Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-08-2019, 07:12 PM)madog Wrote: PS the floor is all yours  .... Feel free to keep lying ... everyone knows you lie by now anyway  Dance  ROFL2  Dance

Only your fellow mythicists think the way you do. They are "true believers" just like you.

The smart people see right through you.

Thumbs Up
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
So, chrestians was typical of a source that was christian?
First I told my imaginary friend about Jesus, then I told Jesus about my imaginary friend.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
Seeing as how we can't seem to manage to "steelman" historical Jesus for atheists I'm going to declare the notion of steelmanning historical Jesus for Christians dead on arrival.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-12-2019, 04:20 AM)Schrodinger's Outlaw Wrote: So, chrestians was typical of a source that was christian?



And remained so for quite some time it seems.

http://gnosis.org/library/meadmarcion.htm

Quote:The Marcionites were the most rigid of ascetics, abstaining from marriage, flesh and wine, the latter being excluded from their Eucharist. They also rejoiced beyond all other sects in the number of their martyrs. The Marcionites have also given us the most ancient dated Christian inscription. It was discovered over the doorway of a house in a Syrian village, and formerly marked the site of a Marcionite meeting-house or church, which curiously enough was called a synagogue. The date is October 1, A.D. 318 and the most remarkable point about it is that the church was dedicated to "The Lord and Saviour Jesus, the Good - "Chrestos", not Christos.

318 is quite some time after the whole bullshit story of Marcion's "ex-communication" was set.  Somehow, no one seems to have paid much attention to that early church pronouncement!
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
I'm posting this reply in the hope  of having  a couple of questions answered.  I make no claims  of being a  serious biblical scholar, so I ask your patience, if I have written any howlers or other indications of ignorance.

I think my position on the historicity of Jesus might be what someone has labelled historical reductionism.  If so, what is wrong with this perspective?

It is my understanding that there is  no contemporary evidence  for the existence  of Jesus.   This is not at all suspicious to me, given the time and place and the fact (?) That most if not all of Jesus' disciples would have been illiterate.

 It is accepted  by  many (but not all) historians  that Jesus was born about bce . That he began his ministry at age 30 .His ministry lasted 3 years . He was crucified during the reign of Tiberius. That puts his death  I think before 30 ce.  The  earliest  canonical writing about Jesus  are Paul's epistles. The earliest,  First Thessalonians, is though to have been written about 50 ce.  From around then on, a great deal was written about Jesus, but no first hand accounts.

 I understand my perception is not uncommon,  but  is still arguable:  It's probable  that in first century Judea, there was a wondering rabbi called something like Yeshua/Yoshua bar Yusuf. A reasonable assumption; wondering rabbis were common at that time and place and neither "Yeshua/Yoshua " nor 'Yusuf"' were uncommon names.

It's also probable that Yesua/Yoshua founded a small ,Jewish , millennial sect . Initially all members had to be Jews or convert, which included having a painful and dangerous circumcision.  That requirement was changed by  Paul, who abolished the ritual commandments, and allowed gentiles to join.

It is also not too unlikely that Yeshua   upset the wrong  people and got himself  crucified. This was not all unusual.The Romans crucified I think thousands of Jews during the Roman occupation of Judea.

Conclusion; the Christian canon has little if anything do to with with the poor little Rabbi, Yeshua bar Yusuf.   The  canon is the mythology of Christianity.


I'm aware nothing has been proved either way and probably never will be.  This is of academic interest to me.I don't care on an emotional level because I'm an atheist. On an academic level,  I think the historicity of Jesus is irrelevant to the existence Christianity .
 
Christians have had 2000 years of to develop  a quite stunning level of cognitive dissonance which allows the continuance of the status quo.

Having said all that, I'm a skeptic. However, I try not to scoff instinctively at any idea, but I do question . Above all , I try to leave my own beliefs and attitudes open to question. On this matter, this week I have begun reading  " Did Jesus Exist?" by former Christian and biblical scholar, Bart Erhman. Bart takes an affirmative position. 

I welcome corrections of factual error and other opinions, based on at least the same amount as evidence as I have offered, which isn't really very much.  Consider
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote:
Show ContentSpoiler:

Did Jesus Exist?
Pliny, Tacitus, Suetonius: no proof of Jesus
There was no Jesus, there is no god
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote: I'm posting this reply in the hope  of having  a couple of questions answered.  I make no claims  of being a  serious biblical scholar, so I ask your patience, if I have written any howlers or other indications of ignorance.

I think my position on the historicity of Jesus might be what someone has labelled historical reductionism.  If so, what is wrong with this perspective?

It is my understanding that there is  no contemporary evidence  for the existence  of Jesus.   This is not at all suspicious to me, given the time and place and the fact (?) That most if not all of Jesus' disciples would have been illiterate.

 It is accepted  by  many (but not all) historians  that Jesus was born about bce . That he began his ministry at age 30 .His ministry lasted 3 years . He was crucified during the reign of Tiberius. That puts his death  I think before 30 ce.  The  earliest  canonical writing about Jesus  are Paul's epistles. The earliest,  First Thessalonians, is though to have been written about 50 ce.  From around then on, a great deal was written about Jesus, but no first hand accounts.

 I understand my perception is not uncommon,  but  is still arguable:  It's probable  that in first century Judea, there was a wondering rabbi called something like Yeshua/Yoshua bar Yusuf. A reasonable assumption; wondering rabbis were common at that time and place and neither "Yeshua/Yoshua " nor 'Yusuf"' were uncommon names.

It's also probable that Yesua/Yoshua founded a small ,Jewish , millennial sect . Initially all members had to be Jews or convert, which included having a painful and dangerous circumcision.  That requirement was changed by  Paul, who abolished the ritual commandments, and allowed gentiles to join.

It is also not too unlikely that Yeshua   upset the wrong  people and got himself  crucified. This was not all unusual.The Romans crucified I think thousands of Jews during the Roman occupation of Judea.

Conclusion; the Christian canon has little if anything do to with with the poor little Rabbi, Yeshua bar Yusuf.   The  canon is the mythology of Christianity.


I'm aware nothing has been proved either way and probably never will be.  This is of academic interest to me.I don't care on an emotional level because I'm an atheist. On an academic level,  I think the historicity of Jesus is irrelevant to the existence Christianity .
 
Christians have had 2000 years of to develop  a quite stunning level of cognitive dissonance which allows the continuance of the status quo.

Having said all that, I'm a skeptic. However, I try not to scoff instinctively at any idea, but I do question . Above all , I try to leave my own beliefs and attitudes open to question. On this matter, this week I have begun reading  " Did Jesus Exist?" by former Christian and biblical scholar, Bart Erhman. Bart takes an affirmative position. 

I welcome corrections of factual error and other opinions, based on at least the same amount as evidence as I have offered, which isn't really very much.  Consider

That sounds similar to my opinion on it, especially the "nothing has been proved either way and probably never will be."  There's a few forum members who think that's a batshit crazy point of view so try to be patient with them.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote: I'm posting this reply in the hope  of having  a couple of questions answered.  I make no claims  of being a  serious biblical scholar, so I ask your patience, if I have written any howlers or other indications of ignorance.

I think my position on the historicity of Jesus might be what someone has labelled historical reductionism.  If so, what is wrong with this perspective?

It is my understanding that there is  no contemporary evidence  for the existence  of Jesus.   This is not at all suspicious to me, given the time and place and the fact (?) That most if not all of Jesus' disciples would have been illiterate.

Actually, the letters of Paul were written by a contemporary; Paul the Apostle.

Quote:It is accepted  by  many (but not all) historians  that Jesus was born about bce . That he began his ministry at age 30 .His ministry lasted 3 years . He was crucified during the reign of Tiberius. That puts his death  I think before 30 ce.  The  earliest  canonical writing about Jesus  are Paul's epistles. The earliest,  First Thessalonians, is though to have been written about 50 ce.  From around then on, a great deal was written about Jesus, but no first hand accounts.

Circa CE 30 is fine.

Quote:I understand my perception is not uncommon,  but  is still arguable:  It's probable  that in first century Judea, there was a wondering rabbi called something like Yeshua/Yoshua bar Yusuf. A reasonable assumption; wondering rabbis were common at that time and place and neither "Yeshua/Yoshua " nor 'Yusuf"' were uncommon names.

True.

Quote:It's also probable that Yesua/Yoshua founded a small ,Jewish , millennial sect . Initially all members had to be Jews or convert, which included having a painful and dangerous circumcision.  That requirement was changed by  Paul, who abolished the ritual commandments, and allowed gentiles to join.

True.

Quote:It is also not too unlikely that Yeshua   upset the wrong  people and got himself  crucified. This was not all unusual.The Romans crucified I think thousands of Jews during the Roman occupation of Judea.

That's the general consensus of historians.

Quote:Conclusion; the Christian canon has little if anything do to with with the poor little Rabbi, Yeshua bar Yusuf.   The  canon is the mythology of Christianity.

Mostly true.

Quote:I'm aware nothing has been proved either way and probably never will be.  This is of academic interest to me.I don't care on an emotional level because I'm an atheist. On an academic level,  I think the historicity of Jesus is irrelevant to the existence Christianity.

Somewhat agree.
 
Quote:Christians have had 2000 years of to develop  a quite stunning level of cognitive dissonance which allows the continuance of the status quo.

Having said all that, I'm a skeptic. However, I try not to scoff instinctively at any idea, but I do question . Above all , I try to leave my own beliefs and attitudes open to question. On this matter, this week I have begun reading  " Did Jesus Exist?" by former Christian and biblical scholar, Bart Erhman. Bart takes an affirmative position.

Ehrman has a few good ideas, but none are really unique. 

Quote:I welcome corrections of factual error and other opinions, based on at least the same amount as evidence as I have offered, which isn't really very much.  Consider

You don't really need much in the way of any corrections. Your understanding of this mess is directly inline with the scholarly consensus.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 12:18 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote:
Show ContentSpoiler:

Did Jesus Exist?
Pliny, Tacitus, Suetonius: no proof of Jesus
There was no Jesus, there is no god


The premise  does not support the conclusion: Absence of proof is not proof of absence, of  Jesus , god or anything else.

Classic response  to that logical  fallacy is  Russell's teapot:

"Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.
Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion.[1] He wrote that if he were to assert, without offering proof, that a teapot, too small to be seen by telescopes, orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, he could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong.
Russell's teapot is still invoked in discussions concerning the existence of God, and has had influence in various fields and media. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot


To make it more contemporary; so far, there is no proof of sentient alien life. That does not mean  there aren't any.


PS I'm familiar with the article. I explained in my post why lack of contemporary evidence is not suspicious. Most certainly proves nothing., Using classical writers in this context is a logical fallacy of 'appeal to authority" .Correct response is "so what?"

"Unfalsifiable" means a thing is not true because it cannot be proved to be false. Nor is it false because it cannot be proved to be true,

I'l repeat.as far as I'm aware, there is no proof of the existence of Jesus, one way or t'other. Neither Jesus nor god can be argued into or out of existence. That is because a logically valid conclusion is true IF AND ONLY IF the premise is true.
The following 2 users Like grympy's post:
  • Free, jerry mcmasters
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 01:24 AM)grympy Wrote:
Show ContentSpoiler:

The error in Russell's Teapot
Why Russell's Teapot fails
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
G don't waste your time arguing with someone who just has a bag of links to continuously throw at you.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
The problem with the shrieking that people like Free do about an "argument from silence" is that he simply cannot or will not understand what is being said.  Archaeologists know that an argument from silence can be overturned by the next shovel in the ground. 

For example, archaeology has established that 10th century BC "Jerusalem" ( and it may not have even been called that ) was nothing more than a miserable little hill top village of perhaps 500-700 people.  This is what archaeology has found at 10 century BC levels.  There is no great capital of a far flung empire as the theists insist based on their silly book.  There are no inscriptions.  No monumental architecture. No population base capable of supporting any sort of "empire." 

Can such evidence be overturned by future finds?  Absolutely.  And if such evidence were to turn up then the "silence" would be broken and the new evidence would have to be evaluated.  But failing that we remain in a situation where it does them no good to insist that their bible is right and if we just keep digging we'll find the evidence.  Well.  Fuck them.  Let's see what evidence they can produce to support their bible because I am satisfied for now that Judah in the 10th century BC was an impoverished and underpopulated shithole of no value to anyone.

As you said, right now there is no evidence of sentient life anywhere in the universe.  The silence from space is deafening but there is always a chance that a message will suddenly arrive.  If it does I will change my opinion but it will be on the basis of evidence, not on the woo-woo whining of ET fans.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 2 users Like Minimalist's post:
  • Phaedrus, madog
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 01:46 AM)Minimalist Wrote: The problem with the shrieking that people like Free do about an "argument from silence" is that he simply cannot or will not understand what is being said.  Archaeologists know that an argument from silence can be overturned by the next shovel in the ground. 

For example, archaeology has established that 10th century BC "Jerusalem" ( and it may not have even been called that ) was nothing more than a miserable little hill top village of perhaps 500-700 people.  This is what archaeology has found at 10 century BC levels.  There is no great capital of a far flung empire as the theists insist based on their silly book.  There are no inscriptions.  No monumental architecture. No population base capable of supporting any sort of "empire." 

Can such evidence be overturned by future finds?  Absolutely.  And if such evidence were to turn up then the "silence" would be broken and the new evidence would have to be evaluated.  But failing that we remain in a situation where it does them no good to insist that their bible is right and if we just keep digging we'll find the evidence.  Well.  Fuck them.  Let's see what evidence they can produce to support their bible because I am satisfied for now that Judah in the 10th century BC was an impoverished and underpopulated shithole of no value to anyone.

As you said, right now there is no evidence of sentient life anywhere in the universe.  The silence from space is deafening but there is always a chance that a message will suddenly arrive.  If it does I will change my opinion but it will be on the basis of evidence, not on the woo-woo whining of ET fans.

^^^^ Even this argument defending an argument from silence is of itself an argument from silence. A mystery wrapped up in an enigma disguised as a phenomenon. 

Facepalm
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
@Free

"Actually, the letters of Paul were written by a contemporary; Paul the Apostle."

Umm, do you mean a contemporary of Jesus? When was that discovered?  I hadn't heard  (like on the news) or read anything about such an earth shattering revelation

As far as I'm aware, as of today, there is no contemporary evidence of the existence Jesus .  I'll be thrilled to see your evidence.,

 As for  Bart Ehrman. I confess  I've only read one other of his books" Misquoting Jesus'" , which  I thought was excellent. Have only just started . "Did Jesus  Exist? " . So far all I'll  say is it's very scholarly. I would expect no less from a man with Ehrman's credentials .

Only one niggle. I'm a little  concerned at what seems to be  facile dismissal  of other scholars who are not 'trained biblical scholars'. Imo ,a scholar who say reads  ancient Greek and Hebrew might have something of value to contribute.


PS 'argument from silence' is simply claiming absence is not proof. An argument of 'unfalsifiable' has an implicit caveat; NOW, with all the evidence is available. Evidence MAY be found at any time, but that is not an argument.

I guess we need to agree to differ. I will continue to disbelieve in god, due to lack of evidence I will continue to doubt the historicity of Jesus , but continue to believe his existence is probable. That no proof has yet been discovered oneway or the other.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 01:55 AM)grympy Wrote: @Free

"Actually, the letters of Paul were written by a contemporary; Paul the Apostle."

Umm, do you mean a contemporary of Jesus?
 

Yes, and it's always been known and accepted among a consensus of historians. This fact can be easily determined within his letters.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote: It is my understanding that there is  no contemporary evidence  for the existence  of Jesus.   This is not at all suspicious to me, given the time and place and the fact (?) That most if not all of Jesus' disciples would have been illiterate.

Huh   It is surprising to me that Jesus could roam the country for three years performing incredible miracles and amassing followers via the internet of the day (word of mouth), but no word of him or his activities ever reached any reputable record keepers or curious authors recording significant events of the day.
No gods necessary
The following 1 user Likes brunumb's post:
  • Phaedrus
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:01 AM)brunumb Wrote:
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote: It is my understanding that there is  no contemporary evidence  for the existence  of Jesus.   This is not at all suspicious to me, given the time and place and the fact (?) That most if not all of Jesus' disciples would have been illiterate.

Huh   It is surprising to me that Jesus could roam the country for three years performing incredible miracles and amassing followers via the internet of the day (word of mouth), but no word of him or his activities ever reached any reputable record keepers or curious authors recording significant events of the day.

You are conflating the historical Jesus with the Gospel accounts.

An old mythicist trick to obfuscate.

Facepalm
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:05 AM)Free Wrote: You are conflating the historical Jesus with the Gospel accounts.

What other accounts do you have?  How is it that he suddenly appears on the scene at about the age of 30 with no back story?
No gods necessary
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:01 AM)brunumb Wrote:
(08-14-2019, 11:27 PM)grympy Wrote: It is my understanding that there is  no contemporary evidence  for the existence  of Jesus.   This is not at all suspicious to me, given the time and place and the fact (?) That most if not all of Jesus' disciples would have been illiterate.

Huh   It is surprising to me that Jesus could roam the country for three years performing incredible miracles and amassing followers via the internet of the day (word of mouth), but no word of him or his activities ever reached any reputable record keepers or curious authors recording significant events of the day.

If I'm not mistaken three years is the estimate in John, the least historical of the four gospels.  The other three have him deciding to go to Jerusalem at a single time, causing a disturbance of some kind, presumably rebellious, and getting himself killed, unremarkable and unlikely to get much attention from Roman or Jewish writers.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 01:55 AM)grympy Wrote: Only one niggle. I'm a little  concerned at what seems to be  facile dismissal  of other scholars who are not 'trained biblical scholars'. Imo ,a scholar who say reads  ancient Greek and Hebrew might have something of value to contribute.

There was no Jesus, there is no god (the same link I provided previously, proving you would rather ignore what I post than take a genuine look at it.)

Quote:A former fundamentalist Christian, Raphael Lataster is a professionally secular PhD researcher (Studies in Religion) at the University of Sydney. His main research interests include philosophy of religion, sociology of religion, Christian origins, logic, epistemology, Bayesian reasoning, justifications and social impacts of atheism, Taoism, overpopulation and sustainability concerns, pantheism, and pandeism.

Raphael wrote his Master's thesis on Jesus mythicism (the view that even a 'historical', non-miraculous Jesus may not have existed), concluding that historical and Bayesian reasoning justifies a sceptical attitude towards the 'Historical Jesus'.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:12 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:
(08-15-2019, 01:55 AM)grympy Wrote: Only one niggle. I'm a little  concerned at what seems to be  facile dismissal  of other scholars who are not 'trained biblical scholars'. Imo ,a scholar who say reads  ancient Greek and Hebrew might have something of value to contribute.

There was no Jesus, there is no god (the same link I provided previously, proving you would rather ignore what I post than take a genuine look at it.)

Here's a novel idea. I don't click your links either, unless you have some context to precede them. We have no idea where those links go or what they say. Therefore, post your points and then post the link to show your source.

Otherwise ... fuck that. I ain't clicking fuck all.

Ya lazy bastard.

Confused
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
Quote:^^^^ Even this argument defending an argument from silence is of itself an argument from silence. A mystery wrapped up in an enigma disguised as a phenomenon.



It seems as if you are trying to prove there is no intelligent life in Canada.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • Phaedrus
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:18 AM)Free Wrote: Here's a novel idea. I don't click your links either, unless you have some context to precede them. We have no idea where those links go or what they say. Therefore, post your points and then post the link to show your source.

Otherwise ... fuck that. I ain't clicking fuck all.

Ya lazy bastard.

Confused

1. The title of the link states where it will send you, to an article describing what the title mentions.
2. I am not a twelve-year old troll who is going to send you to Tubgirl.
3. Me preferring to post a link, because I work for a living and don't have time to write out a novel that you're just going to ignore anyway for your preferred bias, does not in any way make the content of the link irrelevant.
4. How about you stop being the lazy one and click the link because of 1-3.
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:00 AM)Free Wrote:
(08-15-2019, 01:55 AM)grympy Wrote: @Free

"Actually, the letters of Paul were written by a contemporary; Paul the Apostle."

Umm, do you mean a contemporary of Jesus?
 

Yes, and it's always been known and accepted among a consensus of historians. This fact can be easily determined within his letters.

And what you will learn about Free is that he will dismiss anyone who does not agree with his predetermined notions of his godboy as "not a real scholar."  He seems to think that he alone has the right to determine who may or may not offer views on the subject.

It is one of the main reasons why I consider Free to be a crackpot.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • Phaedrus
Reply

Steelmaning Histrorical Jesus for the Christers
(08-15-2019, 02:25 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:
(08-15-2019, 02:18 AM)Free Wrote: Here's a novel idea. I don't click your links either, unless you have some context to precede them. We have no idea where those links go or what they say. Therefore, post your points and then post the link to show your source.

Otherwise ... fuck that. I ain't clicking fuck all.

Ya lazy bastard.

Confused

1. The title of the link states where it will send you, to an article describing what the title mentions.
2. I am not a twelve-year old troll who is going to send you to Tubgirl.
3. Me preferring to post a link, because I work for a living and don't have time to write out a novel that you're just going to ignore anyway for your preferred bias, does not in any way make the content of the link irrelevant.
4. How about you stop being the lazy one and click the link because of 1-3.

Not good enough. Start posting content or stfu.
Welcome to the Atheist Forums on AtheistDiscussion.org
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)