Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 06-07-2012, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

One can investigate events or traditions or popular ideas, and we can designate such investigation "history",

In what respect would such investigation be history? This is still too tangential.

aeebee50 · 06-07-2012, 05:33 AM

It would be easier to explain the poem. "Lion-Eating Poet in the Stone Den."

spin · 06-07-2012, 06:20 AM

Can we please try to focus on the significance of history, what is historical (as in "historical Jesus") and what historicist is (eg "a Jesus historicist"), rather than continue to go in tangents.

Diogenes the Cynic · 06-07-2012, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

I don't think HJ needs to be tied to the Gospels, he just needs to be any real person who was revered as "Jesus Christ" by the seminal Jesus sect (i.e. by the "pillars").

(Your parenthesis is purely eisegetical, ie it's not from any relevant source text.)

What does text have to do with anything? Christianity had an origin. It either started with a real person or it didn't. Texts are irrelevant. I'm reading into nothing.

Will Wiley · 06-07-2012, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

First we need to understand what you mean by "(in) history".

Subject to gravity.

sotto voce · 06-07-2012, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will Wiley

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

First we need to understand what you mean by "(in) history".

Subject to gravity.

Very good.

Except when walking on water, of course.

Will Wiley · 06-07-2012, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Can we please try to focus on the significance of history, what is historical (as in "historical Jesus") and what historicist is (eg "a Jesus historicist"), rather than continue to go in tangents.

History is whatever people say it is, ultimately. If some agree the evidence is sufficient it is history, if not, its not.
If it doesn't end up in our net it isn't a fish

Will Wiley · 06-07-2012, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will Wiley

Subject to gravity.

Very good.

Except when walking on water, of course.

Sheshbazzar · 06-07-2012, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

...any actual historical individual..

Is that tautological?

only if extracted from the context of the sentence that it appears within.

There are people, events, and things that are commonly described and referred to by the hegemony as being 'historical' when in fact there is -no verifiable history- to support that they in fact ever occurred or existed.
So yes, there is what is claimed to be 'historical', and there is what is verifiably historical -the 'actual historical', and the two are NOT the same.

.

spin · 06-07-2012, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

(Your parenthesis is purely eisegetical, ie it's not from any relevant source text.)

What does text have to do with anything?

That's where you found Paul's discussion of the pillars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Christianity had an origin. It either started with a real person or it didn't. Texts are irrelevant. I'm reading into nothing.

Except Gal 2.

Can we have this somewhere else if needed? It's a tangent here.

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

06-07-2012, 05:33 AM	#22
aeebee50 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 5,810	It would be easier to explain the poem. "Lion-Eating Poet in the Stone Den."

06-07-2012, 06:20 AM	#23
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Can we please try to focus on the significance of history, what is historical (as in "historical Jesus") and what historicist is (eg "a Jesus historicist"), rather than continue to go in tangents.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.