Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-10-2013, 07:26 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 12:17 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 08:23 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Philo of Alexandria wrote about 20 - 40 BCE. SNIP

It's my understanding that this 'celestial Jesus' is the basis for Dr. Richard Carrier's myth theory.


(09-10-2013 09:53 PM)PersephoneK Wrote:  Regarding Carrier, ill let Bart Ehrman discuss him. A little scholar on scholar action is fun. Decide for yourself. http://ehrmanblog.org/fuller-reply-to-richard-carrier/

I have too, and unfortunately Ehrman does not appear to have composed himself very well in their exchange.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1794

It seems that Carrier kicked Ehrman's ass and then handed him his lunchbox.

Don't sell yourself short Judge, you're an incredible slouch.

Martin Luther was the "father" of two movements - The Reformation and Nazism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 09:42 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(09-10-2013 08:05 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Dr. Richard Carrier (who has impeccable credentials), agrees with Atwill to some extent. Atwil wrote a book with Eisenman about the Dead Sea Scrolls, so to compare him with O'Reilly is preposterous.

Also, here's what Carrier himself has to say about Atwill: http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

"If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." ~Rene Descartes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 09:46 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(09-10-2013 11:41 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 10:55 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Hi, I just read your article. You make a number of assumptions and errors.

Firstly, see Bucky's comment.

Secondly, you fail to understand that the gospels as we have now were not written in the first century. Something may well have been first penned in the first century, but they "evolved" over the subsequent next 200 years. This helps explain why they're so inconsistent.

Thirdly, it appears that you haven't even read Mr Atwill's book. If you're going to make scathing comments about someone who genuinely attempts to make sense of the history, then you must first pay him the respect of reading his work.

Fourth, you are claiming that Paul knew of a historical character called Jesus. That's an assumption that is very much open to debate. Paul knew of a mythical son of God who rose from the dead, but whether he thought of that person as a once living human Jesus is an interesting question you fail to ask.

Your 4th point is spot on! Paul knew nothing if any of it was real. He set out to just start his own religion and filled in blanks with vague references that seemed to fit the "prophesy" but with his own odd beliefs attached.

None of that is remotely what most experts believe. Only the mythicists of which most people in this thread appear to be. What is the big deal with accepting that Jesus probably existed? It doesn't change anything about how destructive religion is? In fact, I think it gives it more power. The insignificant Jewish preacher was transformed into god by superstition and flawed human thinking over 2000 years. This is a lesson in skeptical and critical thinking education if I ever heard one.

"If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." ~Rene Descartes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PersephoneK's post
10-10-2013, 09:50 AM (This post was last modified: 10-10-2013 10:00 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 09:42 AM)PersephoneK Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 08:05 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Dr. Richard Carrier (who has impeccable credentials), agrees with Atwill to some extent. Atwil wrote a book with Eisenman about the Dead Sea Scrolls, so to compare him with O'Reilly is preposterous.

Also, here's what Carrier himself has to say about Atwill: http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

Forest for the trees ... still can't address the actual issues I see. So now, contrary to the entire thrust of YOUR BLOG, you're defending Carrier, who is doing precisely what your blog says not to do. I don't care who says what about anything. The only thing I care about is the evidence. You have proven you are unable to even discuss the subject. I said above we'll see what Atwill produces. YOUR blog implied the entire subject of historicity was, or ought to be, off the table. It is NOT "off the table", and is a legitimate and active question for debate.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
10-10-2013, 10:01 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 09:50 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(10-10-2013 09:42 AM)PersephoneK Wrote:  Also, here's what Carrier himself has to say about Atwill: http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

Forest for the trees ... still can't address the actual issues I see. I don't care who says what about anything. The only thing I care about is the evidence. You have proven you are unable to even discuss the subject. I said above we'll see what Atwill produces. YOUR blog implied the entire subject of historicity was, or ought to be, off the table. It is NOT "off the table", and is a legitimate and active question for debate.

Huh? You don't care who says what about anything? So the experts who have provided proof through their years of careful study mean nothing to you? Then you and I are at an impasse.

I have proven I'm unable to discuss the subject? How so?

If I implied the subject of historicity is "off the table" on my blog, I apologize, as that was not the intent and am not sure where you got that. If I thought it was off the table, I wouldn't have bothered writing a blog that discusses a small fraction of the actual evidence. My point is that its fairly established by scholars that Jesus existed based on a fair amount of evidence. The burden of proof rests with those making claims in contrast to that to prove Jesus didn't exist. If you think Atwill meets that burden, well, good for you. I might as well try to perpetuate my claims that I have a pet dragon that I use to travel around the world.

"If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." ~Rene Descartes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 10:10 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 10:01 AM)PersephoneK Wrote:  
(10-10-2013 09:50 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Forest for the trees ... still can't address the actual issues I see. I don't care who says what about anything. The only thing I care about is the evidence. You have proven you are unable to even discuss the subject. I said above we'll see what Atwill produces. YOUR blog implied the entire subject of historicity was, or ought to be, off the table. It is NOT "off the table", and is a legitimate and active question for debate.

Huh? You don't care who says what about anything? So the experts who have provided proof through their years of careful study mean nothing to you? Then you and I are at an impasse.

I have proven I'm unable to discuss the subject? How so?

If I implied the subject of historicity is "off the table" on my blog, I apologize, as that was not the intent and am not sure where you got that. If I thought it was off the table, I wouldn't have bothered writing a blog that discusses a small fraction of the actual evidence. My point is that its fairly established by scholars that Jesus existed based on a fair amount of evidence. The burden of proof rests with those making claims in contrast to that to prove Jesus didn't exist. If you think Atwill meets that burden, well, good for you. I might as well try to perpetuate my claims that I have a pet dragon that I use to travel around the world.

Are you feeling well ?
You're using Carrier, who does NOT BELIEVE Jebus existed, in your argument, then you say the argument is a settled matter. Do you even know who Carrier is ?

I said I care about EVIDENCE. Nice try.

No expert has "provided proof" of anything. You made false statements about Josephus. You have MADE NOT ONE argument about the SUBSTANCE of the debate.

We're hardly (even) at an "impasse". So far you have not even BEGUN to make an argument over the SUBSTANCE. All you do is make the "argumentum ad vericundiam" fallacy. You are incompetent, apparently, to even begin a discussion of this subject.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 10:16 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
Nevertheless, her link does show that Carrier's not keen on Atwill at all, in fact he mentions this upcoming talk and concludes that in his opinion Atwill is a crank...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 10:22 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 10:10 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Are you feeling well ?
You're using Carrier, who does NOT BELIEVE Jebus existed, in your argument, then you say the argument is a settled matter. Do you even know who Carrier is ?

I said I care about EVIDENCE. Nice try.

No expert has "provided proof" of anything. You made false statements about Josephus. You have MADE NOT ONE argument about the SUBSTANCE of the debate.

We're hardly (even) at an "impasse". So far you have not even BEGUN to make an argument over the SUBSTANCE. All you do is make the "argumentum ad vericundiam" fallacy. You are incompetent, apparently, to even begin a discussion of this subject.

Wow, you're mean.

But anyway, I was using Carrier to debunk Atwill, not that Jesus existed. Its telling that a fellow mythicist doesn't buy what Atwill is selling. The Carrier link was posted on The Thinking Atheist's facebook page today. Thought I'd share for funsies.

Your statement that no expert has provided proof of anything suggests you don't know what you're talking about. What exactly would meet the burden of proof for you?

Have a nice day.

"If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." ~Rene Descartes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 10:24 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 10:16 AM)morondog Wrote:  Nevertheless, her link does show that Carrier's not keen on Atwill at all, in fact he mentions this upcoming talk and concludes that in his opinion Atwill is a crank...

That was my only point regarding Carrier (who is an actual historian, and one of the very few mythicists with strong credentials). Its telling that a guy who essentially agrees with Atwill's conclusions still thinks he's "a crank."

"If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things." ~Rene Descartes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2013, 10:31 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(09-10-2013 07:03 PM)PersephoneK Wrote:  "Denying that Jesus was a real person is just as bad as believing in supernatural explanations for things."

From her blog. That was an attempt to make the debate invalid, and illegitimate.

(09-10-2013 07:03 PM)PersephoneK Wrote:  Ok, I'm feeling lazy, so I'm flat out saying I didn't read this entire thread, but this Atwill story has been floating all over Facebook on atheist sites. I find it disturbing that atheists are so willing to believe this guy who frankly sounds about as credible as Bill O'Reilly is about the historicity of Jesus. I wrote a blog about it today if any of you want my full analysis: "Defending Truth Can Mean Defending Jesus".

We sound like theists willing to believe anything that supports the way we wish history was, not the way it actually was. Let be a bit more skeptical.

Indeed. Most of the people in this thread said we would wait and see what the "evidence" would be, that will be presented, precisely because we are skeptical.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: