Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Festle · 09-04-2009, 08:39 AM

My view is that it doesn't really matter whether someone named Jesus existed during that time period or what he may or may not have done. It is completely irrelevant to my life. In all likelihood the entire story was made up after the fact - religious folk tend to do that sort of thing. But really, it doesn't matter either way.

Festle

No Robots · 09-04-2009, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Yes. Romulus and Remus must have been historical, and the offspring of the god Mars and the virgin Silvia.

For if we were acquainted with significantly unique and inspired deeds under the names, for instance, of Sargon, Romulus, Perseus, Theseus, Heracles, Siegfried and Tell, then I would have to believe, if I were not to betray my fundamental notion of resultant phenomena having a cause (for every cause must produce its specific result, and every result must have its specific cause). This would follow even if I had never so little to show of the causes involved, of the originators of such works; for, in cases like this, the minus in terms of the kind of experiential certainty which is supplied by sense-data and other external information is outweighed by the plus of inner conviction. Thus I would have to believe that these deeds had creative personalities behind them, and so I would call them Tell, Siegfried, Heracles, Theseus, Perseus, Romulus and Sargon, just as I call Shakespeare the author of the unmistakably distinctive literary marvels, pointing to a single originator, that go under his name, in spite of the fact that we have as little certain knowledge of the life of the man Shakespeare as of the life of the man Christ—nay, we have less.--Constantin Brunner

dog-on · 09-04-2009, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Maybe this will help you, Chaucer.

What Tom Sawyer did is called making shit up.

In other words, he has absolutely no imperical data with which to support his hypothesis

A declaration like that simply shows your own ignorance of the way the most up-to-date historians practice history today. Historical data emphatically includes textual data, which is SIFTED. Unless you wish to burn down every library in the world (something which I would not put past many a mythicist I've encountered on line), that data will still be around after you and I are six feet under.

Chaucer

LOL!!!!!!

Please present your best evidence for average joe Jesus.

I am willing to learn.

Chaucer · 09-04-2009, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sea

Representing the 'legendary embellishment, not myth' faction here. I think Jesus was a real person who believed he was preparing the Jews for an apocalypse in his lifetime. He was so charismatic that not even his death stopped his movement entirely. Instead, some of his followers came up with another explanation which turned his public failure into a spiritual success.

It is true that the only first century information we have about Jesus comes through the Church itself, but the failures of the crucifixion and the apocalyptic statements are likely to be historical facts that had to be worked around. Same with Jesus being from Nazareth even though many thought the Messiah was supposed to be from Bethlehem. Matthew and Luke appear to have made up contradicting birth stories to resolve that problem.

Michael Grant's Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels and Bart Ehrman's Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium both advocate the view I just outlined.

Not trying to start a big argument in this thread; I just wanted to show that I have thought about the evidence and still consider Jesus historical.

I'm new to this forum, so I'm surprised to hear the mythicist position is the majority. On TheologyWeb -- where I've been a skeptical regular since late 2003 -- we have a few mythicists but most of us believe the Gospels are legendary embellishments. Interested in hearing more about why the situation may be reversed on this forum.

Thank you. You said it all. Someone from the real world! Hopefully, you don't have the same lousy temper I do and won't turn off so many other posters. It will be interesting to see the interaction that you and the other two historicists in this thread have with the other skeptics/mythicists on this board.

Chaucer

Amaleq13 · 09-04-2009, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Here, there is not a single skeptic to be found who is not also a Jesus mythicist.

You obviously have not been paying enough attention.

Quote:

Thoughts?

You need a new hobby.

dog-on · 09-04-2009, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Of course, the Holy Roman Empire should not be considered as the "singularly powerful phenomenon" at the source, now should it...

As usual, I am at a bit of a loss as to what you are getting at. But the fact is that the most interesting dimension of history is how the Christian spirit permeated the Roman Empire and its successors. Of course, this process is fraught with disasters, misunderstandings and out-and-out betrayal. The old joke is that the Holy Roman Empire should actually be called the Nominally Christian German Confederacy!

My point is that you seem to ignore the most obvious reason for the long term success of Christianity.

Of course, eventually even this will fade as well.

Chaucer · 09-04-2009, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

A declaration like that simply shows your own ignorance of the way the most up-to-date historians practice history today. Historical data emphatically includes textual data, which is SIFTED. Unless you wish to burn down every library in the world (something which I would not put past many a mythicist I've encountered on line), that data will still be around after you and I are six feet under.

Chaucer

LOL!!!!!!

Please present your best evidence for average joe Jesus.

I am willing to learn.

We've already been over all this with a fine tooth-comb. I'm not rehashing it here. You can peruse

http://www.freeratio.org//showthread.php?t=271751

if you wish.

Chaucer

dog-on · 09-04-2009, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

LOL!!!!!!

Please present your best evidence for average joe Jesus.

I am willing to learn.

We've already been over all this with a fine tooth-comb. I'm not rehashing it here. You can peruse

http://www.freeratio.org//showthread.php?t=271751

if you wish.

Chaucer

Any particular post you think I should read in that 11 page thread.

Chaucer · 09-04-2009, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

We've already been over all this with a fine tooth-comb. I'm not rehashing it here. You can peruse

http://www.freeratio.org//showthread.php?t=271751

if you wish.

Chaucer

Any particular post you think I should read in that 11 page thread.

The OP. Then you can read everyone else's ripping it apart.:-)

Cheers,

Chaucer

(I'm not going to be referring again here to that other thread; it's a derail of this one.)

dog-on · 09-04-2009, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Any particular post you think I should read in that 11 page thread.

The OP. Then you can read everyone else's ripping it apart.:-)

Cheers,

Chaucer

(I'm not going to be referring again here to that other thread; it's a derail of this one.)

The Ant 20 reference is an obvious interpolation.

You got anything else?

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

09-04-2009, 08:39 AM	#31
Festle Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Midwest Posts: 163	My view is that it doesn't really matter whether someone named Jesus existed during that time period or what he may or may not have done. It is completely irrelevant to my life. In all likelihood the entire story was made up after the fact - religious folk tend to do that sort of thing. But really, it doesn't matter either way. Festle

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.