• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Christ Myth Theory

Learner

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
3,289
Location
Between two Cities
Basic Beliefs
Christianity and Common Sense
The bible narrative says 'the meek shall inherit the earth' etc..

Paul says that Jesus, in obedience (FAITH) to first-god, relinquished the perfection of the heavenly realm and humbled himself. The message is that Jesus suffered and that for those with FAITH—the dead do not die per se.
  • Passion: to carry or bear a burdon​

from Latin passiō, ultimately from patior. Cognate with patience.
from Greek pathós (παθός) someone who experienced or underwent something e.g. an agony (a word originaly meaning: competition, battle).
  • The education featured in the agōgē (ἀγωγά) involved cultivating loyalty to Sparta and paidagōgíā (παιδᾰγωγῐ́ᾱ ) through pain tolerance.

Yes, I would also say that is an apsect to 'faith' - Jesus having humbled himself, being human... and those that had faith would be saved, etc.. Humilty an example set by Jesus for his followers didn't start there. This trait 'to be humble' goes way back to the OT.... long before Paul, contextually understood like: 'the meek shall inherit the earth':

Proverbs 16:19
It is better to be humble in spirit with the lowly Than to divide the spoil with the proud.

Zephaniah 2:3
Seek the Lord, All you humble of the earth Who have carried out His ordinances;
Seek righteousness, seek humility. Perhaps you will be hidden In the day of the Lord’s anger.

Psalm 25:9
He leads the humble in justice, And He teaches the humble His way.

Proverbs 18:12
Before destruction the heart of man is haughty, But humility goes before honor.

Daniel 4:37
Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, exalt and honor the King of heaven, for all His works are true and His ways just, and He is able to humble those who walk in pride.”

Isaiah 5:15
So the common man will be humbled and the man of importance abased,
The eyes of the proud also will be abased.

Proverbs 22:4
The reward of humility and the fear of the Lord, Are riches, honor and life.
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,202
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
Those sentiments are universal because of disparities both within and between societies. Although much of the disparity is self-inflicted much more is environmentally dictated.

This alleged Jesus didn't cure disease. And I don't count the propagandistic tall tales where he was supernatural. If there really was a supernatural Jesus he missed the boat on disease and science, medicine and hospitals, the prime ways he could have helped humanity. Instead he is alleged to have performed magic tricks. Why was Gospel Jesus just another common bum in this regard?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dbz

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
28,276
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Those sentiments are universal because of disparities both within and between societies. Although much of the disparity is self-inflicted much more is environmentally dictated.

This alleged Jesus didn't cure disease. And I don't count the propagandistic tall tales where he was supernatural. If there really was a supernatural Jesus he missed the boat on disease and science, medicine and hospitals, the prime ways he could have helped humanity. Instead he is alleged to have performed magic tricks. Why was Gospel Jesus just another common bum in this regard?
It's a good question. What's so impressive about curing a leper, when you could instead cure leprosy?

It's not even that difficult to cure leprosy. A couple of weeks of treatment with Rifampicin and Dapsone will do it.

There's a reason why leper colonies, and all the misery and suffering they entailed, continued their existence for two thousand years after Jesus's alleged miracles, but disappeared in the twentieth century without needing a miracle at all. We just decided we wanted to do it; worked out how to do it; and did it.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
...because of disparities both within and between societies. Although much of the disparity is self-inflicted much more is environmentally dictated.
  • In short, resources are limited.
We just decided we wanted to do it; worked out how to do it; and did it.
Rather, we evolved more optimal strategies to eat (survival) and fornicate (reproduction) that could eventually dead-end with extinction.

For commentary on the human strategies per survival and reproduction see:
"Evolution, Sex & Desire | David Buss | The JBP Podcast". YouTube. Jordan B Peterson.

[02:09] Career Background
[01:23:29] Monogamy & Violence
[01:33:40] Why Strategies Differ
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
3,289
Location
Between two Cities
Basic Beliefs
Christianity and Common Sense
Those sentiments are universal because of disparities both within and between societies. Although much of the disparity is self-inflicted much more is environmentally dictated.
Those sentiments are universal... yes of course - as it's written 'in the heart of the beholder'.

This alleged Jesus didn't cure disease. And I don't count the propagandistic tall tales where he was supernatural.
If there really was a supernatural Jesus he missed the boat on disease and science, medicine and hospitals, the prime ways he could have helped humanity.

The narrative is already set out... IF you've read it, there IS resolution. "Could have.."and "should have..." as according to 'your taste', doesn't indicate any "alledged" Jesus as according to your description, I quoted above.

Instead he is alleged to have performed magic tricks. Why was Gospel Jesus just another common bum in this regard?

Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD, IOW. Critiquing the bible with a theist in discussion, lets at least be on the same page. ;)
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
2,339
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,202
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.
Isn't that a distinction without a difference? Miracles don't happen and neither does magic. People just get fooled into believing something. In both cases there is supposedly a power or force at work and someone or something wielding that power. In the end miracles are just magic performed in a religious setting. We're supposed to believe the two things are different but that's just religious spin.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
28,276
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.
Isn't that a distinction without a difference? Miracles don't happen and neither does magic. People just get fooled into believing something. In both cases there is supposedly a power or force at work and someone or something wielding that power. In the end miracles are just magic performed in a religious setting. We're supposed to believe the two things are different but that's just religious spin.
The word "miracle" just means 'magic, but not the bad kind that's not done by my God, only the good kind that my God does'.

The history of Christian thought shows that both are believed to be real, and are indistinguishable, other than in moral value. It's a bit pointless to hang a man as a witch if he's just pretending to do magic; His crime is that he's employing powers that are reserved to God alone. It's a patent infringement.
 

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
10,509
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
I knew an vangelcal who absolutely belived in faith healing. He trabed to a cener for it in Ca somewhere.

He had a list of mrcale cures dedicated to faith healing. He had a list of allrged miracle cures taken as fact, but he never saw it happen. One was something abut a person in Afruca who blindness was cured. The claim was people saw milky eye cleared as they watched.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
This article argues that the dendritic (tree-like) or traditional model of Christian origins must be replaced with a plectic (braid-like) model. The dendritic model assumes that Christianity began at a specific point in both time and space—in the person of “Jesus of Nazareth”—and then branched out to form the various ancient sects of Christianity. This article asks: What if the numerous forms of “Christianity” did not all derive from a single historical figure? What if these earliest “Christianities” arose in the same way that the different forms and varieties of Egyptian, Indic, and Greco-Roman religions evolved? A new paradigm is proposed where the various forms of Christianity can be envisioned as forming by the coalescence of various threads (or trajectories) of religious tradition. Some of the threads may trace back into the mists of prehistory, others may trace to the turn of the current era, and still others may have begun in the second or third centuries CE. Not all early forms of Christianity contained the same threads. Not all threads stayed in the braid for long, and still others continued into the present. After entering the braid, threads of tradition evolved, bifurcated, branched off, or were absorbed into other traditions. Clearly, this is what we see happening today as multitudinous sects, cults, and denominations continue to arise and go extinct. As in historical geology, so too in religious history: The present is the key to the past.
  • Zindler, Frank R. (1 August 2022). "A New Paradigm for the Study of Christian Origins: Replacing the Dendritic Model". Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry. 4 (1): 114–152. doi:10.33929/sherm.2022.vol4.no1.08.

The edited volume, Varieties of Jesus Mythicism, aims to present diverse approaches and theories to the debate on Jesus’ historical existence. While it includes several enlightening and worthwhile contributions, there are too many amateur contributions employing dubious claims and methodologies. The result is that, apart from the few worthy contributions, the book as a whole is only useful for comparing poor with genuine scholarship. And some advice on how to make such a comparison, so as to distinguish the one from the other, is here provided.
  • Carrier, Richard (1 August 2022). "Book Review: Varieties of Jesus Mythicism". Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry. 4 (1): 171–192. doi:10.33929/sherm.2022.vol4.no1.10.
 

SIB

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2022
Messages
141
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
To me, religion and god belief are different. They do have a huge overlap for some tho.

The belief in some thing more (whatever that is) is more reliable than the reverse belief.

That doesn't mean any one religion's god is the only way. Some theist and atheist just do not understand that so they cling to their their statement of belief about god like its the truer than true. So be it, they need it. Just keep it out of law making.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
To me, religion and god belief are different.
[. . .]
The belief in some thing more (whatever that is) is more reliable than the reverse belief.
Per "The belief in some thing more (whatever that is) is more "reliable"—in terms of an optimal "survive and reproduce" strategy at a species level which carries over to the IN-group v. OUT-group competition for resources to "survive and reproduce" which carries over to the XX&XY status hierarchies optimal distribution (relative to the species "survive and reproduce" strategy) of limited survival resources and reproduction opportunities.

Given that Nash equilibrium and other strategy can alter "optimal" relative to the species/group/individual.

IMO evolutionary psychology explain both religion and god belief.

For commentary on XX&XY status hierarchies, see @ "Evolution, Sex & Desire | David Buss | #235". YouTube. Jordan B Peterson:
[00:00] Intro [02:09] Career Background [06:50] Human Mating Strategies [09:18] Patriarchy & Mating [10:52] Female Preferences & Resource Acquisition [14:54] Sexual Selection Theory: An Overview [25:23] Patriarchy: Origins
[27:36] (Dominance) Hierarchies
[40:20] Women & the Dark Triad (Narcissism, Machiavelianism, & Psychopathy) [57:59] Attention & (Fe)male Selection [01:04:24] Violence [01:07:47] Emotional Regulation & Status [01:13:59] Disturbing Ethical Conclusions [01:20:25] (Fe)male Aggression [01:23:29] Monogamy & Violence [01:28:30] Inequality [01:33:40] Why Strategies Differ [01:42:45] Outro
 

SIB

Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2022
Messages
141
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
To me, religion and god belief are different.
[. . .]
The belief in some thing more (whatever that is) is more reliable than the reverse belief.
Per "The belief in some thing more (whatever that is) is more "reliable"—in terms of an optimal "survive and reproduce" strategy at a species level which carries over to the IN-group v. OUT-group competition for resources to "survive and reproduce" which carries over to the XX&XY status hierarchies optimal distribution (relative to the species "survive and reproduce" strategy) of limited survival resources and reproduction opportunities.

Given that Nash equilibrium and other strategy can alter "optimal" relative to the species/group/individual.

IMO evolutionary psychology explain both religion and god belief.

For commentary on XX&XY status hierarchies, see @ "Evolution, Sex & Desire | David Buss | #235". YouTube. Jordan B Peterson:
[00:00] Intro [02:09] Career Background [06:50] Human Mating Strategies [09:18] Patriarchy & Mating [10:52] Female Preferences & Resource Acquisition [14:54] Sexual Selection Theory: An Overview [25:23] Patriarchy: Origins
[27:36] (Dominance) Hierarchies
[40:20] Women & the Dark Triad (Narcissism, Machiavelianism, & Psychopathy) [57:59] Attention & (Fe)male Selection [01:04:24] Violence [01:07:47] Emotional Regulation & Status [01:13:59] Disturbing Ethical Conclusions [01:20:25] (Fe)male Aggression [01:23:29] Monogamy & Violence [01:28:30] Inequality [01:33:40] Why Strategies Differ [01:42:45] Outro
1/2 way. You are half way there.

Evolution brought us to this point. "evolution", more precisely the unaversive, has created us so that we can now can look around and evaluate our place in the system. I like to start at the best baseline truth we have. so i ask myself ...

So what is a more reliable stance?

we are part of some thing more.
or
we are not?

that, in no way implies a deity to me. But it aint nothing either.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
Evolution brought us to this point. "evolution", more precisely the unaversive, has created us so that we can now can look around and evaluate our place in the system.
We are at a juncture where "evolution" can be manipulated for "optimal results"!

The question is whose "optimal results"? Humanity has an atavistic devil on one shoulder and an ad astra angel on the other!
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
What did Yesus teach?
  • The end is nigh, REPENT!
Per the historical personage Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera, whom I have given the moniker Yesus. Bart Ehrman holds the viewpoint that Yesus was a Jewish preacher and teacher—crucified during the reign of Pontius Pilate. Ehrman indicates that he believes that Yesus was born into poverty and was either a carpenter or a carpenter’s son. He began his public ministry while trapped in a poverty-stricken lower-class life. He was an “The end is nigh! Repent!” type of preacher. He was baptized by John the Baptist. He “raised the ire of Pharisees,” causing a ruckus in the Temple but not at the scale depicted by the Gospels. Pilate personally ordered his crucifixion after a brief trial at the beginning of Pesach, the holiest holiday of them all. Roman soldiers flogged Yesus on his way to the Cross, and he was dead within six hours.

What did second-god teach?
  • I will be to you a redeemer GOD!
Cf. Godfrey, Neil (2 December 2010). “The Second God among Ancient Jewish Philosophers and Commoners”. Vridar.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
"Did The Greco-Roman Elite Class Write The Gospels?! - Professor Robyn Faith Walsh". YouTube. History Valley. 24 May 2022.
2:12 ...I consider [the gospel authors] elite culture or elite persons within a particular you know stratum of culture .. those who have access to what's called Paideia, so advanced education in the ancient world, and the number of people who actually had that kind of advanced education was really really narrow...
22:01 [Q: What else what led you to the conclusion that it's possible that Christians actually didn't write the gospels] Well this is something that I've been a little surprised that people have taken away from the book, because what I say in the book is that I'm interested in what's the most formative group that we can attribute the content of the gospels to...
 
Last edited:

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
10,509
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
I was not familiar with the term but I go with plectic or braided model.

I expect literacy not unlike today means functional literacy. The ability to read and write and understand at a basic level. Wide open to superstition and influence.

The Jesus of the gospels appears to have been educated, but he also appeared to hang out with the bottom of the pecking order who would not have been literate. He was not associating with the Jewish elite who would have been better educated.
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
3,289
Location
Between two Cities
Basic Beliefs
Christianity and Common Sense
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

I'm glad someone agrees with the contextual differences (even if you're entertaining the idea at least, getting the theist/biblical viewpoint ).

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.

You are correct Atrib... I can't do it. Obviously to demonstrate those miracles to be true... It would have to be Jesus Himself, who would need to be in front of you, for you to see ( If it was I, who appeared to be doing some illusionary miracle, I would probably be a magician). It's not a sufficient good enough answer I know, especially when it comes to 'repeating' or trying to demonstrate 'how' miracles are performed by altering the laws of physics etc..
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
28,276
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

I'm glad someone agrees with the contextual differences (even if you're entertaining the idea at least, getting the theist viewpoint ).

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.

You are correct Atrib... I can't do it. Obviously to demonstrate those miracles to be true... It would have to be Jesus Himself, who would need to be in front of you ( If it was I, who appeared to be doing some illusionary miracle, I would probably be a magician). It's not a sufficient good enough answer I know, especially when it comes to 'repeating' or trying to demonstrate 'how' miracles are performed by altering the laws of physics etc..
When every single person who does something apparently impossible, and who has been checked out, has turned out to be a magician, it's more than a little unwise to accept a claim that someone who wasn't checked out, and can't be because he's been dead for two thousand years, was the one solitary instance of a genuine miracle worker.

So what justification do you have for taking such an unwise stance?

It looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. Every single time we have checked out such a thing, it has always turned out to be a duck. What reason could you possibly have to believe that on this one single occasion, it's a goose on the way to a fancy dress party?
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
3,289
Location
Between two Cities
Basic Beliefs
Christianity and Common Sense
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.
Isn't that a distinction without a difference? Miracles don't happen and neither does magic. People just get fooled into believing something. In both cases there is supposedly a power or force at work and someone or something wielding that power. In the end miracles are just magic performed in a religious setting. We're supposed to believe the two things are different but that's just religious spin.

I'd like to keep up with the times. Why not? I was born into the modern world....

... God with His advanced know how, should be very advanced in science. Magic is as steady as pseudo science. ;)

"Let there be reversals of magnetic polarities in solid objects, so that man can float like the angels in the clouds.." sayeth the Lord of Physics!
 

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
6,663
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
I recall a Christ mythicist from highschool, the only other one I've met in the flesh. I think about her, wishing that she had not been essentially dragged off to Texas by her dad and forced to marry and be "cowed".

Eventually her point sank in even if it took almost a decade, and exposure to these forums: a hundred percent of the cultists came about in the timeline that would be explained well by a Greek style play presented as reality.

Whether Jesus existed or not, the only contemporary accounts are accounts about the cultists and what they believed.

Trusting the documents OF a cult ABOUT the cult is about as reasonable as picking up a Mormon text and saying it's an argument for the historicity of Xenu.

We have 2000 years of vigorous book burnings and book HIDING going on from the organization that grew up from those tiny cults.

There's just no evidence for it.

Personally I think it has more value as a tragedy and allegory and work of fiction anyway.

From this lens as "fiction but one which contains truth", we can glean much: a number of decent fables, some ethical paradigms with good staying power, and a number of good imprecations against being a greedy fuck which I managed to learn (and more importantly come to understand) in spite of rigorous Republican upbringing.

I appreciate Christian origins from a secular philosophical standpoint. For instance, I appreciate Jesus redefining Love/Agape from love of God and neighbor to include love of enemy. This helps us move beyond the eros of glory/honor obsessed Achilles to bestowing value where even those who are sometimes seen as undesirable like widow, orphan, stranger and enemy have full worth. That was Nietzsche's positive takeaway from Jesus in the Antichrist: the loving Jesus vs the blaming Christ. It's just a healthy approach to life if you strip away the magic/superstition.

It can certainly get heated debating with mythicists. Ehrman said of Carrier that:

Carrier wrote a very long and detailed response which was meant to show, as is his wont, that I don’t know what I’m talking about. I have been asked several times by several people to respond to his response, but I know where that will go – it will take a response twice as long as his to show why his views are problematic, he will reply with a reply that is four times as long to show I don’t know what I’m talking about, I will respond with a response twice as long as that to show that I do, he will rejoin with …. (Ehrman, 2016, ehrmanblog)
I mean, fuck, I'm a mythicist and I'm a fucking wizard. I am going to point out that I do absolutely think that parts of this story are the result of someone the original author knew, being observed living his life.

It sounds like the kind of trouble I would get into if I was born at the turn of the age, myself.

Even so, the majority of it is a work of fiction, and was spread around originally as such. The cult only likely ever saw this fiction is how I see it, and it has value moreso as fiction.

There's value in a good piece of fiction. I mean shit, my favorite author is a Mormon! And a fiction author.

Akkadian Councils Of Wisdom

Behavior toward your enemies (41-55?)
Do not exchange hostilities with your opponent;
repay your evil-doer with goodness.
Grant justice to your enemy;
show a cheerful heart to your foe.
Guide […] even the one who gloats over you.
Do not let him set your mind on evil.
[remainder of stanza is broken]
 

Learner

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
3,289
Location
Between two Cities
Basic Beliefs
Christianity and Common Sense
"Did The Greco-Roman Elite Class Write The Gospels?! - Professor Robyn Faith Walsh". YouTube. History Valley. 24 May 2022.
2:12 ...I consider [the gospel authors] elite culture or elite persons within a particular you know stratum of culture .. those who have access to what's called Paideia, so advanced education in the ancient world, and the number of people who actually had that kind of advanced education was really really narrow...
22:01 [Q: What else what led you to the conclusion that it's possible that Christians actually didn't write the gospels] Well this is something that I've been a little surprised that people have taken away from the book, because what I say in the book is that I'm interested in what's the most formative group that we can attribute the content of the gospels to...


Ideas like this, (Caesars' Messiah etc..) where the suggestion that the writings of the Gospels were written by the Greco-Roman elite, seems self harming, like "shooting oneself in the foot" not thoroughly thought-out if this was the case. The Gospels IOW is anti class-elitist, Jesus is the King above Caesar etc..

It wouldn't be surprising at all, to expect people of the elite classes would instead, become followers of Christ - just like the Romans in military who became Christians, where there are reports written by Romans, that the new converts were refusing to fight - i.e. becoming 'conscientious objectors'.


IRENAEUS (180 A.D.) "For the Christians have changed their swords and their lances into instruments of peace, and they know not how to fight."

JUSTIN MARTYR (150 A.D.) "That the prophecy is fulfilled, you have good reason to believe, for we, who in times past killed one another, do not now fight with our enemies."26 "We, who had been filled with war and mutual slaughter and every wickedness, have each one-all the world over-changed the instruments of war, the swords into plows and the spears into farming implements, and we cultivate piety, righteousness, love for men, faith, (and) the hope which is from Father Himself through the Crucified One

JUSTINUS (150 A.D.) "We who hated and slew one another, and because of (differences in) customs would not share a common hearth with those who were not of our tribe, now, after the appearance of Christ, have become sociable, and pray for our enemies, and try to persuade those who hate (us) unjustly, in order that they, living according to the good suggestions of Christ. [....}.
 
Last edited:

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
10,509
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
Facinating how people endlessly quote and reference people from thousands of years ago. People for who we know nothing about what they wrer really like as human beings.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
Facinating how people endlessly quote and reference people from thousands of years ago. People for who we know nothing about what they wrer really like as human beings.

Euhemerus (fl. late 4th century BCE) wrote Iera Anagraphe in which he maintained the Greek deities actually were historical mortals.

Circa 1865 in literature on myth—the word "euhemerism" was coined as the "historical theory" of mythology.

We do not know if Euhemerus was an atheisist who really did believe what he said, or was just advocating for the belief in the the Pythagorean's Monad, Middle-Platonic "All-Father", etc..

All we do know for sure is that Euhemerus turned a god(s) into a human—the exact opposite of apothéōsis (Greek ἀποθέωσις ).

"psychology". Etymonline.
Origin and meaning of psychology
  • 1650s, "the study of the soul," from Modern Latin psychologia, probably coined mid-16c. in Germany by Melanchthon from Latinized form of Greek psykhē "breath, spirit, soul" (see psyche) + logia "study of" (see -logy). The meaning "science or study of the phenomena of the mind" is attested by 1748, in reference to Christian Wolff's "Psychologia empirica" (1732). The modern behavioral sciences sense is from the early 1890s.
 

fromderinside

Mazzie Daius
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
15,826
Location
Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguo
Basic Beliefs
optimist
Magic is by concept a name given for acts performed by tricksters, charlatans, mediums, fortunetellers, magicians, witches & wizards (the big tricks sometimes assisted by summoning spirits etc.) - all to which, are NOT of GOD,
You are absolutely right. You often say really stupid stuff, but you are not stupid. You nailed the definition of magic, as distinguished from a miracle where the laws of the universe are actually broken.

I'm glad someone agrees with the contextual differences (even if you're entertaining the idea at least, getting the theist viewpoint ).

Now for the hard part: demonstrate that the stories of Jesus performing miracles are true. Not people being deceived by skilled magicians, not people being lied to or making up stories, but actual miracles where the laws of the universe were broken. You can't do that.

You are correct Atrib... I can't do it. Obviously to demonstrate those miracles to be true... It would have to be Jesus Himself, who would need to be in front of you ( If it was I, who appeared to be doing some illusionary miracle, I would probably be a magician). It's not a sufficient good enough answer I know, especially when it comes to 'repeating' or trying to demonstrate 'how' miracles are performed by altering the laws of physics etc..
When every single person who does something apparently impossible, and who has been checked out, has turned out to be a magician, it's more than a little unwise to accept a claim that someone who wasn't checked out, and can't be because he's been dead for two thousand years, was the one solitary instance of a genuine miracle worker.

So what justification do you have for taking such an unwise stance?

It looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. Every single time we have checked out such a thing, it has always turned out to be a duck. What reason could you possibly have to believe that on this one single occasion, it's a goose on the way to a fancy dress party?
You've said it yourself. No miracle duck has ever quacked.
 

dbz

Member
Joined
May 30, 2022
Messages
277
Gender
male
Basic Beliefs
Max 1:3 possible that Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera was a historical personage
Am I quackers to be a devotee of said canardfr?
 
Last edited:

Unknown Soldier

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
503
Location
Williamsport, PA
Basic Beliefs
Truth Seeker
I just went back to the Wikipedia page on the Christ myth theory, which I haven't looked at in years, to find it is basically being portrayed as analogous to Young Earth Creationism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory .
Yes, that's a popular way among historicists to impugn the Christ-myth "theory" which is actually a set of theories, a fact that seems lost on historicists. In any case, comparing Christ-myths to creationism is a weak analogy at best. The evidence for evolution is far more robust and convincing than the evidence for a historical Christ. Those who doubt evolution are doubting a theory supported by very strong evidence while those who doubt the historicity of Christ are doubting a claim that has comparatively weak evidence to support it.
And, Internet Infidels/Secular Web gets a mention:

Ehrman notes that "the mythicists have become loud, and thanks to the Internet they've attracted more attention".[380] Within a few years of the inception of the World Wide Web (c. 1990), mythicists such as Earl Doherty began to present their argument to a larger public via the internet.[note 35] Doherty created the website The Jesus Puzzle in 1996,[web 24] while the organization Internet Infidels has featured the works of mythicists on their website[381] and mythicism has been mentioned on several popular news sites.[382]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGullotta2017311–312,_n._34-466
It's common for Jesus historicists like Ehrman to impugn mythicism as a product of the internet and do so using the internet! Ehrman is implying that since mythicism is popular on the internet, then it doesn't have a scholarly basis. Another way to look at it is that the internet has enabled skeptics to more freely express their views that there simply are no good reasons to believe Jesus existed, a notion that Ehrman and his ilk find repugnant and unacceptable.
Since its resurgence in the 1970's, proponents of the Christ Myth Theory have only managed to publish one peer reviewed book on the topic, "On The Historicity Of Jesus" by Dr. Richard Carrier, with the footnote that this was published by Sheffield, who also published Thomas Brodie's mythicist autobiography, so they seem to like that sort of thing. The only related peer reviewed publication was by Dr. Raphael Lataster, arguing for Jesus Agnosticism. I have interviewed Richard before and find his argument rigorous and plausible, though I ultimately disagree with mythicism on interpretive grounds.
It's very common for people to impugn the sources of anybody who espouses an idea they disagree with. If historicists are so concerned about sources of information, then they need to take a look at the New Testament, the source they use for information!
What do others think of Jesus Mythicism? Do you find it plausible, or finge/crank?
I have no convincing evidence that Jesus existed or not. Since it's plausible either way, I keep an open mind on the issue.
Would anyone be interested in discussing the recent Loftus/Price mythicist book Varieties of Jesus Mythicism: Did He Even Exist.

View attachment 38791

I realize I'm raising this in the context of Internet Infidels / Secular Web, where Richard used to work, and he has a significant online following, so there may be some interesting discussions to be had!
I'll put it on my reading list and get back to you when I'm done reading it.
 

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
10,509
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
Facinating how people endlessly quote and reference people from thousands of years ago. People for who we know nothing about what they wrer really like as human beings.

Euhemerus (fl. late 4th century BCE) wrote Iera Anagraphe in which he maintained the Greek deities actually were historical mortals.

Circa 1865 in literature on myth—the word "euhemerism" was coined as the "historical theory" of mythology.

We do not know if Euhemerus was an atheisist who really did believe what he said, or was just advocating for the belief in the the Pythagorean's Monad, Middle-Platonic "All-Father", etc..

All we do know for sure is that Euhemerus turned a god(s) into a human—the exact opposite of apothéōsis (Greek ἀποθέωσις ).

"psychology". Etymonline.
Origin and meaning of psychology
  • 1650s, "the study of the soul," from Modern Latin psychologia, probably coined mid-16c. in Germany by Melanchthon from Latinized form of Greek psykhē "breath, spirit, soul" (see psyche) + logia "study of" (see -logy). The meaning "science or study of the phenomena of the mind" is attested by 1748, in reference to Christian Wolff's "Psychologia empirica" (1732). The modern behavioral sciences sense is from the early 1890s.
In the 70s when I was reading through Tibetan Buddhism after a while itsunk in that take away the paranormal aspects and it vwas a practical psychology. The mental practices ere about mental health.

I see Buddha s the first 'self help guru' so to speak.

I watched an old Bill Moyers show where he had psychologists, atheists, and theists picking apart Genesis. There is actualy a pscyholgy to it beyond the supernatural.
 

Unknown Soldier

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
503
Location
Williamsport, PA
Basic Beliefs
Truth Seeker
Do you find it plausible, or finge/crank?
Those aren't necessarily non-overlapping categories.
True, I find it fringe, and yet plausible. \
All ideas start out as "fringe." If those ideas are also plausible, then we should hope they get their days in court.
I think Carrier makes a compelling argument that there is definitely influence here from Pagan Dying/Rising God mythology (see his post https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13890 ). Another good point he has is the Rank-Raglan mythotype, that if we put the names of figures in a hat that are as heavily mythologized as Jesus, the likelihood of drawing the name of an historical figure is at best 1/3.
Sure. Jesus is a possibly mythical figure who is very often privileged over other such figures. This "privileged Jesus" should come as no surprise in a culture greatly influenced by Christianity. I should emphasize that anybody who privileges the historicity of Jesus need not be a Christian. Even scholars who may be atheists can be influenced by our predominately Christian culture especially when those scholars have been educated by Christian institutions.
I also don't feel the historicist's "go to" arguments like the "James, the brother of the Lord" passage, or the seed of David passage in Paul are particularly problematic for mythicism. With the former, Carrier is right that "James" in Paul could simply be referring to a non-apostolic baptized Christian, not a blood brother of Jesus, and for the latter, as Covington pointed out to Carrier, we have an analogy to magically preserved sperm in Zoroastrianism (which the Christians seem to have been using anyway), so that objection doesn't really work either.
I think that the "James, brother of the Lord" mentioned by Paul was a real man. However, to say he ate at the same breakfast table as Jesus did is a stretch. How many people who say that they are "the brother of the Lord" are saying that they are literally God's blood brother?
I disagree with Carrier on interpretive grounds since the message the first Christians were trying to sell makes far more sense from a historicist perspective than a mythicist one.
I've often wondered if Jesus existed, then why didn't the early Christian sect encourage people to visit his presumably empty tomb or the place of his crucifixion? Real people tend to have real places of death and burial whereas fabricated people have no such evidence left behind.
It's not important to me from a personal point of view, since Christianity is not more likely true if Jesus existed. It's all just ancient superstition however you paint the portrait of Jesus, mythical or historical.
The probability of Christianity's claims being true if Jesus never existed is close to zero. That's what scares many people about mythicism. For those of us who have no stake in the historicity of Jesus, we can openly consider the very real possibility that he was but a myth.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
11,547
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
The probability of Christianity's claims being true if Jesus never existed is close to zero. That's what scares many people about mythicism. For those of us who have no stake in the historicity of Jesus, we can openly consider the very real possibility that he was but a myth.
I'll point out that this is only partially true when addressing claims beyond immediate historical reification.

While 100% of the events are suspect, all the stories themselves are extant. It is trivially so.

Most don't need the stories to be true for them to carry important messages and for people to accept the need to forgive one another and love one another.

In fact there is even an important message about redemption from ignorance through the passage of knowledge, and the necessity of it for there to be any hope of saving ourselves from our flaws.

It's just that back then there wasn't much a concept of an independent genre of "fantasy", and folks tended to write their fictions as if they happened in the actual past about real people.
 

Unknown Soldier

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
503
Location
Williamsport, PA
Basic Beliefs
Truth Seeker

Unknown Soldier

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
503
Location
Williamsport, PA
Basic Beliefs
Truth Seeker
The probability of Christianity's claims being true if Jesus never existed is close to zero. That's what scares many people about mythicism. For those of us who have no stake in the historicity of Jesus, we can openly consider the very real possibility that he was but a myth.
I'll point out that this is only partially true when addressing claims beyond immediate historical reification.
What is only partially true?
While 100% of the events are suspect, all the stories themselves are extant. It is trivially so.
Yes. We have stories about Jesus. That's not in dispute.
Most don't need the stories to be true for them to carry important messages and for people to accept the need to forgive one another and love one another.
I wonder why people need stories to teach them that love and forgiveness are often advantageous. But yes, stories can impart "truths" beyond their plots and their characters. Aesop's fables come to mind. Many people in antiquity told stories for that purpose.
In fact there is even an important message about redemption from ignorance through the passage of knowledge, and the necessity of it for there to be any hope of saving ourselves from our flaws.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here.
It's just that back then there wasn't much a concept of an independent genre of "fantasy", and folks tended to write their fictions as if they happened in the actual past about real people.
I've heard that before. I understand that people in antiquity did not distinguish between myth and history. So for the early Christians, it perhaps didn't matter if Christ really existed or not. Only later was his earthly life made into a dogma with the Apostles' Creed.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
11,547
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I'm not sure what you're referring to here
The entire theme of the new testament, and like... Half of the old testament?

Sin has always been a metaphor for the ignorance we are born in. Knowledge, understanding, and the work of and for each other are our only freedom from that.

It's just also much more useful as a tool of control when that isn't spelled out clearly, and people think that it's somehow their fault they were spewed into the world knowing nothing, among a society that knows only the barest bit more than that.

Only in accepting how little we know (and how shaky our knowledge is even in the things we do 'know') may we ever come to know more.


I wonder why people need stories to teach them that love and forgiveness are often advantageous
Because Darwinism pushes hard towards selfishness, with many compartments of defense shielding this core from modification.

The less engaging and empathetically available information is, the less it can make it through that swamp of denial and self-deception and narcissistic tendencies. So we need stories about people to deliver them more effectively than a dry fucking lecture.
 
Top Bottom