|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
 Posted - 11/22/2002 : 11:10:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Slater: Surely even you must realize that in all your cut and pastes, with all your name calling, with all of your phoney assed "experts" you have not presented a single shred of evidence for an historic Jesus
quote:
DA Repeats: Next you will have noticed that when I've asked Slater for ANY competent HISTORIANS or CLASSICAL scholars who share his iconoclastic views all we get is silence
This is why The Real World calls you "crazies" because you ARE! Not even the Jesus Smear group would associate with you. As far your bravado in claiming I "have not presented a single shred of Evidence for an historic Jesus" is beyond absurdity.I've presented more than 27(The NT plus Early Historians ect...).Now of course you will cry"thats not evidence" but as I said before your view is definitely in the minority of scholarly opinion on this.Anyhow Slater I admire you and your disciples persistence in face of all evidence to the contrary-KEEP THE FAITH.  |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 11/22/2002 11:12:42 |
 |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 11:32:40 [Permalink]
|
Moakley responds: quote:
I stand by my original statement you have not made your case as convincingly as Slate, ReasonableDoubt and others. "Sum Ergo Cogito"
And what case have they presented that has proved a universal negative concerning the existential phenomena of one of the most documented personages of classical times? Do you know of any competent Classical Historical Scholars who could support their outlandish views ?If so please share. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 12:10:24 [Permalink]
|
For some reason known only the computer demons, I can't get page 10 to open. If someone could send me what has been written since my last post I would appreciate it.
Now Darwin, what bug have you got up your arse this time around?
This is why The Real World calls you "crazies" because you ARE!
The MTV show? Has that damn Puck been mouthing off again?
I haven't noticed anyone calling us "crazy" except religious fanatics.
Not even the Jesus Smear group would associate with you.
You mean the Jesus seminar I take it. I thought that their mission was to cut through the magic and fantasy to try to make an historic Jesus more palpable to people who weren't half wits.
The magic Jesus, walking on water, returning from the dead is, of course, an impossibility. What the JS was doing in remaking Jesus into a man was trying to bring him into the world of possibility. However they hit the same wall everyone does. No evidence. Without evidence while the possibility remains the probability is so slim as to not be worthy of consideration.
As far your bravado in claiming I "have not presented a single shred of Evidence for an historic Jesus" is beyond absurdity.
You really don't know what the word "evidence" means do you?
I've presented more than 27(The NT plus Early Historians ect...).Now of course you will cry "thats not evidence" but as I said before your view is definitely in the minority of scholarly opinion on this.
Amongst actual scholars it is the prevailing view. You might recall the short lived fervor over the James bone box a few weeks ago. It was (before it was dismissed) being touted in the press by scholars that, if it were genuine, it would be the first piece of historical evidence of Jesus. The reason they kept saying that, and had such hopes for it is that there is no other evidence.
Anyhow Slater I admire you and your disciples persistence in face of all evidence to the contrary
The "Scientific Method" isn't really called Slaterism (but if they wanted to change it's name to that I wouldn't kick).
And you have presented no evidence. It doesn't do you any good to keep whining about it. Your appeals to "authority" are ridiculous because if your authorities possessed any evidence they would share it with the rest of us. Their religious faith is evidence only of their faith, not of historic facts. They "believe" there was an historic Jesus, they can "prove" nothing.
In THE REAL WORLD it's what you can prove that counts.
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 12:57:55 [Permalink]
|
And what case have they presented that has proved a universal negative concerning the existential phenomena of one of the most documented personages of classical times
1) There is no universal negative presented. The negative is very specific
2) There are no existential phenomena. What there is, and ALL there is, is "your claim". Just a story told by you which you have no means to back up
3) He wasn't documented at all. Had he been that could be your proof. But no one noticed him. No one wrote to, or about him. He wrote nothing. No records were kept about any events he was associated with.
I wish you would stop lying about this subject. It speaks very poorly of you. Your continual baseless claims of an historic Jesus show you to be completely lacking in morals. You should be ashamed of yourself.
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 12:59:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
As far your bravado in claiming I "have not presented a single shred of Evidence for an historic Jesus" is beyond absurdity.I've presented more than 27(The NT plus Early Historians ect...).
One issue that must be dealt with up front is the question of what is meant by the term "evidence". Unfortunately, the term may legitimately be used in two related, but distinct, ways: - EVIDENCE can mean something that furnishes proof, or
- EVIDENCE can mean something submitted as probative.
Using the second definition, you might submit any number of things as evidence, but that act of submittal does not relieve you of the burden of proof - you must show that the evidence is worth something.
In fact, you couldn't convict a jaywalker on the evidence you've submitted. If you doubt this, select one piece of evidence and demonstrate its probative value - preferably in a new thread. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 13:19:59 [Permalink]
|
DA: All I get from you in terms of evidence is that "everyone knows it's true therefore it is. Case closed." That might get you a lot of knowing glances from your buddies but around here it doesn't count for anything.
|
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 14:02:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Slater: You've got to be kidding me.
Have you been kidding me? Why is it considered permissible to claim that the gospel of Mark incorporates Greek myths but not Hebraic ones? Certainly the character of Judas seems to be lifted wholesale from the Old Testament. quote:
Slater: Maybe I need to find Miller's book because these verses from the OT aren't [even] straws to grasp at. They are nothing.
Have you any argument to support this claim? I could easily say the same of your pagan myths. quote:
Slater: May I ask your religious affiliations?
Surely, if you would rather go "to the man" than address the arguments and evidence at hand. I'm always up for some circumstantial ad hominem. quote:
Slater: I'm guessing Southern Baptist.
Now that is just plain insulting. I demand a retraction. 
Seriously, though, if you think the webmaster and de facto leader of Oklahoma Atheists is actually a covert agent of the Southern Baptist Convention, then perhaps you have gone from skeptical to downright paranoid. quote:
Slater: Why do you get E-mail sent to Oklahoma Atheists?
Sometimes the correct answer is the most obvious one. quote:
Slater: I'm getting tired of this.
Very well. Feel free to duck out and leave the defense of the Jesus myth hypothesis to some lesser mind. quote:
Slater: All you have done is write out the fucking gospel.
Not true. I took pains to remove the obviously mythical and miraculous elements out of the fucking gospel under consideration. I may quite happily remove more material based upon the analysis you have graciously provided above, to which I shall reply in detail as soon as I can address every point in sufficient detail.
quote:
Slater: But if you aren't going to read the stories of Mithra, Dionysus and Apollonius then stop complaining to me that you don't know them.
If you aren't going to read the stories of Moses, Joshua, and Elijah then stop complaining to me that you don't know them. quote:
Slater: Amazon dot com or a decent public library will fix you right up.
Same to you! In all seriousness, though, I would like to continue a cordial dialogue, if you are willing. If not, so be it. There is always the JesusMysteries group at Yahoo. |
-- tergiversant@OklahomaAtheists.org
"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
|
| Edited by - tergiversant on 11/22/2002 14:07:28 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 14:25:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tergiversant
If you aren't going to read the stories of Moses, Joshua, and Elijah then stop complaining to me that you don't know them.
Please accept this as a totally honest question: what possible probative value could this have beyond demonstrating Judaic threads woven into some early Christology? You could find the "Sermon on the Mount" written backwards in Lamentations and still have nothing of relevance to the issue of historicity. A red herring is no more valid by virtue of being kosher. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 16:52:09 [Permalink]
|
Have you been kidding me? Why is it considered permissible to claim that the gospel of Mark incorporates Greek myths but not Hebraic ones?
I didn't say it wasn't. But the references you gave me had almost no bearing on what you claimed they did.
Certainly the character of Judas seems to be lifted wholesale from the Old Testament.
Since the name is a Latin pun and he is the height of anti-Semitism
Have you any argument to support this claim? I could easily say the same of your pagan myths
The references were single lines of copy. The myths that I pointed you towards are entire stories
Slater: May I ask your religious affiliations?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surely, if you would rather go "to the man" than address the arguments and evidence at hand. I'm always up for some circumstantial ad hominem.
Paranoid? I'm just interested because of the G of Mark you produced where you kept so many magical parts. I've made no secret of my religious affiliations-it allows you to know where I am coming from.
Seriously, though, if you think the webmaster and de facto leader of Oklahoma Atheists is actually a covert agent of the Southern Baptist Convention, then perhaps you have gone from skeptical to downright paranoid.
And I'm supposed to know this…just how? So, that what moved you to keep the magic healings and sun going out in Mark?
Slater: I'm getting tired of this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well. Feel free to duck out and leave the defense of the Jesus myth hypothesis to some lesser mind.
I'm not as young as I once was, and I'm afraid I never will be again.
Slater: All you have done is write out the fucking gospel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not true. I took pains to remove the obviously mythical and miraculous elements out of the fucking gospel under consideration. I may quite happily remove more material based upon the analysis you have graciously provided above, to which I shall reply in detail as soon as I can address every point in sufficient detail.
You left in a great deal of previously used mythic material. That's what puts the lie to the historic Jesus the redundancy.
If you aren't going to read the stories of Moses, Joshua, and Elijah then stop complaining to me that you don't know them.
I know their stories well. But they are Jewish myths and Jesus is not. Even God is different in the Jesus stories.
In all seriousness, though, I would like to continue a cordial dialogue, if you are willing.
Of course I am.
I think you've fallen into a trap that Christians set when they try to tie the NT & OT together. You have to remember that the Hebrew Bible is not the OT. The early church rearranged it to make it look like it leads up to Jesus. By all means you should read Jack Miles Pulitzer Prize winner "GOD a biography."
The big give away that the Jesus story isn't Jewish is when Magi and Shepherds show up at his birth. That leads into Baptism, also a rite of the Magi. Then later there are the loaves and fishes, the holy sacrament of the Magi. This starts becoming a large pile of Paganism, especially when you compare it to things like riding two colts into Jerusalem which, though taken from Jewish writing, botches up what it actually means. The references to Judaism are forced into the story line rather inexpertly.
This becomes clearer in the so called Gnostic gospels (some actually are gnostic while others go far afield) Again you find Jesus life made up from Pagan myths--but different Pagans than the ones in the synoptic.
Then you have to consider the fact that the Pagans themselves saw this and called the Christians out on it. Julian the Apostate wrote about this a length. And if he's too boring (no ifs about it) there is always Gore Vidal's Julian.
Then the fact that the early Catholic Church lifted it's social structure, uniforms, icons, symbolism even the Vatican itself from the Mithrains.
None of the facts, none of the evidence is consistent with an historic Jesus. But it is exactly what you would expect to find if he were fictitious.
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2002 : 13:31:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
Since the name is a Latin pun and he is the height of anti-Semitism.
The pun is mere speculation. As to the anti-Semitism, I do not deny it.
As to the Hebraic origin of this fictional betrayer:
Psalm 41:9
“Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.”
Mark 14:17-18
“When evening came, Jesus arrived with the Twelve. While they were reclining at the table eating, he said, "I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me--one who is eating with me.” quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
I'm just interested because of the G of Mark you produced where you kept so many magical parts.
Such as? quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
...what moved you to keep the magic healings and sun going out in Mark?
Faith healers were quite common back then. It is not hard to fool those who believe in a demon-haunted world into believing that you have cast out demons. As to the sun going out, are you referring to the part where Jesus quotes from Isaiah 13:10 and 34:4 in Mark 13:25? quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
You left in a great deal of previously used mythic material.
I disagree, for reasons which shall be made clear point-by-point in my next post. quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
I think you've fallen into a trap that Christians set when they try to tie the NT & OT together.
I think you've fallen into a trap that Jesus Mythers set when they try to tie the NT & pagan myths together. quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
By all means you should read Jack Miles Pulitzer Prize winner "GOD a biography."
I have. Do you have specific page numbers for me to reread and reconsider? quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
The big give away that the Jesus story isn't Jewish is when Magi and Shepherds show up at his birth.
An event that goes unmentioned in the oldest and most reliable of Jesus' biographies. quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
That leads into Baptism, also a rite of the Magi.
Immersion as a symbol of repentance is a Jewish rite. Please reference the John the Baptist thread.
quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
...riding two colts into Jerusalem which, though taken from Jewish writing, botches up what it actually means.
|
-- tergiversant@OklahomaAtheists.org
"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
|
| Edited by - tergiversant on 11/23/2002 13:37:23 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 08:53:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tergiversant
As to the Hebraic origin of ...
Hebraic "origins" prove what? |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 15:07:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Slater: Must I do your homework for you? Sigh. What say I just point you in the right directions? Would that be alright with you?
As you please. You are the teacher, I am merely the bright-eyed student. quote:
Slater: The 12 Apostles are lifted from Mithra.
If perchance Jesus really thought of himself as a Messianic figure and prophet come to preach the new “Reign of God” on Earth, is it not plausible that he would pick out for himself twelve followers to correspond with Jacob's twelve sons? quote:
Slater: “Take nothing for the journey except a staff” -- Apollonious of Tyana
Who borrowed this injunction from whom and how can one claim to tell? Did not Jesus precede Apollonious? quote:
Slater: Curing paralyzed man...blindness...deaf mute...fever -- Apollonious of Tyana.
When exactly was Apollonius of Tyana active? I had thought it was well after the time when Jesus was said to have roamed Galilee, and indeed after the composition of the gospels themselves. Moreover, I did not claim that any of these healings actually happened, although it would not surprise me if “faith healing” rabbis fooled groups of people into believing that minor illnesses (e.g. fevers, mental derangement) have been cured, at least until they broke camp and left town. Certainly the faith healers of today seem big on such things as “casting out demons” and other feats involving psychosomatic and psychological illnesses. quote:
Slater: Pharisees complaining, scorn for fasting, scorn for Saturday Sabbath -- Roman anti-Semitism.
It looks to me like Jesus is critiquing the rabbinical establishment rather than the orthodox Judaism of the time. Certainly he does not openly repudiate any of the Jewish law or prophetic writings. quote:
Slater: Preaching from boat to crowd -- Dionysus
Is it so implausible that an actual Jewish rabbi or Greek sage would do such a thing? quote:
Slater: Jews accuse Jesus of being possessed by Beelzebub; Jesus scorns his mom and brothers; to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that “they may be ever seeing but never perceiving; Lamp on a Stand; Parable of the Growing Seed -- Roman anti-Semitism.
I fail entirely to see the anti-Semitism here. It seems to me just the sort of thing one might expect from someone styling himself as an apocalyptic prophet and from the Jewish establishment in reaction thereto. quote:
Slater: Parable of the Mustard Seed -- just plain stupid.
|
-- tergiversant@OklahomaAtheists.org
"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
|
|
|
|
tergiversant
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 15:13:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
quote:
Originally posted by tergiversant
As to the Hebraic origin of ...
Hebraic "origins" prove what?
Regarding historicity, nothing at all. Whether a myth is Greek or Gentile, it is still a myth. Slater and I have been off on a bit of a tangent as to whether the gospels are more derived from pagan myths or Hebrew midrash. I should start another thread on this matter. I believe I shall -- tommorow. |
-- tergiversant@OklahomaAtheists.org
"Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione."
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 19:45:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Slater and I have been off on a bit of a tangent as to whether the gospels are more derived from pagan myths or Hebrew midrash. I should start another thread on this matter. I believe I shall -- tommorow.
But, why? Furthermore, you may find that the two positions are far from mutually exclusive. It's not as if 2nd Temple period Judaism was immune from pagan influence. I suspect that the search for pure theological roots is about as misguided as the search fore pure 'racial' roots. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 07:05:03 [Permalink]
|
Slater: quote:
You mean the Jesus seminar I take it. I thought that their mission was to cut through the magic and fantasy to try to make an historic Jesus more palpable to people who weren't half wits.
The magic Jesus, walking on water, returning from the dead is, of course, an impossibility. What the JS was doing in remaking Jesus into a man was trying to bring him into the world of possibility. However they hit the same wall everyone does. No evidence. Without evidence while the possibility remains the probability is so slim as to not be worthy of consideration.
While you are correct that the J/S is trying to make Jesus "more palpable".The emphasis that I was making is that in spite of their obvious anti-supernatural bias against the Jesus of the NT is that to a tee they all agree that the synthetic historic evidence points to the existence of the Historic Jesus. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 11/25/2002 07:23:24 |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
