Doug Shaver

I think it's also an irrelevant analogy.

So far as I'm aware, no ahistoricist denies that some real people have been mythologized. We just think there is good reason to doubt that Jesus of Nazareth was one of them.

aa5874

Standing does not really help the historical case at all.

All he has done is to confirm the obvious flaw in the case for the historical Jesus.

And this is the fundamental flaw..

HJer's have refused to accept the evidence before them.

There are only layers of mythology from the NT and the church writers, yet, they ignore the mythological evidence and want people to imagine or assume that perhaps all the historical evidence was destroyed, interpolated, embellished or simply forgotten.

But, we can only deal with the evidence before us, we cannot deal with what may be out there somewhere that may or may not help.

No jury deals with evidence that has not been presented, but HJers differ, they want people to believe that what perhaps may be out there somewhere must be taken into consideration, even though they cannot tell what really is out there.

It seems it has never ever occurred to HJers that what may be out there somewhere may in fact be more layers of myth.

There are only layers of myth for Jesus at this time.

Jesus is a myth is a reasonable verdict.

Amaleq13

That isn't a problem, that is a necessity for any attempt to show that an historical figure could be thoroughly mythologized.

Unless one can say that the figure actually was historical despite the mythological nature of the data, the mythicist would be free to say that the offered example might also entirely mythical.

Since there really isn't any good reason to think that "the Jews" (a less than useful generalization) were actually doing this, that isn't a problem either.

Toto is correct that the biggest problem with the comparison is the fame of the central figure. Only a confirmed historical "nobody" who is subsequently heavily mythologized would form the basis of a true analogy.

aa5874

Haile Selassie was deified. He cannot be a myth at all in anyway.

The Caesars were deified, not made myths at all in any way.

Making false claims about real persons do not in any at all turn them into myths.

The analogy of Haile Selassie is one of the worst examples for historicists to use to try to establish an historical Jesus, since not one shred of history of Jesus of the NT be found anywhere at all.

Amaleq13

Unless you think he really was a god, then his deification was also an example of mythologizing.

Correct.

Relating stories about the person that present an exaggerated or idealized depiction of the person, often involving the supernatural, is what turns them into myths.

A story deifying a person would be an example of an exaggerated or idealized depiction that involves the supernatural.

aa5874

Unless, you think he did not exist, he was deified.

False.

The Caesars are not myths or Haile Selassie, regardless of false supernatural stories about them.

Rasatfarians, like many believers, just simply believe and propagate lies, and mis-leading information about Haile Selassie.

Like the stories about the Caesars and Haile Selassie.

lpetrich

Although Haile Selassie is well-documented, he does provide an interesting example of how real people can acquire a mythology with little resemblance to them, and Mr. Standing's point is a legitimate one.

But in his scenario, it would be difficult to recover anything about a historical Jesus Christ from the Gospels.

Amaleq13

No, thinking he didn't exist changes nothing with regard to my statement. Stories that deify an individual, whether historical or entirely fictional, are examples of myths.

What I was trying to get you to understand is that, contrary to your comment, deification and mythologization are not incompatible or contradictory concepts. Telling a story about a person that deifies them is telling a myth about that person.

And that is true regardless of whether the person actually existed.

Deification stories about them are myths about them but that obviously doesn't make them myths.

Yes, those are examples of myths about people. If all we had were the myths, it would be difficult to say whether they actually existed or not.

aa5874

Mr. Standing really has no point. He has completely overlooked the fact that people have been deified since antiquity.

He has shown from his analogy that Haile Selassie did not even need to exist for Rastafarians to worship him as a God and to make up supernatural events that are completely incredible or implausible.

Rastafarians are not concerned about the truth, just to maintain their belief.

And other observation is that perhaps Mr. Standing has inadvertently showed under what conditions religious beliefs can be maintained.

Rastafarians live thousands of miles from Ethiopia, perhaps Jesus believers originated thousands of miles from Judaea, many decades after his supposed death, and did not get to know the truth about Jesus until it was too late.

aa5874

That is most absurd.

If all evidence show guilt, it is very easy to declare a guilty verdict.

If all we have are myths of any entity, then it is absolutely easy and reasonable to declare that entity to be a myth.

Why was it so easy to declare Achilles a myth? All we have about Achilles are myths, unless you think that all the history of Achilles was destroyed, imterpolated, forgotten or confused.

And it is extremely easy, and far more so, to declare Jesus a myth since hundreds of texts of mythology have survived with Jesus as the offspring of the Holy Ghost, born without sexual union, transfigured, resurrected and ascended, unless you think all the hundreds of texts were interpolated.


It would appear HJers have a serious problem, they don't want to deal with all the mythological evidence.