Historical Jesus

[steve_bank]

The Flintstomns may have been based o historical characters.

Don't you mean prehistorical characters?

No I don't.

Scholars based on accounts written on cave walls and images on the walls cleary show that there was flesh and blood Fred Flintstone.

Family drawings on the walls show they had a pet dinosaur.

Clearly as god creayed dinosaurs and humans at the same time gives further proof.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The Flintstomns may have been based o historical characters.

Don't you mean prehistorical characters?

It would have to be late prehistory -- we have oral traditions which indicate that they were a modern stone age family...

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The Flintstomns may have been based o historical characters.

Don't you mean prehistorical characters?

No I don't.

Scholars based on accounts written on cave walls and images on the walls cleary show that there was flesh and blood Fred Flintstone.

Family drawings on the walls show they had a pet dinosaur.

Clearly as god creayed dinosaurs and humans at the same time gives further proof.

I believe you may have invented a new criterion of authenticity: The Criterion of Multiple Pictures. So scholars of Biblical history assure us that Jesus must have existed because we have many pictures of Him "going way back early." With all those pictures of Jesus, "he almost certainly existed" as Bart Ehrman wrote.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The Flintstomns may have been based o historical characters.

Don't you mean prehistorical characters?

It would have to be late prehistory -- we have oral traditions which indicate that they were a modern stone age family...

Who in their right minds would make up a bumbling, overweight figure like Fred Flintstone to be a hero? And there's so much attestation about him--that just can't happen unless he was a real guy.

 

[steve_bank]

Yabba Dabba Do.

Modern myths, metaphors, and cultural icons.

 

[bilby]

The Flintstomns may have been based o historical characters.

Don't you mean prehistorical characters?

It would have to be late prehistory -- we have oral traditions which indicate that they were a modern stone age family...

Who in their right minds would make up a bumbling, overweight figure like Fred Flintstone to be a hero? And there's so much attestation about him--that just can't happen unless he was a real guy.

I am rather concerned about the recent deadly terrorist attacks that have resulted from the schism between those who interpret the verse "it's a place right out of history" as implying that the town of Bedrock is historical, and those whose interpretation is that if it is "right out of" history, it must therefore be construed as outside history, and therefore pre-historical.

Of course, both sides agree that it would have been completely impossible for the entire town to be fictional; I mean, it's possible to invent a building or even a family, but to invent an entire town, with all its inhabitants, would be absurd if it wasn't a real place.

 

[steve_bank]

The Flintstones and the Rubbles were 60s-70s working class neighbors. Nothing mysterious or deep about it. It was obvious.

 

[bilby]

The Flintstones and the Rubbles were 60s-70s working class neighbors. Nothing mysterious or deep about it. It was obvious.

How do you respond to a person who thinks that the above needed to be said?

There's a certain level of idiocy defined by the inability to work out that other people aren't idiots. IMO, it's the worst of them all, because it's hermetically sealed off from any possibility of self awareness.

It's defining characteristic is the need to explain the joke, when intelligent people are playing with the inherent humour of absurdities.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I am rather concerned about the recent deadly terrorist attacks that have resulted from the schism between those who interpret the verse "it's a place right out of history" as implying that the town of Bedrock is historical, and those whose interpretation is that if it is "right out of" history, it must therefore be construed as outside history, and therefore pre-historical.

Of course, both sides agree that it would have been completely impossible for the entire town to be fictional; I mean, it's possible to invent a building or even a family, but to invent an entire town, with all its inhabitants, would be absurd if it wasn't a real place.

Given that despite their (apparent) setting, the reports of their modern culture and recreation of technology lead me to believe the headcannon that the town of Bedrock, and indeed the entire Flintstones world, are not "prehistoric" at all, but rather post-apocalyptic.

I believe that The Flintstones takes place after their world -- our world -- was, quite literally, "bombed back to the stone age," and that the survivors of the event (and their animals which mutated into dinosaur-like creatures) processed their collective trauma by attempting to rebuild their world as close as they could to what it was before with the available materials.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Of course, both sides agree that it would have been completely impossible for the entire town to be fictional; I mean, it's possible to invent a building or even a family, but to invent an entire town, with all its inhabitants, would be absurd if it wasn't a real place.

People digging deep holes have discovered Bedrock.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

We know there is much homophobia today and outright persecution of homosexuality yet with every new Flintstone adventure we are invited to participate in having a "gay old time." For me that's the clincher. What could be more historically revealing? And "Yabbadabbadoo time?" Obviously an idiom we haven't yet successfully parsed.

 

[TLK Valentine]

People digging deep holes have discovered Bedrock.

Most of whom were playing Minecraft at the time...

 

[TLK Valentine]

We know there is much homophobia today and outright persecution of homosexuality yet with every new Flintstone adventure we are invited to participate in having a "gay old time." For me that's the clincher. What could be more historically revealing? And "Yabbadabbadoo time?" Obviously an idiom we haven't yet successfully parsed.

Ah, the acceptance of homosexuality supports my theory that The Flintstones takes place in the future, not the past...

 

[Learner]

Would you believe it 2000 years from now based on a few scant wrings from today?

2000 years from today.

It will depend on the nature of the story, obviously. Like for example: Would there also be writings from people of the same time-period who would refute these stories as being real?

Where are the refutations of Superman, Batman, Wonderwoman, Supergirl, Paul Bunyan, Spiderman, the Dukes of Hazard and the Beverly Hillbillies, to name a few?

To state the obvious - there's always been available to the public, the written literature, that comes right alongside each story that goes out to the masses, like the characters you mention above. People just know it's a story because for example, when the authors are given credit, they get written about (who are often known for writing other stories too) - they may give insight, as to why they wrote their book, explaining while being interviewed. This would be the refutation to your above fictional characters. Basically ... we are aware of Jerry Siegal and Joe Schuster.

 

[TomC]

like the characters you mention above. People just know it's a story because for example, when the authors are given credit, they get written about (who are often known for writing other stories too)

There's a name that sticks out from the others on @T.G.G. Moogly 's list.
It's Paul Bunyan.
Unlike the others, nobody really knows where the tall tales of Bunyan originated. It's possible that there really was a big burly woodcutter who went around with his ox and inspired stories by his exploits. More likely, to me, Paul Bunyan is a name given to an archetype. Strong, independent, free, Bunyan represented an ideal. Not an actual living human.
Tom

 

[Learner]

like the characters you mention above. People just know it's a story because for example, when the authors are given credit, they get written about (who are often known for writing other stories too)

There's a name that sticks out from the others on @T.G.G. Moogly 's list.
It's Paul Bunyan.
Unlike the others, nobody really knows where the tall tales of Bunyan originated. It's possible that there really was a big burly woodcutter who went around with his ox and inspired stories by his exploits. More likely, to me, Paul Bunyan is a name given to an archetype. Strong, independent, free, Bunyan represented an ideal. Not an actual living human.
Tom

Right you are TomC. Bunyan is the odd one out, well noted.

Two thousand years from now, I'll presume someone would read quite a few writings that would exist, being similar to (if not including) your post quoted in bold.

 

[James Brown]

Right you are TomC. Bunyan is the odd one out, well noted.

And King Arthur, and Robin Hood, and Uncle Sam, and John Frum, and William Tell, and Noah, and Abraham, and Moses, and Jonah...

 

[TomC]

Right you are TomC. Bunyan is the odd one out, well noted.

And King Arthur, and Robin Hood, and Uncle Sam, and John Frum, and William Tell, and Noah, and Abraham, and Moses, and Jonah...

This is an important point.

Popular culture is crowded with figures who are legends. Their lives, as told in stories, are nearly impossible to be real. How historically accurate any of the stories are is also nearly impossible to ascertain. There's no real way to tell how much is true, sorta true, mostly not true, and completely made up. So it's mostly a matter of discussing people's opinions about the plausibility of unusual human history and stories. Not much possibilities of discussing reality.
Tom

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Right you are TomC. Bunyan is the odd one out, well noted.

And King Arthur, and Robin Hood, and Uncle Sam, and John Frum, and William Tell, and Noah, and Abraham, and Moses, and Jonah...

This is an important point.

Popular culture is crowded with figures who are legends. Their lives, as told in stories, are nearly impossible to be real. How historically accurate any of the stories are is also nearly impossible to ascertain. There's no real way to tell how much is true, sorta true, mostly not true, and completely made up. So it's mostly a matter of discussing people's opinions about the plausibility of unusual human history and stories. Not much possibilities of discussing reality.
Tom

Particularly when that "reality" involves personal identification with the story, i.e. religion. Questioning a person's "identity" is usually a bad idea, at the very least it requires a lot of tact. Said person may eventually come around to agreeing with new information but the initial reaction is usually understandable emotional denial and argument.

 

[Learner]

Right you are TomC. Bunyan is the odd one out, well noted.

And King Arthur, and Robin Hood, and Uncle Sam, and John Frum, and William Tell, and Noah, and Abraham, and Moses, and Jonah...

Hmm, ok I see, well curiously I'd think, that within each of these characters story's you kindly brought up, I'd wonder about those comparisons and differences. Say for example as with the biblical timeline - are there any similar characters and individuals, who come after King Arthur, and Robin Hood, and uncle Sam, and John Frum and William Tell, who follow the long-line of succession of a long continuation, just as we see through the biblical timeline? Like Jesus and the Apostles would acknowledge and recognize the previous prophets. Adam to Noah to Moses to Jesus etc..

(Interestingly, I read John Frum followers, were told to give up Christianity, apparently )