The Lost Number

Bede:

First, I complement you on a rather good article. Though I am a devoute skeptic, and disagree with you partially since I believe quite a bit of the Christian, Bible-based views on Jesus are incorrect i.e. myths, I too realize how silly the whole desperate Christ Myth idea is. I especially loved your last bit about Hannibal's "dubious" (by Christ-Myth standards) existence.

Second, is it ok to call you "Beady"? Your name bears a somewhat passing similarity to that word, and I would just love to call you it because, IMHO, it's so cute, and sounds funny. But if you are seriously offended, then I won't use it. If not, then I'd appreciate your explicitly stating so, because otherwise people around here could get the idea that I'm unfairly insulting you.

Third, since I'm busy and don't presently have the time to check out the rest of your site, I'm left wondering: do you have any professional educational background in the study of history?

Ok, that's all. Farewell until next time.

The Lost Number

And all too many citizens who just plain don't do the right thing sometimes in life. Like refraining skewing the intended topic/s of a conversation by introducing an irrelevant one, such as a discussion of Bible history which has unrelated comments/criticisms about modern politics introduced.

Really, we all have our beef about this or that law, politician, social condition or whatever, but we also have a forum dedicated specifically to discussing politics, for the purpose of, among other things, keeping good conversations like this one from degenerating into the typical: "I'm right, you're wrong - my beliefs will make this country great; yours will do something considerably less than that!" jibberish that permiates political debates.

No offense intended (though a lot will probably be baselessly assumed nevertheless), I just hate seeing good threads ruined like that.

Peter Kirby

By the way, where exactly does the Lost Number fit in? I always had a slight suspicion that something was missing between 15 and 16...

best,
Peter Kirby

Steven Carr

What is there to love about Bede's proof (using Christ myth standards) that Hannibal did not exist?

Bede writes 'In fact, although there is plenty of writing about Hannibal, none of it is contemporary and there is no archaeological evidence for him at all (not surprising given the Romans razed the city from whence he came). Furthermore he is not mentioned in any Carthaginian sources - incredible given he was supposed to be their greatest leader (there are no Carthaginian sources as the Romans burnt their city down)! '

How is this analogous?

We do have sources , such as Pliny the Elder and Philo of Alexandria, who should have spotted things like a 3 hour eclipse at the crucifixion.

It would only be analogous if Bede could show that Philo's works had been burned.

Bede writes 'as long we can invent a motive for fabrication we can assume that fabrication exists.' Bede is presumably implying that Christ-mythers just invent the idea that stories about Jesus have been fabricated, and it is wrong to assume that fabrication exists.

So Bede thinks there has been no fabrication about Jesus! Perhaps I could point him to the Infancy Gospels, the Gospel of Truth, etc etc.

We can certainly assume that fabrication about Jesus exists. In fact, Christians agree with Christ-mythers that Christians fabricated stories about Jesus.

So Bede's analogies are the usual desperate straw-men arguments, by somebody who cannot give us a methodology to tell us what is fact and what is fiction in the Gospels.

Bede would have a better analogy if he could find a fanatical supporter of Hannibal, writing 15-30 years after his death, who wants to tell people about Hannibal ,as a matter of life and death urgency, but never gives any details of what Hannibal did. An easy task for Bede.

Steven Carr

Bede writes in his web page 'Jesus prayed to God using the term "abba". (Galatians 4:6)

Here is Galatians 4:6 'Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!"'

Notice there is no mention at all of Jesus praying, or praying to God, and Paul explicitly says 'abba' comes from the 'Spirit' of the Son, rather than the Son in the flesh ,or through tradition.

This is a fairly explicit denial of a Gospel story.

Bede also writes that Paul says Jesus was betrayed, yet Paul uses that word to say Jesus 'betrayed' himself or that God 'betrayed' Jesus! Perhaps Paul uses the word to mean something else. (Any lexicon will tell you it has other meanings than betrayed)

Bede says that Paul writes 'The death of Jesus was at the hands of earthly rulers'. Actually, 'the rulers of the age' in Paul's letters refers to spiritual forces. Indeed, Romans 13 is hard to reoncile with somebody who thinks the authorities appointed by God have killed the Saviour of the World.

excreationist

IntenSity:
It looks like it only says that it was a "large herd" (Matthew 8, Mark 5, Luke 8).

Matthew 14/Mark 6/Luke 9/John 6 - 5000 men (not including women and children) with 5 loaves and 2 fish
Matthew 15/Mark 8 - 4000 men (not including women and children) with 7 loaves and a few small fish

So there were at least 2 huge miracles involving fish and loaves - and when you add on the women and children, the number of people in the crowds would be very great.

Peter Kirby

excreationist writes: It looks like it only says that it was a "large herd" (Matthew 8, Mark 5, Luke 8).

Mark 5:13
Jesus gave them permission. And coming out, the unclean spirits entered the swine; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, about two thousand of them; and they were drowned in the sea.

best,
Peter Kirby

excreationist

Thanks Peter,
I mustn't have read through the 3 versions of that story very thoroughly... 2000 sure is a large herd...

Peter Kirby

Some suggest that the swine represent a Roman "legion" (note the name in Mark), which could explain the large number.

best,
Peter Kirby

Bede

Lost Number,

Thanks you for your kind words but I'd rather not be called Beady. Bede was the first English historian, a great scholar and a fine saint which is why I have taken his name. Not sure how he'd react to Beady...

I am a History graduate student at the University of London so not quite a professional yet.

Steven,

You seem to have a special illness that prevents you understanding what passages mean. It happened with Dawkins and more forgivably with Paul.

Anyway, your first post about the darkness, like Intensity's on the feedings and pigs, is one long strawman. We are talking about the historical Jesus not miracle claims. Hence you post is irrelevant and you know it.

Second, the Paul quotes are all accurate and say what I say they do. The spirit of the son is the risen Christ who is the same person as Jesus who says "Abba". By no stretch of the imagination is it a conflict with the Gospel. Betrayed is a reasonable translation in this context as any lexicon will tell you. Third, the rulers of this age are clearly earthly as crucifying people can't be done by spirits. Also, Romans 13 is quite consistant with this - Jesus's death was God's will.

After this lot you are left with a load more explicit references in Paul so even if you were right with these you loose the argument. In fact, typical sceptical tactics is to work away at one tiny part of an argument and declare victory if they can show alternative possible interpretations. They ignore the big picture.

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>