Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Calculus Crusader
_Emeritus
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 5:52 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Calculus Crusader »

Enzo the Baker wrote:This is the best, informative, scholarly, work on the question of whether Jesus was a real historical person or not...spoiler alert: not bloody likely.

http://www.amazon.com/Historicity-Jesus ... +for+doubt


Thanks for the laugh. Richard Carrier is an imbecile. Here is an actual informative, scholarly work:

http://www.amazon.com/Historical-Jesus-Comprehensive-Gerd-Theissen/dp/0800631226/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1437771788&sr=8-1&keywords=gerd+historical+jesus
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei

(I lost access to my Milesius account, so I had to retrieve this one from the mothballs.)
_Fence Sitter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Fence Sitter »

Fence Sitter wrote:So how does arguing that there was a historical figure named Jesus, who didn't satisfy any of the requirements of being the Messiah, help the cause of those that believe he was?

huckelberry wrote:I am not sure it does, so why do you think a bunch of followers ended up believing he was? Talked into it by Pilot? an accident?

.


Probably for the same reasons many think Joseph Smith or Muhammad are prophets.
huckelberry wrote:It would seem unlikely that any argument made now would effect the belief of the first thousand years of the church.


I am not sure I follow you here. I made my comment regarding how the argument in question did seem to support those that today believe in the divinity of Christ. What does this have to do with his followers in the first thousand years?
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Enzo the Baker wrote:This is the best, informative, scholarly, work on the question of whether Jesus was a real historical person or not...spoiler alert: not bloody likely.

http://www.amazon.com/Historicity-Jesus ... +for+doubt


Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Mr. Carrier stated to the effect that his 'Christ-Myth theory' ought to undergo a peer review?

It sounds like he's inviting the academic community, whoever it would be, to give his theory a go and attempt to disprove. I can't say this isn't an attempt at self-promotion, but it is intriguing nevertheless.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_huckelberry
_Emeritus
Posts: 4559
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:29 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _huckelberry »

Fence Sitter wrote:
Probably for the same reasons many think Joseph Smith or Muhammad are prophets.
huckelberry wrote:It would seem unlikely that any argument made now would effect the belief of the first thousand years of the church.


I am not sure I follow you here. I made my comment regarding how the argument in question did seem to support those that today believe in the divinity of Christ. What does this have to do with his followers in the first thousand years?


Hi Fence Sitter, I was asking the same question over again in various ways. I think it is straightforward to say a major reason anybody thinks of Jesus as messiah now is because the early church was filled with people who did.

Your answer, same as with Joseph Smith or Muhammad may point to something, or may not. Muhammad was a big military success and people think his words lovely poetry. Joseph Smith presents a reform movement in the popular Christian religion. It takes a stab at resolving problems people have been troubled by in the then current forms of Christianity.

Not all reform movements become popular.
_Enzo the Baker
_Emeritus
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:07 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Enzo the Baker »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Enzo the Baker wrote:This is the best, informative, scholarly, work on the question of whether Jesus was a real historical person or not...spoiler alert: not bloody likely.

http://www.amazon.com/Historicity-Jesus ... +for+doubt


Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Mr. Carrier stated to the effect that his 'Christ-Myth theory' ought to undergo a peer review?

It sounds like he's inviting the academic community, whoever it would be, to give his theory a go and attempt to disprove. I can't say this isn't an attempt at self-promotion, but it is intriguing nevertheless.

- Doc

This work underwent a rigorous peer review prior to its publication. However, Carrier still welcomes any review/critique of his work. Here's what I consider to be a very good, albeit somewhat lengthy, review of the book.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/Carrier.htm
_Enzo the Baker
_Emeritus
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:07 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Enzo the Baker »

Calculus Crusader wrote:
Enzo the Baker wrote:This is the best, informative, scholarly, work on the question of whether Jesus was a real historical person or not...spoiler alert: not bloody likely.

http://www.amazon.com/Historicity-Jesus ... +for+doubt


Thanks for the laugh. Richard Carrier is an imbecile. Here is an actual informative, scholarly work:

http://www.amazon.com/Historical-Jesus-Comprehensive-Gerd-Theissen/dp/0800631226/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1437771788&sr=8-1&keywords=gerd+historical+jesus

Thanks CC for the recommendation on the book you suggested which I have not read yet but will do so and see how it compares with "imbecile" Carrier's treatise. Just curious, what did you find laughable about it? Please be specific, as obviously you've read it.
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Chap »

Calculus Crusader wrote:
Enzo the Baker wrote:This is the best, informative, scholarly, work on the question of whether Jesus was a real historical person or not...spoiler alert: not bloody likely.

http://www.amazon.com/Historicity-Jesus ... +for+doubt


Thanks for the laugh. Richard Carrier is an imbecile. Here is an actual informative, scholarly work:

http://www.amazon.com/Historical-Jesus-Comprehensive-Gerd-Theissen/dp/0800631226/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1437771788&sr=8-1&keywords=gerd+historical+jesus


I don't want to express a judgement about either of those books. But I wonder whether we shall ever see an example of Calculus Crusader referring to someone he disagrees with, without labeling that person as in some way mentally defective? It is a strange mental tic, and one what makes me glad I am only interacting with him in cyberspace.
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _SteelHead »

Cc is a Christian who abstains from Christ like behavior . I sometimes wonder if he isn't a sock puppet experiment into Poe's law.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_Fence Sitter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _Fence Sitter »

huckelberry wrote:
Hi Fence Sitter, I was asking the same question over again in various ways. I think it is straightforward to say a major reason anybody thinks of Jesus as messiah now is because the early church was filled with people who did.


I am sure there are many other factors for belief , however the OP at hand seems to raise more challenges to belief than it answers. If one is to accept his argument as evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus than one must also accept the same evidences that point to him not being the expected Messiah, but rather a figure that was forced into that role by future redactors, one of many who could have been used.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
_honorentheos
_Emeritus
Posts: 11104
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:17 am

Re: Interesting post about the historicity of Jesus

Post by _honorentheos »

Fence Sitter wrote:
huckelberry wrote:
Hi Fence Sitter, I was asking the same question over again in various ways. I think it is straightforward to say a major reason anybody thinks of Jesus as messiah now is because the early church was filled with people who did.


I am sure there are many other factors for belief , however the OP at hand seems to raise more challenges to belief than it answers. If one is to accept his argument as evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus than one must also accept the same evidences that point to him not being the expected Messiah, but rather a figure that was forced into that role by future redactors, one of many who could have been used.

Hi Fence Sitter,

Looking back on my Mormon upbringing I'm not sure that it follows from the OP that Jesus-as-Messiah necessarily requires a forcing of his life into the mythology by redactors. I think the faithful view is that the Jewish nation misunderstood that the purpose of the Messiah was not to save Israel from a geopolitical enemy but instead to save Israel and mankind from sin and death. While there are plenty of historical arguments to be made on those points, I don't think the believer must reevaluate their view based on the argument of the OP alone.

My 2¢.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Post Reply