Jesus: Myth, or Man?

[rat_avatar]

@Jayhawker_Soule

So you are agnostic regarding whether or not the works of Paul and Acts are complete fabrications?

I am not agnostic to strawman bating and will not answer that. Are you agnostic regarding the claim that Freyja farted when she had sex with her brother?

[Jayhawker_Soule]

@rat_avatar

I am not agnostic to strawman bating and will not answer that.

OK.

[rat_avatar]

@Jayhawker_Soule

OK.

Good to see that you are so committed to your side of the debate as to provide such a compelling counter argument.

[Jayhawker_Soule]

For general consideration:

An Atheist Historian Examines the Evidence for Jesus (Part 1 of 2)

An Atheist Historian Examines the Evidence for Jesus (Part 2 of 2)

His conclusion being …

The original question we concerned ourselves with was whether historians regard the existence of Jesus to be “historical fact”. The answer is that they do as much as any scholar can do so for the existence of an obscure peasant preacher in the ancient world. There is as much, if not slightly more, evidence for the existence of Yeshua ben Yusef as there is for other comparable Jewish preachers, prophets, and Messianic claimants, even without looking at the gospel material. Additionally, that material contains elements which only make sense if their stories are about a historical figure.

The arguments of the Jesus Mythicists, on the other hand, require contortions and suppositions that simply do not stand up to Occam’s Razor and continually rest on positions that are not accepted by the majority of even non-Christian and Jewish scholars. The proponents of the Jesus Myth hypothesis are almost exclusively amateurs with an ideological axe to grind and their position is and will almost certainly remain on the outer fringe of theories about the origins of Christianity.

[rat_avatar]

@Jayhawker_Soule

For general consideration:

An Atheist Historian Examines the Evidence for Jesus (Part 1 of 2)

An Atheist Historian Examines the Evidence for Jesus (Part 2 of 2)

His conclusion being …

That cite does parrot a common viewpoint, and it also fits into the false dichotomy that you are trying to hand to me on a platter.

If I created a cult revolving around young Jew living in NYC named Mordechai Carver whom saved christmas whom died in the 70’s and created a press release would that mean he existed?

To be clear, despite the attempted claims that I am a mythicist I am not. I do not buy that because a cult was formed, and because the god in that myth was so pathetic that it is impossible that anyone would make it up is good proof for a historical person.

That is the standard I referenced in my above posts google “Criterion of embarrassment” This is one of the MAJOR claims for a historical Jesus.

My claim is that it is just as plausible that the whole persona was created by assembling other stories as religions have a well documented history of doing. And because there is no compelling reason to believe that Jesus exists outside of the fact his cult exists I error to the more scientific conclusion that until there is evidence that he did not, functionally exist. I am not in the habit in claiming things as fact just because people make a claim or wish that it was true.

Do you yourself acknowledge a the historical Moroni or Xenu or Mordechai Carver?

This would be a closed case if it didn’t involve a major religions deity, and because of that and the distance in time we will probably never know.

[Jayhawker_Soule]

@rat_avatar

That cite does parrot a common viewpoint, …

[rat_avatar]

@Jayhawker_Soule

No smily for the Hebrew Hammer reference? Man I love that movie.

Anyway it is hard to have a chevruta via emoticons so best of luck.

[Rhodes]

@TonySinclair

Not so fast; we have eyewitnesses!

And I have to agree with Mark Twain:
“And when I am far on the road to conviction, and eight men, be they grammatical or otherwise, come forward and tell me that they have seen the plates too; and not only seen those plates but ‘hefted’ them, I am convinced. I could not feel more satisfied and at rest if the entire Whitmer family had testified.”

Fun piece of Mormon trivia: Apparently all of the witnesses signed with suspiciously identical handwriting.