Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Have you done critical work on Buddha? What excepts Mohammed? What real study have you taken of the subjects? Are you familiar with modern cults? Ancient ones? Modern primitive ones? Why should anyone take your opinion as the defining matter?

Originally Posted by Malachi151

My arguments are here: http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...th_history.htm

The core of any true Mythical Jesus argument has to be that there is much evidence which contradicts the existence of a human Jesus. If all we had was lack of evidence then there wouldn't be a very sound argument. All you could argue there would be that we don't have reliable accounts of this person. But that's not what we have. What we have, at least in terms of some of these arguments, is evidence that CONTRADICTS the existence of a human Jesus.

These would be things like:

1) Paul's writings where he says things that don't make any sense if Jesus had been a real person, such as when Paul describes Jesus as a mystery that is being revealed by prophecy and scripture, such as the fact that Paul never talks about a return of Jesus, just a future coming of Jesus, such as when Paul says in Romans 10 that we the Jews still need to be held accountable for not honing Jesus, even though they have never heard of him, etc.

2) Contradictory early traditions, all of which are based on scritpures, such as how Jesus is described as a high priest and Yom Kippur sacrifice in Hebrews, how Paul never says anything about Jesus having been killed during Passover in all of his letters, how Paul only calls Jesus a "Passover Lamb" one time when he is obviously addressing people's actions on Passover, and like the case of Jesus being said to have been both crucified on a cross and hung from a tree (the hanging from a tree being a idea coming from scripture).

3) The fact that none of the earliest apologists had one single shred of information about Jesus outside of the Gospel stories. All of their defense of a human Jesus relied on their references to the Gospels, they themselves, even only some 100 years after his supposed death, had no other evidence for his existence than the Gospels, which they clearly didn't understand the true origins of and which they fully trusted despite the fact that much of the Gospel narratives now are provably unhistorical.

4) The fact that virally every detail of the Gospels can be shown to be based on scripture or other sources, not on real events, i.e. the scenes are based on things that relly happened, they are based on creating scenes from earlier scritpures. Even every detail of the crucifixion in the Gospels comes from prior scritpures, there is no real historical information there. Had there been a real event this is not what one would expect.

etc.

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

So whats your explanation.Where did Christianity come from.Who were these 12 disciples.Were they also invented?by whom?who were these NT writers that kept inventing characters.What about Paul?Was he also part of the grand scheme?

why did he believe that Jesus Was historical?did he receive the myth from the original plotters?or paul is also invented,then who invented Paul?who wrote those letters of Paul?

What about extra-biblical references to the apostles?were they also invented?

Originally Posted by jules?

perhaps i should have put this in philosophy, the question is why do you lean towards a historical Jesus rather than a cosmic Christ?

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

Sorry, I'll stop derailing your thread...thought I was just throwing in an aside...

Perhaps I should have just said, 'i don't lean towards a historical jesus, nor do i believe in a cosmic christ'.



He's just another myth, IMO.

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

Tacitus is questionable at best. From wikipedia:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Tacitus had access to the imperial archives.


Or what he read.


This is conjecture on your part, for which there is no evidence.


And baseless accusations they are.


Are you seriously denying that there is no extent description of Jesus other than that in the imagination of mythicists? Really? Have you never even heard of the Gospel of Mark?


Bullfinch is what you need to read. Or the Oxford Classical Dictionary. Or the Encyclopedia of Religion, subsection Dying and Rising Gods. Edith Hamilton is outdated and uses a very sloppy methodology.


Wine itself isn't used as a powerful symbol for Jesus either.


Shifting goalposts, aren't we? But keep rolling your eyes, because you're wrong anyway. Dionysus wasn't accused of thinking himself a god in front of Pentheus either. I suspect you never read the Bacchae:



King Pentheus wants to know the Dionysian rites, which the God refuses to tell him. In fact, Pentheus doesn't even know that Dionysus is a God. He throws him in jail, then Dionysius breaks free. Jesus, on the other hand, is condemned to the cross and dies. Dionysus blames Pentheus, but Pilate is blameless.

Similarities are far too superficial. Many humans, which Mark portrays Jesus as, die having been condemned to the cross after a trial. That was oh too common back then.

Moreover, yeah, that's right, that's not all, Jesus wasn't accused of thinking himself a God, either. He was accused of being King of the Jews, an imperial offense against the Romans.


Bait and switch fallacy.


Once again with the bait and switch fallacy, and it shows the weakness of your position, for both men and women followed both Christ and Dionysus, and thus it shows no similarity at all.

Which is a load of crap.

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

At the behest of the thread starter, I'm no longer arguing along this topic...

Feel free to start your own thread with this topic in mind.

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

I think I've said enough. Your arguments have shown to be false. If you think your position still has merit, argue for it, but otherwise you've been rebutted. Good day.

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

I'm only being polite to the thread starter.

Using that to achieve this 'victory' of yours is a cheap shot.

So, keep fooling yourself.