Ted Hoffman

Is that an infraction of some sort?
Dont squander your time on that: MF was not a mythicist in a sense similar to Paul.
I havent investigated that myself. If they did influence each other, I would think that they (or other contemporarios) could have mentioned so. As you read this, I am not aware of anyone who says they influenced each other.
I think the war scattered the people and it took time before the different strands of Christianity could be brought together forcefully to define an Orthodoxy.

GakuseiDon

I know that M Felix rejected the concept of worshipping a crucified man who committed wicked crimes, but where does he reject a HJ as saviour, or the concept of godmen?

Ted Hoffman

Have you read Doherty's response to your second rebuttal? I await your response to my critique of your explanations for the silence.

When, Minucius writes [paraphrased by Doherty for clarity] the following, he ipso facto rejects a HJ:
Unless you want to argue that he was an Ebionite, which is also ruled out by his earlier comments regarding the type of man who deserves honour.

GakuseiDon

In a way. Whenever any analysis of the mythicist case comes up, the arguments seem to revolve around the writer not believing in a historical Jesus rather than in analysing what the writer DID believe in.

How do you know? What are the differences, in your opinion? I'd like to investigate this more. We often compare writings to see who influenced who, and the development of ideas. Why not do the same for the mythicists?

What can we conclude when looking at the mythicists as a whole? I'd say that they felt they were speaking for Christians as a whole, for example. But did each writer have a different set of beliefs, in your opinion?

So, the Second Century writers developed their ideas individually, then? IOW, they weren't influenced by any first century writers?

Ted Hoffman

This is incorrect. We know what Paul believed in. We cannot go beyond what the sources say. Be mad at the sources, not us.
Minucius does not provide any Christology. Paul does. MF, unlike Paul, does not expose his beliefs but from his criticism, we can tell that he rejected a HJ.
Paul does not reject a HJ but shows us that he believed in a MJ.
Those are some of the differences.
Nobody is stopping you. Knock yourself out.

Almost *every* Christian, even today, has a different set of beliefs. Some pray on saturday, some on sunday. Some fornicate, some dont. Some believe in the trinity, some dont. Some believe in a deistic god, some dont. Some believe in frontloading, some believe in creation ex nihilo, some are creationists, some are IDers. Some are flat earthers, some are not. Some are YECs, some are not. Some dont want to touch blood, some indulge in blood transfusion. Some believe in an adoptionist Jesus, some believe in the NT alone, some dont, ...perpetual virginity of mary, purgatory, hell, heaven, final judgement, forgiveness of sins, intercession, predestination... the list is endless.
These schisms are what compelled creation of an orthodoxy and the rest became heretics. These are fundamentals.

You get the idea?
Of course they got influenced. The title Jesus Christ, the idea of resurrection, the disciples/apostles, Pilate, crucifixion etc. They picked these from their predecessors.

GakuseiDon

I read Doherty's response to my second rebuttal, and yours to my first one. Is there another one that you've done?

The subject has been a type of euhemerism. M. Felix is presenting the case that mortals regarded as gods are not, in fact, gods. Therefore there is no point in putting your hopes in them. I can't see why this rules out a belief in godmen.

GakuseiDon

So, can we say that M Felix wasn't influenced by Paul? Would you say the evidence suggests that M Felix made up his beliefs, and they are unconnected to earlier beliefs?

Yep, doing it now.

Well, the mythicist apologists wrote to the pagans of the day as though theirs was the only Christianity on offer. Anyway, we can talk in terms of influence. We can say when one belief began, and changed, for example. But if we can't do that for any of the mythicist writers, is there any reason why we shouldn't say that they made up their beliefs at that time? If they weren't influenced by Paul, for example, then perhaps their mythicism was just an expression of the Second Century.
Do we get any hints in the mythicist writers whether or not they had predecessors?

Ted Hoffman

Nope. We await your serious response.
Considering that MF was a Christian, the highlighted section means he was a Christian who rejected the idea that a historical flesh-and-blood man died and resurrected in a salvific act.
It means his brand of Christianity excludes a HJ. That is what mythicists are interested in.

GakuseiDon

I agree that M Felix rejected the idea that Christians believed that a flesh-and-blood man died and resurrected. As M Felix says, "But that is divine which has neither rising nor setting". And as Tertullian says, "It is a settled point that a god is born of a god, and that what lacks divinity is born of what is not divine." But I know we agree to disagree on the significance of this, so perhaps it isn't worth repeating previous arguments.

Ted Hoffman

MF does not tell us much about his beliefs. But what he rejects is enough to allow us to regard his brand of Christianity as lacking a HJ.
Whether he made them up, read them up or dreamt them up is another matter. If you want to invide me to speculate, I will disapoint you.
Every Christian: Calvinist, Jehovah Witness, SDA, Catholic etc, thinks his is the best that Christianity has to offer.
Wake up. Hellloooooh?
I think everyone picks beliefs and adds their own spin to it. Depending on their erudition, creativity and position in the society.
But that is a very thin thread. You will need to read further to be able to argue plausibly.
Why are you asking this? Once you agree that there were Mythers, then we can start earnest discussions.
I also invite you to look at my bliblicalstudies post in the thread I have pointed Criddle to in my earlier.
Paul uses the OT and relies on revelation for his Christology and soteriology. A number of those early communities behind texts like Didache and Shepherd of Hermas relied on similar sources.