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 02-24-2010, 11:18 AM   #11
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 425
Default

Quote:
spamandham "This is a nice summary of the *external* evidence of a later date for the gospels. I wonder why she omitted the *internal* evidence? "
She doesn't omit any internal evidence, "The "Historical" Jesus?" link is just a brief excerpt. She discusses Hadrian in all of her books.

Quote:
spamandham "The combination of this internal and external evidence beats the snot out of the sophomoric arguments typically used to try to force an early date on the gospels."
Agreed

You might enjoy these mentions of Hadrian

Late Dating of the Gospels

Pliny, Tacitus and Suetonius: No Proof of Jesus

Of course, there's more details in the books.
Dave31 is offline  
Old 02-24-2010, 01:33 PM   #12
avi
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Location: eastern North America
Posts: 1,468
Default mythicist position...

Dave, thanks for the links, above, much appreciated.

I read Acharya/Murdoch's comments re: Pliny/Tacitus/Suetonius. I feel comfortable with her conclusions, but I think they are based on opinion, rather than evidence.
My opinion is not different from her conclusion.

I was not satisfied, however, with her one word reference to the correspondence between Paul and Seneca. If legitimate, i.e not forgeries themselves, as I have suggested earlier today on this forum in a different thread, then, Paul is placed, preaching about Jesus, in Rome, during the reign of Nero.

I would welcome any comment you or she may wish to offer...

To me, the sine qua non for any mythicist position is evidence. Maybe 100% of our evidence is forged? Then what? If our conclusions are based upon "interpolation", how is our conduct different from those who believe in supernatural nonsense?

I find it very difficult to sort out fact from forgery, especially when one invokes the "patristic" evidence, i.e. copies of documents citing other documents, to validate the non-existent originals.

Thanks,
avi
avi is offline  
Old 02-24-2010, 06:57 PM   #13
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avi View Post
To me, the sine qua non for any mythicist position is evidence. Maybe 100% of our evidence is forged? Then what?
What I think needs to be done is simply ask the question, if the new testament and its history and the christian history of Eusebius and the christian martyrs of Eusebius and all later embellishments are simply fourth century political forgeries, then what evidence should we expect to find emanating out from the crime scene? What are the implications that Constantine presented a known fabrication to the Roman Empire?

Utter controversy!
See Arius. Julian

Authoritarian censorship.
See Eusebius, Cyril.

Quote:
If our conclusions are based upon "interpolation", how is our conduct different from those who believe in supernatural nonsense?

I find it very difficult to sort out fact from forgery, especially when one invokes the "patristic" evidence, i.e. copies of documents citing other documents, to validate the non-existent originals.
The evidence is speaking to us from the ground of the 4th century.
And I think that the "Mythicists Position" needs to ask who were the Gnostics,
and what do the Gnostic Gospels and Acts tell us about Jesus? They suggest
a Jesus of myth, but they also strongly suggest a Jesus of Fable and Fiction.
The Interpretation of Knowledge: NHC 11.1

This text makes some interesting statements. The first presented is that many people fled in advance of the implementation of Christianity because of reproaches and humiliations, to the extent they fled without having heard that the Christ had been crucified
They came to believe by means of signs and wonders and fabrications. The likeness that came to be through them followed him, but through reproaches and humiliations before they received the apprehension of a vision they fled without having heard that the Christ had been crucified. But our generation is fleeing since it does not yet even believe that the Christ is alive.


The final bolded statement is intriguing because it essentially summarizes the refuge condition of the editors of the NHC. From this it may be strongly argued, if not concluded, that the author (and editors) did not believe in Jesus whatsoever.

This argument is strengthened by a following entirely docetic statement in this text, which concludes with the satirical observation that Jesus was nailed by the Church as an internal asset.
And he was crucified and he died - not his own death, for he did not at all deserve to die because of the church of mortals. And he was nailed so that they might keep him in the Church.
mountainman is offline  
Old 02-24-2010, 09:02 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

<edit>
Loomis is offline  
Old 02-25-2010, 01:31 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,779
Default

Gday,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave31 View Post
Acharya S/Murdock currently has five books with over 2,100 pages of text, including over 5,700 footnotes/citations to primary sources and the works of highly credentialed authorities from a wide variety of relevant fields, adding up to over 1,600 bibliographical sources. Her books also contain over 300 illustrations.
And DOC has over 1500 posts here :
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124603

And just as convincing.


K.
Kapyong is offline  
Old 02-27-2010, 09:01 AM   #16
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 425
Default

Kapyong, I don't see any real point with your post. Even Christian NT scholars can't agree on evidence. And I didn't see any scholars in that thread. Here are a few quotes from NT scholars:

Quote:
"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy. In the end, the historian is left with the difficult task of sifting through the Four Gospels for historical tradition."

- Dr. John P. Meier

- Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ (WWJ) page 86
Quote:
"The gospels are in fact anonymous"

- Dr. Craig L. Blomberg

- WWJ (60)
Quote:
"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."

- Dr. John Dominic Crossan

- WWJ (24)
Quote:
"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2 "...According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3

1. Dr. Metzger, HLS, 8.

2. Dr. Meier, II, 536.

3. Dr. Geisler, CA, 320.

- Who Was Jesus? page 259
Quote:
"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"

- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (v.6,83)
- WWJ (84)
Dave31 is offline  
Old 05-19-2010, 01:13 PM   #17
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 425
Default

A 6-part video series titled, "Mythosphere"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN1vCESALds
Dave31 is offline  
Old 05-19-2010, 01:59 PM   #18
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Starts with an excerpt from

Elizabeth Vandiver
Classical Mythology: Part 1 - Lecture 1 Introduction
(The Teaching Company/The Great Courses)

And other excerpts from other copyrighted videos follow.

I really dislike arguments on youtube. If you are presenting music or art, I can see the value of a video, but I would prefer to see a logical argument laid out in text form.
Toto is offline  
Old 05-19-2010, 03:09 PM   #19
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave31 View Post
Quote:
mountainman "Does Acharya/Murdock make any mention of Nag Hammadi?"
I can find no mention of the Nag Hammadi texts. What does the author theorise concerning the authorship of the texts bound within the 12-13 volume set of the NH codices? I am assuming you are in at least partial contact with the author. If you dont know could you please ask her. I would be interested to hear what she has to say on this matter. Many thanks.
mountainman is offline  
Old 05-19-2010, 03:39 PM   #20
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 425
Default

Quote:
Toto "I really dislike arguments on youtube. If you are presenting music or art, I can see the value of a video, but I would prefer to see a logical argument laid out in text form."
Fair enough, the guy who made the video is not a scholar, nor are the videos meant to serve as a scholarly documentary. It's just a private project that I thought was good enough to mention here since it was on topic ... no need to start a new thread for that video.

Quote:
mountainman "I am still not sure whether Nag Hammadi is mentioned by the author."
Yes, she mentions the Nag Hammadi in nearly every book she has written to date. No, I'm not in any contact with her, I have just actually read and own her books. She mentions the Nag Hammadi in Christ Conspiracy, Suns of God, Who Was Jesus? and Christ in Egypt.
Dave31 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:35 PM.

Top

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