Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-07-2015, 11:03 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 10:43 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 10:05 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  Ah, sorry. The above is part of a number of posts of mine on the same subject. In several of the earlier posts, I specified that I was referring to non-biblical texts. I didn't feel it necessary to keep repeating myself. Perhaps I should have done.

Again, in the earlier posts, I specifically refer to the texts of Josphus and Tacitus. Again, I didn't feel it necessary to keep repeating myself. Perhaps I should have done.

Love 15.

There again, perhaps the onus was on you to familiarise yourself with this thread prior to comment.

15 all.

I presume that a draw is acceptable?

I actually have read the whole thread, but was only responding to that one post. But I have no wish to start a fight here, so I will happily call it a draw. Cheers!

Smile

More seriously, though, I don't think either side has a slam dunk here. The miracle-working, walking-on-water, rising-from-the-dead Jesus of the Gospels is almost certainly a fabrication, but it seems plausible to me that there may have been a rabble-rousing preacher named Jesus who got a bit too uppity and was executed by the Romans. That such a person existed doesn't seem such an outrageous position for an atheist to hold.

I will freely admit that I don't know nearly enough to make any dogmatic pronouncements on this issue -- and I wonder if any of us do. Perhaps we should be a bit more polite to each other, and give a bit more "benefit of the doubt". For my part, I am happy to leave it for scholars like Carrier and Ehrman to duke it out.

I think that, on the balance of probability, given ALL other considerations, an Earthly existence was created for jesus by what some refer to as early christians through the manipulation of existing, and the creation of false, documents. It also seems likely that they created lies that were then passed on by word of mouth and grew as it was passed on from person to person.

I can also accept that this isn't a 'slam-dunk' position, yet.

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 11:17 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 10:38 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 10:27 AM)Free Wrote:  You act as if Carrier has changed the opinions of the world's scholars.

He has not. He basically stands alone in the field due to his crackpot ideas. He hasn't made any noticeable difference in the scholarly field on the question of historicity.

Guys like you eat his crap up like starving wolves. The rest of us laugh at him.

Thumbsup
My point is made, boy.

When I spoke of people "who are stuck where they were - and will probably remain there until they die believing that jebus actually existed.", I was thinking of people like you.

There's an interesting Dawkins video in which he talks about a certain Cambridge Professor who, on the one hand, teaches Darwinism and, on the other hand, states that "of course, I don't really believe in Darwinism".

It was ever thus.

You made no point. Said absolutely nothing that can be verified with evidence.

The Jesus Mythicism position has absolutely no solid evidence to support itself. None.

Here's a quest for you, and all Jesus Mythicists:

Find one ancient text where anyone in antiquity explicitly states that Jesus Christ was wholly a myth.

Since we have ancient records from antiquity whereas we see anti-Christians speaking out against Christianity (Celsum) then it is absolutely reasonable to expect at least one ancient record which states something to the effect that Jesus Christ was wholly a myth.

Yes, this is an argument from silence, however, an argument from silence can be validated when there is a reasonable expectation of evidence.

So let's see the evidence.

Go!

Thumbsup

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 11:30 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 11:03 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  I think that, on the balance of probability, given ALL other considerations, an Earthly existence was created for jesus by what some refer to as early christians through the manipulation of existing, and the creation of false, documents. It also seems likely that they created lies that were then passed on by word of mouth and grew as it was passed on from person to person.

I can also accept that this isn't a 'slam-dunk' position, yet.

And your evidence to support this theory is where?

Can you provide ancient records from antiquity which will demonstrate the following:

1. an Earthly existence was created for jesus by what some refer to as early christians

2. they created lies that were then passed on by word of mouth

Go!

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 12:32 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 11:30 AM)Free Wrote:  
(02-07-2015 11:03 AM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  I think that, on the balance of probability, given ALL other considerations, an Earthly existence was created for jesus by what some refer to as early christians through the manipulation of existing, and the creation of false, documents. It also seems likely that they created lies that were then passed on by word of mouth and grew as it was passed on from person to person.

I can also accept that this isn't a 'slam-dunk' position, yet.

And your evidence to support this theory is where?

Can you provide ancient records from antiquity which will demonstrate the following:

1. an Earthly existence was created for jesus by what some refer to as early christians

2. they created lies that were then passed on by word of mouth

Go!

Firstly, as you are aware, it is you that asserts that jeebus existed as a person. The onus is therefore on you to prove and not for me to disprove.

Secondly, just how many times do we need to go around this circle? Have we not been around it enough? We didn't resolve anything previously and I see no reason for believing that we will resolve anything on this occasion.

Thirdly, this argument is becoming heated. Grasshopper saw fit to intercede to provide a calming influence. I took the hint. Perhaps you should too.

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 12:33 PM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2015 01:28 PM by Free.)
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Most of you Jesus Mythicists don't even know how to posit a proper argument. You do not study enough to understand what it is you are talking about.

Now, just to show some of you how a solid argument against the authenticity of the Testimonium Flavium should be presented, here is an argument, and a real one.

Origen - Contra Celsum- CHAP. XLVII.

"Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless--being, although against his will, not far from the truth--that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),--the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice."

No where in the extant Antiquities of the Jews do we ever see Josephus "seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem," nor do we ever see him saying anything about James being the reason that "these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just."

Whatever version of Antiquities that Origen was reading was certainly not what we have as extant. He most certainly had a completely different version of Antiquities of the Jews, since he is quoting things from an Antiquities of the Jews which cannot be found at all in any extant versions.

This clearly demonstrates conclusive proof that at least two different versions of Antiquities of the Jews existed.

Now that is a fucking real argument. Many of you Mythicists concentrate so much on the part that says, "although not believing in Jesus as the Christ," as if it is the only evidence in that text, and use that alone as evidence against the TF.

Open your fucking eyes and look at the rest, ffs.

Origen gives us the earliest references to Antiquities of the Jews with this quote, and in this quote we see obvious statements that contradict what we have as extant.

Listed below are 3 itemized valid points which provide actual evidence to dispute, not only the Testimoium Flavium, but the authenticity of Flavius Josephus' extant copy of Antquities of the Jews as a whole:

1. If the Testimonium Flavium was in the original text, and the TF has Josephus explicitly saying Jesus was the Christ, why then does Origen state that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ?"

2. The extant Atiquities of the Jews does not have Josephus saying " these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just."

3. The extant Atiquities of the Jews does not have Josephus "seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem."


And that's how real historians actually evaluate texts. That's how you are SUPPOSED to evaluate them.

So did you learn anything here?

And yes, I am a pompous ass, and yes, I like being that way.

Drinking Beverage

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 01:33 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Everything covered in this thread is summed up in this video:




**Crickets** -- God
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tonechaser77's post
02-07-2015, 02:04 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 12:33 PM)Free Wrote:  Most of you Jesus Mythicists don't even know how to posit a proper argument. You do not study enough to understand what it is you are talking about.

Whatever you say, dear. Look who's talking.


(02-07-2015 12:33 PM)Free Wrote:  Open your fucking eyes and look at the rest, ffs.

Is that "for fuck's sake" or "for fuck sakes" ?

(02-07-2015 12:33 PM)Free Wrote:  So did you learn anything here?
And yes, I am a pompous ass, and yes, I like being that way.

We know. All too well. Weeping

In Josephus' "Jewish War", he talks about Vespasian as a fullfillment of that Balaam prophecy : "A star shall come out of Jacob and a scepter will rise out of Israel. It shall crush the foreheads of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom shall be dispossessed.

Josephus thought, or was paid to say Vespasian fulfilled the role of the messiah, (a "christ") in Greek. Spin it anyway you want Free. The fact is you're full of shit. Big Grin

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 02:27 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 12:33 PM)Free Wrote:  Most of you Jesus Mythicists don't even know how to posit a proper argument. You do not study enough to understand what it is you are talking about.

Now, just to show some of you how a solid argument against the authenticity of the Testimonium Flavium should be presented, here is an argument, and a real one.

Origen - Contra Celsum- CHAP. XLVII.

"Now this writer, although not believing in Jesus as the Christ, in seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, whereas he ought to have said that the conspiracy against Jesus was the cause of these calamities befalling the people, since they put to death Christ, who was a prophet, says nevertheless--being, although against his will, not far from the truth--that these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus (called Christ),--the Jews having put him to death, although he was a man most distinguished for his justice."

No where in the extant Antiquities of the Jews do we ever see Josephus "seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem," nor do we ever see him saying anything about James being the reason that "these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just."

Whatever version of Antiquities that Origen was reading was certainly not what we have as extant. He most certainly had a completely different version of Antiquities of the Jews, since he is quoting things from an Antiquities of the Jews which cannot be found at all in any extant versions.

This clearly demonstrates conclusive proof that at least two different versions of Antiquities of the Jews existed.

Now that is a fucking real argument. Many of you Mythicists concentrate so much on the part that says, "although not believing in Jesus as the Christ," as if it is the only evidence in that text, and use that alone as evidence against the TF.

Open your fucking eyes and look at the rest, ffs.

Origen gives us the earliest references to Antiquities of the Jews with this quote, and in this quote we see obvious statements that contradict what we have as extant.

Listed below are 3 itemized valid points which provide actual evidence to dispute, not only the Testimoium Flavium, but the authenticity of Flavius Josephus' extant copy of Antquities of the Jews as a whole:

1. If the Testimonium Flavium was in the original text, and the TF has Josephus explicitly saying Jesus was the Christ, why then does Origen state that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ?"

2. The extant Atiquities of the Jews does not have Josephus saying " these disasters happened to the Jews as a punishment for the death of James the Just."

3. The extant Atiquities of the Jews does not have Josephus "seeking after the cause of the fall of Jerusalem."


And that's how real historians actually evaluate texts. That's how you are SUPPOSED to evaluate them.

So did you learn anything here?

And yes, I am a pompous ass, and yes, I like being that way.

Drinking Beverage
2@

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 02:31 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 01:33 PM)Tonechaser77 Wrote:  Everything covered in this thread is summed up in this video:




Thanks for posting this.

Marburg virus, Ebola, Rabies, HIV, Smallpox, Hantavirus, Dengue Fever all brought to you by god - who cares for us and loves us all Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2015, 02:36 PM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(02-07-2015 02:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Josephus thought, or was paid to say Vespasian fulfilled the role of the messiah, (a "christ") in Greek. Spin it anyway you want Free. The fact is you're full of shit. Big Grin

I am spinning nothing.

The fact remains that of all those who have been proclaimed on internet websites as being "Messianic Claimants," not one of them, including Vespasian, has any evidence whatsoever of ever actually being entitled as a Christ or a Messiah. Not one.

Except Jesus, who was called Christ.

And THAT is how history works. It's not Wikipedia dude.

Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: