Damned Catholics

[The Grand Nudger]

Explain how Assyrian mythology became part of the mythology of "Judeo-Christian" religion.

Go look it up for yourself.

Paul didn't meet Jesus, but he knew Jesus's disciples and even his brother James.

Says who?  

No original of the letter is known to survive. The earliest reasonably complete version available to scholars today dates to approximately 200 AD, approximately 150 years after the original was presumably drafted.

-more from the same..

A majority of scholars agree that Galatians was written between the late 40s and early 50s.[5] although some date the original composition to c. 50–60 AD.

hmn, theres that phrase again......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Galatians

Paul even disagreed with those disciples, especially Peter, over issues like circumcision and eating with Gentiles.

Assuming that any of this happened, at all..sounds alot like three partners in a business discussing marketing, to me.  

Now if all these guys just invented Jesus why were they never on the same page?

Another interesting question..why is it that all of the people who supposedly knew "jesus" or knew a guy who knew a guy who knew "jesus" can't get on the same page about him or his religion..anyway, eh?

[Cherub786]

How can I look up something you just made up?


Says who?  

The historians like Bart Ehrman:

No original of the letter is known to survive. The earliest reasonably complete version available to scholars today dates to approximately 200 AD, approximately 150 years after the original was presumably drafted.

So what? Scholars don't dismiss fragments. There is a general scholarly consensus that the epistles of Paul were composed early on, in the 50s.

A majority of scholars agree that Galatians was written between the late 40s and early 50s.[5] although some date the original composition to c. 50–60 AD.

hmn, theres that phrase again......

Exactly my point. "Majority of scholars" does that not mean anything to you?

Assuming that any of this happened, at all..sounds alot like three partners in a business discussing marketing, to me.  

Your opinion doesn't count. I trust the qualified historians like Ehrman and Dale B. Martin.

Another interesting question..why is it that all of the people who supposedly knew "jesus" or knew a guy who knew a guy who knew "jesus" can't get on the same page about him..anyway, eh?

That's how humans are, that's how history is. It's never a neat tidy package. If it was all invented it would be.

[Angrboda]

The existence of an agenda on the part of the Mythicists, even if true, doesn't eliminate the problem of having an agenda among the historical Jesus scholars.  This is nothing more than a tu quoque argument, which I'm sure you know is a fallacy.

Hey you're the one who brought up the agenda accusation not me. The fallacy is yours and yours alone

Bart Ehrman is a self described agnostic leaning toward atheism. What agenda could he possibly have?

Let me add that Robert Price is really the best guy to present the mythicist point of view. Don't think just because he was trashed in the debate there is someone else out there who can present a stronger argument. He's the best your side has to offer.

The last person who accused me of committing a fallacy ate dirt. Let's hope that you have better success. What fallacy are you accusing me of committing?

As to Ehrman's motives, they are plentiful. Ehrman sells books. Opposing Christianity on the historical question can hurt sales. It can also further erode his reputation among the religious, which, too, would ultimately impact sales. And I have no doubt that Ehrman has many friends and collleagues in the professional, academic, and general social world who would take a rather dim view of him embracing Mythicism. And then there's the fact that even among many who are not religiously invested, Mythicism is considered a fringe movement of ill repute. Embracing that movements conclusions would have a dampening effect even among his secular audience. And there is the simple motive of being an author. The audience for books about the historical Jesus are far larger than that for Mythicism. Additionally, Ehrman may simply believe in a historical Jesus as a consequence of his background. That background itself suggests that Ehrman is unlikely to be impartial. So, Ehrman 's situation is rife with potential conflicts of interest. But beyond that it must be remembered that Ehrman is one scholar, and an unusual one among the historical Jesus crowd, so even if your comment had any merit, it wouldn't absolve the rest of such scholars from such issues. And finally it must be noted that Ehrman is not a historian, and so he is operating outside his bailliwick, undermining his use as an authority.

[The Grand Nudger]

How can I look up something you just made up?

Maybe you should look that up, too?  

The historians like Bart Ehrman:

Ehrman has nothing to tell us about any meeting that isn't found in the fairy tale itself.  

So what? Scholars don't dismiss fragments. There is a general scholarly consensus that the epistles of Paul were composed early on, in the 50s.

Theres a general scholarly supposition, but perhaps you should look into what that supposition is based on and what is actually being supposed than to drone on endlessly about the consensus of scholars?  Peole do that all the time, not knowing that "the consensus of scholars" in this case is a euphemism for vast disagreement between scholars who must all propose..as a part of insisting that the other guys are wrong..that their jesus is the Real Jesus™.

Exactly my point. "Majority of scholars" does that not mean anything to you?

I think that the information from which they draw their inferences, and the strength of those inferences, is far more important than a bunch of people saying something.  

Your opinion doesn't count. I trust the qualified historians like Ehrman and Dale B. Martin.

I don't think that you trust their opinions, either...you only defer when you find some statement that comforts you in your beliefs.  

That's how humans are, that's how history is. It's never a neat tidy package. If it was all invented it would be.

Yeah, it is funny how "jesus" becomes a nice and tidy little christian package by the time of "john"..innit?

[Cherub786]

The last person who accused me of committing a fallacy ate dirt.  Let's hope that you have better success.  What fallacy are you accusing me of committing?

They say pride came before the fall.

I accuse you of the same fallacy you accused me of.

[The Valkyrie]

The last person who accused me of committing a fallacy ate dirt.  Let's hope that you have better success.  What fallacy are you accusing me of committing?

They say pride came before the fall.

I accuse you of the same fallacy you accused me of.

"They" also say that pi is exactly three, the world is flat, that rabbits chew their cud, and that a man can live is the stomach of a fish.

Wait, that's the bible, too.

[Angrboda]

The last person who accused me of committing a fallacy ate dirt.  Let's hope that you have better success.  What fallacy are you accusing me of committing?

They say pride came before the fall.

I accuse you of the same fallacy you accused me of.

Since I didn't commit said fallacy, your claim is without merit. Here. I hope you enjoy eating dirt.

[Cherub786]

They say pride came before the fall.

I accuse you of the same fallacy you accused me of.

Since I didn't commit said fallacy, your claim is without merit.  Here.  I hope you enjoy eating dirt.

I'm not sure if I or you eat dirt. But doesn't your culture eat insects?

[Crossless2.0]

Since I didn't commit said fallacy, your claim is without merit.  Here.  I hope you enjoy eating dirt.

I'm not sure if I or you eat dirt. But doesn't your culture eat insects?

Last I checked, it's not a big thing in Minnesota.

[Angrboda]

Since I didn't commit said fallacy, your claim is without merit.  Here.  I hope you enjoy eating dirt.

I'm not sure if I or you eat dirt. But doesn't your culture eat insects?

Wow. You're a real winner, aren't you? I'm sure we should be glad to have you.