Posts: 67288
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 9:35 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 10:06 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Quote: It's a circular argument to say, "Jesus probably didn't exist because the texts about him are corrupt and include embellishment; therefore Jesus probably didn't exist."
Whew, good thing thats not the mythicist argument huh...nutcase. No need to repost what's already been discussed, but proponents of christ myth theory are perfectly comfortable saying "there may have been a jesus". Lets see what a mythicist actually does argue.....eh?
"the theory that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition."
Take a crack at that, rather than pitching straw?
Quote:Keep in mind that we have sources about Jesus' life and influence that are not written by his followers
Lets see those, that's all anyone's asked for, the evidence that lead you to the conclusion. Or, if you'd rather, you can sit on your branch and chirp "the consensus, the consensus".
?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 30, 2015
Reputation:
0
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 9:40 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 1:43 pm by rexbeccarox.)
{snip}
Mod Edit: this entire wall of text was copypasta spam. Try again in your own words.- rexbeccarox
 (F.S)
Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
73
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 10:23 am
Holy fucking mother of text walls, what is that monster?!?!
Posts: 67288
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 10:23 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 10:24 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Lots of Tacitus and Josephus. 
(and "the bible says" -of course)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 10:24 am
Herospeed...might wanna refomat that reply >.>
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 10:34 am
(June 9, 2015 at 10:23 am)Neimenovic Wrote: Holy fucking mother of text walls, what is that monster?!?!
Nothing but the OP without hide tag, no?
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
73
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 10:41 am
(June 9, 2015 at 10:34 am)Alex K Wrote: (June 9, 2015 at 10:23 am)Neimenovic Wrote: Holy fucking mother of text walls, what is that monster?!?!
Nothing but the OP without hide tag, no?
Looks like a goddamn sea monster and a half on my phone 
Posts: 341
Threads: 26
Joined: February 6, 2015
Reputation:
4
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 11:07 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 11:41 am by TheMessiah.)
(June 9, 2015 at 10:23 am)Rhythm Wrote: Lots of Tacitus and Josephus.
(and "the bible says" -of course)
Yes Rythym.
Professional and expert scholars, who analyse the ancient world for a living have concluded that Tacticus and Josephus are generally reliable.
Posts: 341
Threads: 26
Joined: February 6, 2015
Reputation:
4
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 11:08 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 11:09 am by TheMessiah.)
(June 9, 2015 at 9:07 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: (June 9, 2015 at 8:56 am)Aoi Magi Wrote: Sorry, but I didn't read the 27 pages, but from the article in the OP it seems the basic summary is that JC, as people commonly understand from the bible, is primarily a myth, based on a probable actual person? or am I misunderstanding it?
I believe the conclusion is that there most likely existed some rabbi known as Jesus who claimed to be the messiah, and was crucified. Literally anything other than that is unconfirmable.
Correct.
On the topic of ''anything other'' --- that's where historians really get into heated debates, but generally they agree some dude who claimed to be a messiah got fucked over by the Romans.
Posts: 341
Threads: 26
Joined: February 6, 2015
Reputation:
4
RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 11:11 am
(June 9, 2015 at 8:45 am)Nestor Wrote: (June 9, 2015 at 1:58 am)Goosebump Wrote: Seems to me , a layman, after reading much of this thread and doing a little wiki searching to fill in the gaps what My take away was this.
Historians are in disagreement. Any testimony of Jesus the man or the myth is suspect and in doubt. There is no consensus. Which sounds a lot like hands in the air and nothing like concrete evidence. Historians disagree as to what particulars we can know about Jesus' life beyond things like his baptism by John and his death by crucifixion under Pilate. The number of historians who disagree that this Jesus really existed is, according to mythicist demigod Richard Carrier, about seven.
Seven
There are thousands of historians. To say that is not a consensus would be tantamount to viewing the number of scientists who are creationists and proclaiming that there is no agreement as to whether or not macroevolution really took place.
Thanks for this.
I wasn't aware of how many historians deny HJ, I knew it was low but didn't have an exact figure.
|
