Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dog-on · 06-28-2011, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Yes, for sure. I was engaged in debates against religious apologists on a Christian forum, and it was a very appealing and useful line of attack. It fits the theme that the Bible is all myth, from start to finish. The standard historical-critical way of thinking of Jesus as like a normal human being buried in the legend granted too much ground and was a little too hairy.

How does accepting all the claims as written, other than believing that they are actually true, provide any less ground to people who, by definition, already rely on faith and scripture to determine the truth of their position?

ApostateAbe · 06-28-2011, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

If someone believes that Jesus never existed, then odds are that it has something to do with one's animosity toward Christianity.
All you need to do is to search on Google and YouTube, find the mythicist websites and blogs, and you can see how often the promotion of Jesus-myth theory and anti-religiosity overlaps and coincides with each other.

If one believes that Jebus never existed, WHY would that person want to give to support to a religion that has long used its religious lies to manipulate men into engaging in ceaseless hatreds and wars? :huh:

It really shouldn't take much of a a Sherlock to figure out that the former view would quite logically lead to the latter.

This is a good example, right here. There isn't necessarily a logical connection between believing that Jesus is myth and believing that religion is the inspiration for so much evil in the world, but the ideas are strongly related, not just per my own proposition, but in the minds of mythicists themselves.

Steve Weiss · 06-28-2011, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

If one believes that Jebus never existed, WHY would that person want to give to support to a religion that has long used its religious lies to manipulate men into engaging in ceaseless hatreds and wars? :huh:

It really shouldn't take much of a a Sherlock to figure out that the former view would quite logically lead to the latter.

This is a good example, right here. There isn't necessarily a logical connection between believing that Jesus is myth and believing that religion is the inspiration for so much evil in the world, but the ideas are strongly related, not just per my own proposition, but in the minds of mythicists themselves.

Religion is irrational and so is apologetics. Faith leads to force rather than persuasion, and there is in no one's possession any document that would substantiate the existence of a biblical Jesus, or any of the other names attributed to him. The default position is fiction unless proven otherwise.

ApostateAbe · 06-28-2011, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

If someone believes that Jesus never existed, then odds are that it has something to do with one's animosity toward Christianity. All you need to do is to search on Google and YouTube, find the mythicist websites and blogs, and you can see how often the promotion of Jesus-myth theory and anti-religiosity overlaps and coincides with each other. For example, you do a search for Jesus never existed on Google, and this is the first thing that comes up:

www.jesus never existed.com

"For all who would struggle against the tragedy of religion"

For anyone who is curious, I have a large thread on the connection between Jesus-mythicism and anti-Christianity/anti-fundamentalist here:

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=283440

I have used that thread to collect some of the times I have seen mythicism and anti-religiosity promoted in exactly the same contexts, and I have collected very many of them. They are not hard to find. They kinda jump out at you almost everywhere the topic is discussed.

So, what is it in Christanity that you view as factual? Is there any possibility of any of the stories and miracles being confirmed by science and independent historical evidence? Not a one. The absence of any credible evidence for any religion makes them all myths, Christianity only being the most prominent one in the Western World. To say that one is anti-Christianity is the same as saying that one is anti-lying.

Another good example. This sort of thinking does not apply to all mythicists or all Jesus-minimalists, but I take it as a pattern that is predominant and easily recognizable all the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Religion is irrational and so is apologetics. Faith leads to force rather than persuasion, and there is in no one's possession any document that would substantiate the existence of a biblical Jesus, or any of the other names attributed to him. The default position is fiction unless proven otherwise.

And another.

dogsgod · 06-28-2011, 06:05 AM

That Christianity may have begun with a mythical character is not a bad thing, it's not a blemish on Christianity. Myths are an effective means of expressing truths about the human condition, it doesn't discredit Christianity one bit. It's the mainstream of scholarship and its self serving quest for an historical Jesus that will take the fall, and rightfully so. Christianity will continue without so much as a hiccup should it eventually be accepted that the historical Jesus is not so evident as scholarship would now have us believe.

ApostateAbe · 06-28-2011, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsgod

That Christianity may have begun with a mythical character is not a bad thing, it's not a blemish on Christianity. Myths are an effective means of expressing truths about the human condition, it's not a bad thing and it doesn't discredit Christianity one bit. It's the mainstream of scholarship and its self serving quest for an historical Jesus that will take the fall, and rightfully so. Christianity will continue without so much as a hiccup should it eventually be accepted that the historical Jesus is not so evident as scholarship would now have us believe.

Huh. Christianity's acceptance of mythicism would fully undercut a fundamental tenet of the Nicene creed accepted among almost all branches of Christiandom, feed into the criticism that Christian doctrine is no more than imaginary, and grant authority to Christianity's most extreme critics. You don't see how that may be a blemish on Christianity?

judge · 06-28-2011, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsgod

That Christianity may have begun with a mythical character is not a bad thing, it's not a blemish on Christianity. Myths are an effective means of expressing truths about the human condition, it doesn't discredit Christianity one bit. It's the mainstream of scholarship and its self serving quest for an historical Jesus that will take the fall, and rightfully so. Christianity will continue without so much as a hiccup should it eventually be accepted that the historical Jesus is not so evident as scholarship would now have us believe.

You misunderstand the issue here. Its not mythicism versus christianity.
Its
1.mythicism unsupported by evidence and rational methodology

verses

2.rationalism and rational methodology.

Who cares about christians, they have no rational methodology...but...neither do mythicists.

dog-on · 06-28-2011, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsgod

That Christianity may have begun with a mythical character is not a bad thing, it's not a blemish on Christianity. Myths are an effective means of expressing truths about the human condition, it's not a bad thing and it doesn't discredit Christianity one bit. It's the mainstream of scholarship and its self serving quest for an historical Jesus that will take the fall, and rightfully so. Christianity will continue without so much as a hiccup should it eventually be accepted that the historical Jesus is not so evident as scholarship would now have us believe.

Huh. Christianity's acceptance of mythicism would fully undercut a fundamental tenet of the Nicene creed accepted among almost all branches of Christiandom, feed into the criticism that Christian doctrine is no more than imaginary, and grant authority to Christianity's most extreme critics. You don't see how that may be a blemish on Christianity?

Speaks volumes Abe...

Remember, the most important part of the creed are the two little words right at the beginning. As such, the only effect of a change in position from the scholarly community might be a slightly longer wait at the unemployment line.

ApostateAbe · 06-28-2011, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Huh. Christianity's acceptance of mythicism would fully undercut a fundamental tenet of the Nicene creed accepted among almost all branches of Christiandom, feed into the criticism that Christian doctrine is no more than imaginary, and grant authority to Christianity's most extreme critics. You don't see how that may be a blemish on Christianity?

Speaks volumes Abe...

Remember, the most important part of the creed are the two little words right at the beginning. As such, the only effect of a change in position from the scholarly community might be a slightly longer wait at the unemployment line.

Fascinating belief, thank you.

hjalti · 06-28-2011, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Well, first remember that this is about sociological tendencies, not universal behaviors, so the proposed patterns may or may not apply to you. To think of Jesus as a historical person of the same rough profile as in the gospels would be granting legitimacy to many of the myths of the gospels in the minds of many mythicists, and mythicists would rather not have that.

Really? What type of myths are you thinking about?

Abe, are you just basing this on your experience with debating some mythicists on the internet?

Quote:

Their worldview is framed as us-against-apologists, and they see primarily those two options. Many of the mythicist debaters have that unintended perspective. They often explicitly tell me that my own claims for a historical Jesus resemble the claims of Christian apologists. If you want to see it taken to the extreme, you need only to examine aa5874.

Again, are you just basing all this on your own experience of debating some mythicists on the internet?

Is aa5874 a mythicist? And I don't think that you can use that fellow as an example for something typical.

Quote:

Yes, for sure. I was engaged in debates against religious apologists on a Christian forum, and it was a very appealing and useful line of attack. It fits the theme that the Bible is all myth, from start to finish. The standard historical-critical way of thinking of Jesus as like a normal human being buried in the legend granted too much ground and was a little too hairy.

Ok. Maybe most mythicists aren't like you.

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

06-28-2011, 06:05 AM	#45
dogsgod Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: British Columbia Posts: 104	That Christianity may have begun with a mythical character is not a bad thing, it's not a blemish on Christianity. Myths are an effective means of expressing truths about the human condition, it doesn't discredit Christianity one bit. It's the mainstream of scholarship and its self serving quest for an historical Jesus that will take the fall, and rightfully so. Christianity will continue without so much as a hiccup should it eventually be accepted that the historical Jesus is not so evident as scholarship would now have us believe.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.