Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-10-2017 8:57 PM
339 online now:
Dredge, dwise1, jar (3 members, 336 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,000 Year: 28,606/21,208 Month: 672/1,847 Week: 47/475 Day: 47/58 Hour: 2/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
5Next
Author Topic:   Did Jesus Exist? by Bart Ehrman
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 68 (658590)
04-06-2012 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by crashfrog
04-06-2012 5:14 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
You really need to familiarize yourself with more of the Mythicist arguments.

Jon, there are no mythicist arguments, because mythicists are not required to advance any position. The default conclusion is that Jesus is a figure of mythology unless sufficient evidence can be brought forward by historicists.

The burden of evidence lies all on historicists. I'm not required to make Earl Doherty's arguments; I'm not even required to make any of my own. All that is required to support the mythicist position is the utterly inadequate evidence brought forward to try to substantiate the existence of Jesus.

Sorry if you feel like that's unfair, but then, we're not the ones making the extraordinary claim that Jesus Christ was anything but a legend.

Sorry, Crash. But as in the other thread, you show a complete ignorance of the issues being debated.

Like I said before, please investigate the Mythicist position. I think you will find it is much more than 'Jesus didn't exist'.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by crashfrog, posted 04-06-2012 5:14 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by crashfrog, posted 04-07-2012 8:08 AM Jon has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 68 (658591)
04-06-2012 7:07 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Theodoric
04-06-2012 5:21 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
The crux of the Mythicist argument is that there is no historical evidence. Show us the evidence Jon.

The argument from silence is old. Mythicists no longer make it the 'crux' of their arguments anymore because even they are aware of it's inadequacies.

It's a lot like moon dust...


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2012 5:21 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2012 11:13 PM Jon has responded
 Message 54 by crashfrog, posted 04-07-2012 8:09 AM Jon has not yet responded
 Message 60 by Theodoric, posted 04-07-2012 9:37 AM Jon has responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 68 (658593)
04-06-2012 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Theodoric
04-06-2012 5:17 PM


Re: Read this nonsense?
There is Q material (the text Matthew and Luke have in common against Mark), and Ehrman makes a couple of interesting arguments for supposing some of the Gospel material to have originally been Aramaic.

Do you understand what the Q material is? Do you agree with Ehrman's statement?

quote:
With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life

This is an utter falsehood. What are these numerous, independent accounts that date from a year or two of this life?

Come on show them to us. You and Ehrman will be praised the world over when you produce them.

Even if I give you Q, which I won't because it is a HYPOTHETICAL document. what are these other documents?

As I already said, I think Ehrman puts too much weight on the gospels and his reconstructed sources. Ehrman takes as given many things still up for debate.


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2012 5:17 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2012 11:23 PM Jon has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5772
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 9.6


Message 49 of 68 (658600)
04-06-2012 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Jon
04-06-2012 7:07 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
Then please explain the mythicists arguments.

The mythicist arguments are responses to the historicist arguments. The mythicist take those arguments and explain why the arguments are flawed.

The mythicists cannot provide evidence showing there was no Jesus. To expect so is silly. They can and do demand evidence for jesus and explain why the "evidence" presented is not actually evidence.

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the debate.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 7:07 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 11:46 PM Theodoric has responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5772
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 9.6


Message 50 of 68 (658602)
04-06-2012 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Jon
04-06-2012 7:10 PM


Re: Read this nonsense?
So your backing off your comments about the Q material?

Do you agree Ehrman is speaking crap when he talks about

quote:
numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life
?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 7:10 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 11:41 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 68 (658603)
04-06-2012 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Theodoric
04-06-2012 11:23 PM


Re: Read this nonsense?
Do you agree Ehrman is speaking crap when he talks about
quote:
numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life
?

I think I have mentioned more than enough times now what I think of Ehrman's claims to multiple sources, and his heavy reliance on them.

Edited by Jon, : , → 's


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2012 11:23 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 68 (658604)
04-06-2012 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Theodoric
04-06-2012 11:13 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
Re: Less than Impressed
Then please explain the mythicists arguments.

The mythicist arguments are responses to the historicist arguments. The mythicist take those arguments and explain why the arguments are flawed.

The mythicists cannot provide evidence showing there was no Jesus. To expect so is silly. They can and do demand evidence for jesus and explain why the "evidence" presented is not actually evidence.

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the debate.

Mythicists also make claims to explain the origins of Christianity; that is, afterall, the goal behind proposing an historical Jesus in the first place. Once Mythicists get rid of the historical Jesus, they have to come up with an alternative explanation to take his place. And that's where all the nonsense gobbledygook comes in about dying-rising god-men and other silly goofiness.

Anyway; we already had a thread on this that didn't go anywhere. I think it was closed, but if we want to keep discussing this perhaps the admins will open it back up for us.

As far as the matter goes here, I'm going to try to keep this thread more geared toward a discussion of Ehrman's book as it was intended.

Jon


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Theodoric, posted 04-06-2012 11:13 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by crashfrog, posted 04-07-2012 8:10 AM Jon has not yet responded
 Message 59 by Theodoric, posted 04-07-2012 9:36 AM Jon has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 68 (658610)
04-07-2012 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Jon
04-06-2012 7:05 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
Like I said before, please investigate the Mythicist position. I think you will find it is much more than 'Jesus didn't exist'.

If the mythicist position is something other than "the evidence put forth to substantiate the historical existence of Jesus is insufficient" then I'm happy for you to not consider me a "mythicist." I'm not interested in defending any positions but my own.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 7:05 PM Jon has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Phat, posted 04-07-2012 9:04 AM crashfrog has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 68 (658611)
04-07-2012 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Jon
04-06-2012 7:07 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
The argument from silence is old.

But Theodoric was not making the "argument from silence."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 7:07 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 68 (658612)
04-07-2012 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Jon
04-06-2012 11:46 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
Once Mythicists get rid of the historical Jesus, they have to come up with an alternative explanation to take his place.

An alternative explanation of what?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 11:46 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10222
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 56 of 68 (658613)
04-07-2012 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by crashfrog
04-07-2012 8:08 AM


Why Do Atheists Invest So Much Emotion?
crashfrog writes:

If the mythicist position is something other than "the evidence put forth to substantiate the historical existence of Jesus is insufficient" then I'm happy for you to not consider me a "mythicist." I'm not interested in defending any positions but my own.

I never was impressed much with "absence of evidence equals no Jesus as default position. I concur that for many, the idea of no Jesus...historical or otherwise, is a biased position.

For an argument supposedly based only on facts or the lack of same, there is quite a bit of emotionalism from either side...and it seems to me that there has to be a reason why the atheist side invests so much emotion into these arguments. Just what feels so good about your (not you personally,Crash) position, exactly?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by crashfrog, posted 04-07-2012 8:08 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-07-2012 9:16 AM Phat has responded
 Message 63 by Theodoric, posted 04-07-2012 1:00 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 57 of 68 (658615)
04-07-2012 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Phat
04-07-2012 9:04 AM


Re: Why Do Atheists Invest So Much Emotion?
I never was impressed much with "absence of evidence equals no Jesus" as default position.

Isn't that just the result of your prior ideological commitment to the existence of Jesus as the central figure in your faith?

How much evidence would you need to believe that there's no such thing as fairies? Surely all I'd have to do is point out that there's no evidence of the existence of fairies. Why would I have to do more? Or the existence of dragons? Again, the lack of evidence in support should be sufficient.

But for some reason, for you, the rules are different when it comes to Jesus. I kind of think I know why.

If you've learned anything about me in all these years, you should have learned that I'm completely puzzled by what people think they gain when they relax their standards of evidence. The downside seems pretty obvious - it becomes a lot easier for people to fool you and take advantage of your self-imposed gullibility. What, on Earth, is the upside to that?

For an argument supposedly based only on facts or the lack of same, there is quite a bit of emotionalism from either side...and it seems to me that there has to be a reason why the atheist side invests so much emotion into these arguments.

I'm sorry but I don't see any emotion in my posts at all, aside perhaps from the usual emotion of being excited to be involved in an interesting discussion. Can you elaborate on what you're talking about? Usually the invocation of "too much emotion" is used as an attempt at misdirection when someone is losing the debate.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Phat, posted 04-07-2012 9:04 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Phat, posted 04-07-2012 9:18 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10222
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 58 of 68 (658617)
04-07-2012 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
04-07-2012 9:16 AM


Re: Why Do Atheists Invest So Much Emotion?
ok, but lets let Jon have his topic back. We can argue this one elsewhere....should I simply start a new topic?

Lets go here

Edited by Phat, : link

Edited by Phat, :


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-07-2012 9:16 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5772
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 9.6


(1)
Message 59 of 68 (658620)
04-07-2012 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Jon
04-06-2012 11:46 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
And that's where all the nonsense gobbledygook comes in about dying-rising god-men and other silly goofiness.

Personal incredulity is no argument. All it shows is a close mindedness. Now if you want to present arguments against mythicist arguments please do. Maybe you will be more convincing then Ehrman.

Isn't it amazing that christianity is devoid of all the influences of myth that most other religions are.

Was Buddha a real person? Was Confucius? Modern scholarship puts there existence into question also. This is not an anti-christian proposition. The mythicist argument is following where the evidence leads. It is not an attack on a particular relgion or worldview.

As far as the matter goes here, I'm going to try to keep this thread more geared toward a discussion of Ehrman's book as it was intended.

That is what we are discussing. As you admit this book is sorely lacking. You seem to have some sort of personal animus toward people that are criticizing arguments you yourself have criticized. That seems a bit weird.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 11:46 PM Jon has not yet responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5772
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 9.6


Message 60 of 68 (658621)
04-07-2012 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Jon
04-06-2012 7:07 PM


Re: Less than Impressed
The argument from silence is old.

Please show that this was made.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Jon, posted 04-06-2012 7:07 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Jon, posted 04-07-2012 11:20 AM Theodoric has responded

    
Prev123
4
5Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017