Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Goliath · 04-25-2003, 11:01 PM

Metacrock,

Quote:

Originally posted by Metacrock
sure it does! Asserting things makes them true. I learned that form you.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Vinnie · 04-27-2003, 08:31 AM

Quote:

In order to show Mark/Paul overlaps, you have to show that Paul accepted the humanity of Jesus.

One would think that the nature of the overlaps themselves would indicate this. But the ill-found hyper-skepticism of this board blinds one to the overly-obvious.

Vinnie

lpetrich · 04-27-2003, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bede
Do you reject the historicity of all people about whom this is true? Besides, Jesus's life story does not mimic fictious figures of the time. We have been through this a dozen times on these boards with the Raglan criteria et al and found they have no basis in fact. We found that Churchill, Julius Caesar and Napoleon all fitted the mythic hero criteria as well or better than Jesus.

Bede, how does Jesus Christ not fit the Raglan criteria? He fits them like a glove -- something like 18.5 out of 22. There was a thread on this subject from the UBB days; shall I try to dig it up?

And how do Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Winston Churchill have a better fit? That's news to me.

Here is an evaluation:

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin

The Luke genealogy is sometimes claimed to be for her instead of Joseph, and we've all heard of the Virgin Birth.
1

2. His father is a king and

Joseph, though a commoner, is described as having been a descendant of King David.
0.5

3. often a near relative of the mother, but

0

4. the circumstances of his conception are unusual, and

The Holy Ghost had made her pregnant.
1

5. he is also reputed to be the son of a god

He is the Son of God.
1

6. at birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or maternal grandfather, to kill him, but

King Herod killing the baby boys of Bethlehem.
1

7. He is spirited away, and

His parents flee with him to Egypt.
1

8. Reared by foster-parents in a far country

Joseph and Mary stay for some years in Egypt
0.5

9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but

There is one story, that of his great precocity; some noncanonical Gospels have similar sorts of stories
0.5

10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom.

1

11. After a victory over the king and or giant, dragon, or wild beast

The Devil tries to lead him astray, with no success
1

12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and

0

13. becomes king

His followers certainly treat him as one
1

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and

1

15. Prescribes laws but

His teachings contain lots of laws
1

16. later loses favor with the gods and or his people and

When Pontius Pilate catches him, his followers claim that they never knew him
1

17. Is driven from from the throne and the city after which

Pontius Pilate puts him on trial
1

18. He meets with a mysterious death

Crucifixion
1

19. often at the top of a hill.

Golgotha
1

20. his children, if any, do not succeed him.

1

21. his body is not buried, but nevertheless

He rose from the dead a few days later.
1

22. he has one or more holy sepulchres.

1

Sum: 18.5

lpetrich · 04-27-2003, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Metacrock
(someone else)
Jesus - no evidence

No evidence? What do you call what you just said? Only the fact that almost 12 major historians of the era and several chruch fathers who knew his friends, and the 19 or so Gsopels that dipict his doings and date to the first or early 2nd century, and the fact that Passion narrative goes back to AD 50, why is that not evidence?

And who are these "12 major historians"? Had they known Jesus Christ in person?

04-27-2003, 01:49 PM

Ipetrich,

You are cheating. Try to be honest.

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin

Nope.

2. His father is a king and

He's a carpenter. He is not a king. Even is distantly descended from a king that does not make him one.

3. often a near relative of the mother, but

Nope (as you say)

4. the circumstances of his conception are unusual, and

OK

5. he is also reputed to be the son of a god

OK

6. at birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or maternal grandfather, to kill him, but

Nope. You are cheating.

7. He is spirited away, and

OK

8. Reared by foster-parents in a far country

Nope. He was reared in Nazereth by his natural parents.

9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but

Nope.

10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom.

No.

11. After a victory over the king and or giant, dragon, or wild beast

No.

12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and

No (as you say)

13. becomes king

No.

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and

No.

15. Prescribes laws but

OK

16. later loses favor with the gods and or his people and

OK

17. Is driven from from the throne and the city after which

Nope - never on throne. Not even driven from Jerusalem.

18. He meets with a mysterious death

Nope - nothing mysterious at all.

19. often at the top of a hill.

OK

20. his children, if any, do not succeed him.

1

21. his body is not buried, but nevertheless

Nope. Buried in a tomb.

22. he has one or more holy sepulchres.

OK.

Sum: 7 which is pathetic given how widely drawn some of the criteria are. Ipetrich, anyone who claims to be a rational or sceptical thinker would drop this ridiculous game. Also, half your points come from the birth narratives which are widely believed to be non-historical anyway. Cut them out and you have almost nothing. Also, as the criteria were partly made up with Jesus in mind the whole test is non-objective anyway.

No more discussion about this.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

lpetrich · 04-27-2003, 02:28 PM

Bede:
You are cheating. Try to be honest.

In his "demonstration" of non-fit, Bede has to deny important parts of his creed, which is depressingly common for apologists.

But we do agree on some parts of it, which I've omitted for brevity.

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin

Nope.

It is not for nothing that she is called the VIRGIN Mary.

And if we are to believe the Luke = Mary apologetic, then she is descended from King David. And this descent is very important for establishing Jesus Christ's Messiah-hood.

2. His father is a king and

He's a carpenter. He is not a king. Even is distantly descended from a king that does not make him one.

That's why I gave him a 0.5 -- the Bible's genealogies of him are intended to prove that he is a descendant of King David. And as I'd pointed out earlier, this is very important for establishing Jesus Christ's Messiah-hood.

6. at birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or maternal grandfather, to kill him, but

Nope. You are cheating.

King Herod hoped to kill him by killing all the baby boys of Bethlehem; I wonder what version of the Bible Bede reads.

8. Reared by foster-parents in a far country

Nope. He was reared in Nazereth by his natural parents.

Actually, his parents stayed in Egypt for some years, which is why I gave a 0.5

9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but

Nope.

There's that story of his precocity in the Temple, but that's about it -- that's my 0.5

10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom.

No.

I'm counting becoming a religious prophet as "returning to his kingdom"

11. After a victory over the king and or giant, dragon, or wild beast

No.

What does one call successfully resisting the the Devil's offer of rule of all the kingdoms of the world? And making the Devil slink away in shame?

13. becomes king

No.

He became a sort-of king, becoming a prophet and self-styled Messiah. If I was evaluating any modern leaders, I'd count them as "kings".

14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and

No.

I disagree -- his wandering and preaching and working miracles are not exactly very eventful.

17. Is driven from from the throne and the city after which

Nope - never on throne. Not even driven from Jerusalem.

I disagree, but I was interpreting "king" a bit loosely. He gets put on trial, and many of his followers desert him.

18. He meets with a mysterious death

Nope - nothing mysterious at all.

Actually, Jesus Christ was described as working lots of miracles, and anyone who could turn water into wine and walk on water ought to be capable of jumping off of a cross.

21. his body is not buried, but nevertheless

Nope. Buried in a tomb.

But that does not become the permanent residence of his body.

Also, half your points come from the birth narratives which are widely believed to be non-historical anyway.

So what? I'm working with the account that the Bible gives, not a miracle-free bowdlerization.

Cut them out and you have almost nothing. Also, as the criteria were partly made up with Jesus in mind the whole test is non-objective anyway.

No, they weren't -- they were derived from considering a variety of mythical heroes like

Oedipus
Perseus
Hercules
Romulus

No more discussion about this.

I hope that you are willing to live with your choice.

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

04-27-2003, 01:49 PM	#255
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	Ipetrich, You are cheating. Try to be honest. 1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin Nope. 2. His father is a king and He's a carpenter. He is not a king. Even is distantly descended from a king that does not make him one. 3. often a near relative of the mother, but Nope (as you say) 4. the circumstances of his conception are unusual, and OK 5. he is also reputed to be the son of a god OK 6. at birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or maternal grandfather, to kill him, but Nope. You are cheating. 7. He is spirited away, and OK 8. Reared by foster-parents in a far country Nope. He was reared in Nazereth by his natural parents. 9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but Nope. 10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom. No. 11. After a victory over the king and or giant, dragon, or wild beast No. 12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and No (as you say) 13. becomes king No. 14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and No. 15. Prescribes laws but OK 16. later loses favor with the gods and or his people and OK 17. Is driven from from the throne and the city after which Nope - never on throne. Not even driven from Jerusalem. 18. He meets with a mysterious death Nope - nothing mysterious at all. 19. often at the top of a hill. OK 20. his children, if any, do not succeed him. 1 21. his body is not buried, but nevertheless Nope. Buried in a tomb. 22. he has one or more holy sepulchres. OK. Sum: 7 which is pathetic given how widely drawn some of the criteria are. Ipetrich, anyone who claims to be a rational or sceptical thinker would drop this ridiculous game. Also, half your points come from the birth narratives which are widely believed to be non-historical anyway. Cut them out and you have almost nothing. Also, as the criteria were partly made up with Jesus in mind the whole test is non-objective anyway. No more discussion about this. Yours Bede Bede's Library - faith and reason

04-27-2003, 02:28 PM	#256
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Bede: You are cheating. Try to be honest. In his "demonstration" of non-fit, Bede has to deny important parts of his creed, which is depressingly common for apologists. But we do agree on some parts of it, which I've omitted for brevity. 1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin Nope. It is not for nothing that she is called the VIRGIN Mary. And if we are to believe the Luke = Mary apologetic, then she is descended from King David. And this descent is very important for establishing Jesus Christ's Messiah-hood. 2. His father is a king and He's a carpenter. He is not a king. Even is distantly descended from a king that does not make him one. That's why I gave him a 0.5 -- the Bible's genealogies of him are intended to prove that he is a descendant of King David. And as I'd pointed out earlier, this is very important for establishing Jesus Christ's Messiah-hood. 6. at birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or maternal grandfather, to kill him, but Nope. You are cheating. King Herod hoped to kill him by killing all the baby boys of Bethlehem; I wonder what version of the Bible Bede reads. 8. Reared by foster-parents in a far country Nope. He was reared in Nazereth by his natural parents. Actually, his parents stayed in Egypt for some years, which is why I gave a 0.5 9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but Nope. There's that story of his precocity in the Temple, but that's about it -- that's my 0.5 10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom. No. I'm counting becoming a religious prophet as "returning to his kingdom" 11. After a victory over the king and or giant, dragon, or wild beast No. What does one call successfully resisting the the Devil's offer of rule of all the kingdoms of the world? And making the Devil slink away in shame? 13. becomes king No. He became a sort-of king, becoming a prophet and self-styled Messiah. If I was evaluating any modern leaders, I'd count them as "kings". 14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and No. I disagree -- his wandering and preaching and working miracles are not exactly very eventful. 17. Is driven from from the throne and the city after which Nope - never on throne. Not even driven from Jerusalem. I disagree, but I was interpreting "king" a bit loosely. He gets put on trial, and many of his followers desert him. 18. He meets with a mysterious death Nope - nothing mysterious at all. Actually, Jesus Christ was described as working lots of miracles, and anyone who could turn water into wine and walk on water ought to be capable of jumping off of a cross. 21. his body is not buried, but nevertheless Nope. Buried in a tomb. But that does not become the permanent residence of his body. Also, half your points come from the birth narratives which are widely believed to be non-historical anyway. So what? I'm working with the account that the Bible gives, not a miracle-free bowdlerization. Cut them out and you have almost nothing. Also, as the criteria were partly made up with Jesus in mind the whole test is non-objective anyway. No, they weren't -- they were derived from considering a variety of mythical heroes like Oedipus Perseus Hercules Romulus No more discussion about this. I hope that you are willing to live with your choice.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.