RE: Why do atheists even bother about debating Jesus?
February 4, 2013 at 5:23 am
(This post was last modified: February 4, 2013 at 5:33 am by Justtristo.)
The Christ Myth Hypothesis is held by a number of people who are not atheists. However they have seen the evidence and come to the conclusion that Jesus is a wholly mythological character. I came to that position after examining the proponents of this position and found their arguments compelling.
I agree with Earl Doherty that Jesus was initially was thought out as having existed in some level of the heavens, rather than on Earth. Only somewhat later he got historicized, with his life story in the gospels being composed of various Old Testament "midrash". That view of Jesus having existed in the heavenly realms is the one described in the Pauline Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews. The idea of a Jesus having lived on Earth as a human just is not those writings.
I believe Christians are very much challenged by the Christ Myth hypothesis when they are seriously confronted with it. Especially given that the historical evidence we have for a historical Jesus is very scant and of dubious reliability. For example; we have reliable historical evidence for Apollonius of Tyana who lived in the late 1st century CE. That reliable evidence just consists of references by contemporaries of having met or heard him personally and a letter by him which does not seem to be forged. Just a reference by some 1st century author having personally met Jesus which did not seem to be forged would be enough to establish him unquestionable as a historical character. Given the resources of the church (from the 4th century onwards) you would expect such evidence to be around, the church would have used it's resources to preserve such evidence. However it is not there, which is in my view quite fishy.
Hence the attempts by apologists to say things "like no serious biblical scholars subscribe to it" (which is committing the appeal to authority fallacy), rather than seriously trying to refute the Christ Myth Hypothesis.
I agree with Earl Doherty that Jesus was initially was thought out as having existed in some level of the heavens, rather than on Earth. Only somewhat later he got historicized, with his life story in the gospels being composed of various Old Testament "midrash". That view of Jesus having existed in the heavenly realms is the one described in the Pauline Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews. The idea of a Jesus having lived on Earth as a human just is not those writings.
I believe Christians are very much challenged by the Christ Myth hypothesis when they are seriously confronted with it. Especially given that the historical evidence we have for a historical Jesus is very scant and of dubious reliability. For example; we have reliable historical evidence for Apollonius of Tyana who lived in the late 1st century CE. That reliable evidence just consists of references by contemporaries of having met or heard him personally and a letter by him which does not seem to be forged. Just a reference by some 1st century author having personally met Jesus which did not seem to be forged would be enough to establish him unquestionable as a historical character. Given the resources of the church (from the 4th century onwards) you would expect such evidence to be around, the church would have used it's resources to preserve such evidence. However it is not there, which is in my view quite fishy.
Hence the attempts by apologists to say things "like no serious biblical scholars subscribe to it" (which is committing the appeal to authority fallacy), rather than seriously trying to refute the Christ Myth Hypothesis.
undefined
