Freethought & Rationalism Archive

arnoldo · 04-13-2010, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

If Rodney Stark's estimate in "The Rise of Christianity" that there were 7,530 Christians in the world in 100 A.D. is anywhere near correct. .

Stark states the following;

Quote:

You also argue for steady growth by individual conversions rather than by mass conversions. Why?

RS: We don’t have a single documented case of mass conversion. Yes, there’s the passage in the Book of Acts, and I’m not one of these people who say, “Don’t trust the Bible.” But you’ve got to understand what people meant by numbers in those times. Numbers were rhetorical exercises. You’d say a million when you really meant a hundred. What you’re really saying is “lots.” In Acts, I think the numbers are meant to say, “Look, wonderful things are happening.” If the historical demographers are right, Jerusalem had about 25,000 people in it at the time. So if you start talking about eight or ten thousand converts, that’s a little bit out of scale.

http://touchstonemag.com/archives/ar...id=13-01-044-i

A relatively low number of christians in the first century (7,530) could also signify that the myth/meme was just beginning to spread like a virus.

Johnny Skeptic · 04-14-2010, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

A relatively low number of Christians in the first century (7,530) could also signify that the myth/meme was just beginning to spread like a virus.

My argument is not that Jesus was a myth. My argument is that the alleged miracles that he performed are a myth.

If there were only a relatively few Christians in the world in 100 A.D., and if Jesus did not perform miracles, it is reasonably possible that the main reason for the relatively small number of Christians was that many people testified that they did not see Jesus perform miracles. Obviously, if Jesus did not perform miracles, it would have been much easier to promote Christianity in the second century since most of the people who had been alive during the time of Jesus were dead.

It is very unlikely that Jesus performed many miracles in Jerusalem, and throughout all Galilee, and throughout all Syria, and was followed by great multitudes, and performed many more miracles that were not recorded. If that happened, Jesus' exploits would have been unprecedented in human history, and he would easily have become the biggest celebrity in the entire Middle East and beyond.

What first century, non-Christian evidence do you have that Jesus performed miracles?

Why did Jesus perform many miracles in many places? What was he trying to accomplish?

bacht · 04-14-2010, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Surely there wasn't enough time for the myths about Ned Ludd to develop. The Luddites (c. 1810) were simply too close to the actual events (c. 1780) to have come about by myth. There was no time for a myth to take root and if a mythic version was being proclaimed it would easily be discredited by eyewitnesses of the events.

Right, and we also know that Elvis never really "left the building"

And that Paul McCartney really died in the late 1960s

And that Ozzie Osborne ate animals onstage

And that the U.S. military kept extraterrestrial remains in Area 51

And that pyramids sharpen razor blades

And that the world will end in 2012

And all this from the most scientific and rational culture on the planet - we've come a long way baby...

Clivedurdle · 04-14-2010, 11:44 AM

Quote:

This seems very similiar to an older story about Elisha.

and older stories by Homer, as West Side Story is a rewrite from Romeo and Juliet.

Oh, and that is the other way to make sure there are no witnesses - move the location - Homer's tale from the Aegean to Palestine, with different gods, Shakespeare's from Italy to New York.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.