
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|