FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-28-2012, 04:30 AM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
Default The New Apologists - Ken Humphreys

Ken Humphreys has written an excellent article summing up the case argued by RJHoffman and his fellow apologists in Hoffman's site. It is very well-written and I love his entertaining and colourful Rhetoric.
Sample this: at one point he states:
Quote:
Like a swaggering mafioso brought into town to gun down all naysayers from the comfort of his limo (in this case a blog called The New Oxonian) super-brain Hoffmann amuses himself by decapitating lesser beings with the temerity to question his magisterial rulings. His verdict on mythicism has been delivered: mythicists are conspiracy theorists, invoking "unknown proto-Christians who build up an unattested myth."
In exchange, and in some sort of admiration, Hoffman started a new post at his site titled The Humphreys Intervention. At any rate, Humphrey exposes Hoffman's vacillation and confusion over the entire question of the historicity of Jesus and how bankrupt the recent internet criticism of mythicism has been.
Ted Hoffman is offline  
Old 06-28-2012, 08:16 AM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

why do we care about Hoffmann? why dont we just ignore him? he's old. old things typically go away quicker than new things. it works against you most of the time so why not take advantage of this principle once and a while?
stephan huller is offline  
Old 06-28-2012, 09:31 AM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
Default

We care about him because he is trying to round up other historicists to publicly swat mythicism.
Ted Hoffman is offline  
Old 06-28-2012, 01:12 PM   #4
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 425
Default

Joseph Hoffmann deserves everything he gets as he's got it coming.

Ken Humphreys on the 'New Apologists' desperately seeking the Son of God

Response to Hoffmann/Casey Defense of Ehrman's book
Dave31 is offline  
Old 06-28-2012, 01:28 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

who cares. why not spend your time worrying about ways to strengthen your thesis rather than an old dinosaur
stephan huller is offline  
Old 06-30-2012, 10:25 PM   #6
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default

Those two authors seem to have about the same writing style of colorful hyperbolic taunts. They should work on a book together.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 07-01-2012, 01:00 AM   #7
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
who cares. why not spend your time worrying about ways to strengthen your thesis rather than an old dinosaur
Stephen, arguing with people who disagree with your thesis and think they can show you where you are wrong is a good way to strengthen your thesis.
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 07-01-2012, 01:30 AM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorkosigan View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
who cares. why not spend your time worrying about ways to strengthen your thesis rather than an old dinosaur
Stephen, arguing with people who disagree with your thesis and think they can show you where you are wrong is a good way to strengthen your thesis.
I think both positions have merit - put ones ideas out there and benefit from feedback, either negative or positive. On the other hand, when a debate degenerates into personality type 'arguments' - as this present online 'debate' has done - then, methinks it is time to call it a day....Actually, as for myself, I would not attempt to have any discussion, or debate, with anyone who sought to mock or belittle the position I hold.
maryhelena is offline  
Old 07-01-2012, 05:09 PM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
Default

Quote:
I think both positions have merit
And neither side has "evidence." For the mythicists this is a decided plus and for the historicists a decided negative.

Besides, I'd love for Hoffman to explain how "historical" his vision of the "historical jesus" truly is. Does he buy miracles and coming back from the dead? If not, what is so special about his historical "jesus?"
Minimalist is offline  
Old 07-01-2012, 05:28 PM   #10
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minimalist View Post
Quote:
I think both positions have merit
And neither side has "evidence." For the mythicists this is a decided plus and for the historicists a decided negative....
Please explain the evidence needed for a NEVER existed entity???

Things are considered Myth by ONLY one means when there is NO EVIDENCE for any real existence.

That is, an argument that Jesus was Myth can be MAINTAINED when there is NO evidence of real existence.

The NT Canon and Apologetic sources claimed Jesus was the Son of a Ghost, God the Creator, that Walked on water, Transfigured, Resurrected and Ascended to heaven.

There is evidence to support an argument for MYTH Jesus.
aa5874 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:27 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.