|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
 Posted - 08/22/2002 : 16:28:15 [Permalink]
|
I think CM stands for christ myth. But who knows, these religion types get pretty strange.
To Slater,of course all we have is copies big deal,how many original classical documents do we possess? NONE! No Plato,Herodutus,Homer,or even your beloved Apollonius.
You know why we don't have any copies, don't you?
The Christians destroyed them because they were Pagan blasphemy.
Look up Theodosius the Great, or St Cyril of Alexandria. Look up the murder of Hypatia. All classical wisdom was destroyed for the glory of Christ.
Do you know how we got it back, do you know who saved it for us through our dark ages? The Moslems saved it. Not the Christians, the Moslems.
Do you want to pretend that the Christians and Christian Iconoclasts destroyed all the works of the early church too?
Tell me, why did they save the knucklebones of esoteric saints in golden reliquaries but they threw out every bible, every book by every church father and started again with fresh copies as soon as the Romans adopted Christianity?
Why did you have to give me quotes from "experts" from 30, 50 and 110 years ago? Surely quotes from current day experts would have been easier to find than one from the century before last. Since science is self correcting it seems suspicious behavior.
And why call him Sir William Ramsey when he is Pastor William Ramsey?
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
 |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2002 : 01:24:13 [Permalink]
|
To RD sorry about the "CM" acronym,and yes perhaps I was confusing quote:
: (1) the accuracy of the textual transmission , and (2) the historical reliabilty of the story thus transmitted
but I was so amazed at Slater's cavalier attitude at dismissing 300 years worth of written history(i.e. The Early Church Fathers)with a simple quote:
None of the early church fathers "original" writing exist. It's all "copies" from after 325CE
.Then again nothing that Slater says should amaze me anymore.However,now its I who am confused at what you said quote:
There is no 'expertise' suggesting that a bunch of spirits invaded a bunch of suicidal swine. A typical example of NT historical reliability might be:
Mk 16:05 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
Mt 28:02 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
Lk 24:04 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments.
Jn 20:12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
This seems, at best, very sloppy myth-making!
Are you saying that because a reported event contains supernatural elements that "it just can't be true"? Or are you saying that when the gospels give seemingly diffrent accounts of the same event that layers of "myths" have set in? Now to Slater,when you say that "The Moslems saved it. Not the Christians,
are you implying another "conspiarcy" that Islam really didn't begin in the 7th century but in the 1st? How else can you explane how all those manuscripts survived untill then?Get real just because you cite a few examples of ingnorant "so called" christians burning books doesn't mean ALL did.Justin Marytr wore the "Philosophers Robe", Agustine taught Retoric,Paul quotes "pagan" philosophers and poets in his speaches and writings.Are you really so ingnorant that even right here in the "good o USA" that our first universities(Havard,Princeton ect...)were started by the christian church? No just has there are today fringe groups that dispise learning there are still some who believe the Scripture that we are "to love God with all our MIND".But enough of that if wnat futher proof checkout this cite http://www.tektonics.org/TK-S.html.Its late I gotta go
Edited by - darwin alogos on 08/23/2002 01:28:09
Edited by - darwin alogos on 08/23/2002 01:31:02 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2002 : 03:44:07 [Permalink]
|
darwin alogos,
I would prefer that you meander less while being far more careful with your quotes. In particular, please include in the quote-box only what is being quoted. Let me also suggest that "CM" is a less than helpful acronym. While there is serious debate about the historicity of 'Jesus', there can be little doubt that christology is highly syncretic and heavily myth-ladened.
In response to my statement that "This seems, at best, very sloppy myth-making!", you ask: quote:
Are you saying that because a reported event contains supernatural elements that "it just can't be true"? Or are you saying that when the gospels give seemingly diffrent accounts of the same event that layers of "myths" have set in?
I was saying that it was "very sloppy myth-making" - there are no "layers" here, simply confusion. As for the rest, I will gladly entertain any evidence that you might have for the supernatural. In the meantime, I consider the idea of virgin births, suicidal pigs, and resurrecting messiahs simply laughable.
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2002 : 12:02:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
While there is serious debate about the historicity of 'Jesus', there can be little doubt that christology is highly syncretic and heavily myth-ladened.
I see you suffer from the privite pipeline to ultimate reality complex like Slater.Please inform us as to HOW YOU KNOW "that christology is highly syncretic and heavily myth-ladened"?" Did you discover these "facts" in one of Slater's ChristMythers "scholarly works" or those other "well balanced" Jesus Smear works? quote:
I was saying that it was "very sloppy myth-making" - there are no "layers" here, simply confusion. As for the rest, I will gladly entertain any evidence that you might have for the supernatural. In the meantime, I consider the idea of virgin births, suicidal pigs, and resurrecting messiahs simply laughable.
As far as what you consider "laughable" that tells us nothing about reality present or past.As far as"evidence for the supernatural" I consider the resurrection of Jesus the best we have,apperantly you do not so what do you think happened?
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2002 : 13:22:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
As far as what you consider "laughable" that tells us nothing about reality present or past.
You were not inquiring about reality. You asked if I was dismissive of the "supernatural elements" previously referenced, and I responded to the question asked.
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
... what do you think happened?
I think there was an exceptionally sloppy fabrication, possibly (but not necessarily) overlaid upon an actual execution of a Jewish or Samaritan cult leader. I find the virgin birth and suicidal pigs no more credible.
As for "Slater's ChristMythers", "he that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone." -- oh, sorry, that line may be a fabrication as well.
If you wish to defend the inerrancy of the bible, it may be more appropriate to start a new thread. If and when you do so, please let me know if your defense of scripture extends to the OT/Tanach. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2002 : 09:41:38 [Permalink]
|
To RD,I barely have time to read and respond to this thread so no thanks. quote:
I think there was an exceptionally sloppy fabrication, possibly (but not necessarily) overlaid upon an actual execution of a Jewish or Samaritan cult leader. I find the virgin birth and suicidal pigs no more credible.
So in other words your basing your understanding on what took place 1970 years ago on pure speculation?
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2002 : 15:11:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
To RD,I barely have time to read and respond to this thread so no thanks.
I'm afraid that it has shown in the quality of your input.
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2002 : 18:49:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I'm afraid that it has shown in the quality of your input
Whatever,I at least try and answer questions and present evidence for my views.You seem content to enjoy evading both.So at risk of repeating myself,just what kind of textual evidence do you have to support your view that Jesus was quote:
a Jewish or Samaritan cult leader.
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2002 : 19:49:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
[i]darwin alogos wrote:
... at risk of repeating myself,just what kind of textual evidence do you have to support your view that Jesus was a Jewish or Samaritan cult leader.
Do you attribute such a view to me out of stupidity, malice, or some childish combination of both? Why not be a good little boy or girl and go back and read what I actually wrote. Actually, I'll make it easy for you: quote:
I think there was an exceptionally sloppy fabrication, possibly (but not necessarily) overlaid upon an actual execution of a Jewish or Samaritan cult leader. I find the virgin birth and suicidal pigs no more credible.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2002 : 07:19:38 [Permalink]
|
[list][*] In the opening lines of Romans where Paul is giving an apologia for his apostolate to the Gentiles he adapts an existing credal statement about Christ. Its vocabulary betrays its un-Pauline origins, though we do not know precisely the time and place of such origins. Yet (1) the Davidic reference locates these words in Palestine, and (2) mention of the resurrection and the archaic sounding ‘Spirit of holiness' point towards an early date, perhaps as early as the thirties.
Contained in Paul's apologia for his apostolate, then, is this neatly symmetrical creed about the Son of God.
the Gospel of God...
concerning his Son
who came of the seed of David, according to the flesh
who was set apart as the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness
by his resurrection from the dead
Jesus Christ our Lord Romans 1:3-4 (fn.1)
[*] This is textual evidence for my view that Jesus Paul preached was and is the same "historic" Jewish Rabbi who was crucified AD 33.Now I am not implying you are either "stupid" or have "malice" towards opposing views.However,what historic evidence do you have which would overturn the fact that within the Pauline corpus we have hymns and creeds which pre-date his conversion AD35 which like the above quoted Rom.1:3-4 teach that Jesus was the the Son David and the Son God and that the empirical verification for those outlandish claims (within a strictly monotheistic Hebrew culture)was his resurrection from the dead. (fn.1) http://www.anglicanmediasydney.asn.au/pwb/romans1.htm
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 08/25/2002 : 08:01:08 [Permalink]
|
darwin alogos,
Four requests: - Please address the outstanding issue before meandering into new territory.
- Please make an effort to focus your comments and present them clearly.
- Please learn how to properly employ formatting techniques or, if you would prefer, dispense with them.
- Please begin an appropriate thread if you wish to venture into a discussion of inerrancy, canon, and/or textual criticism of the Pauline and Deuteropauline works.
Thanks.
Edited by - ReasonableDoubt on 08/25/2002 08:02:01 |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2002 : 09:39:13 [Permalink]
|
I was so amazed at Slater's cavalier attitude at dismissing 300 years worth of written history…
But there is no written history from that entire 300 years and that is the point. Why was it all thrown away?
Are you saying that because a reported event contains supernatural elements that "it just can't be true"?
He wasn't saying precisely that, but I will. One sure way to tell if a story is a lie is if it hinges on supernatural events.
are you implying another "conspiarcy" that Islam really didn't begin in the 7th century but in the 1st?
You love using the word conspiracy-although not enough to learn how to spell it-and yet I have never made any claims for any conspiracies at any time.
Islam started between 610 & 613 CE the dark ages got into full swing around 400 CE. The followers of Islam we former Zoroastrians and Christians. The Christians would have been disgusted enough at the doings of Christianity to drop the religion en masse. The early years of Islam were notable for their advances in science and mathematics. These were people who would have (and did) saved the classics.
Get real just because you cite a few examples of ingnorant "so called" christians burning books doesn't mean ALL did.
It was church policy-or do you deny that the dark ages ever happened?
Justin Marytr wore the "Philosophers Robe"
What has he to do with Theodosius the Great?
Agustine taught Retoric,
He also wrote the City of God in which he attempts to explain why Rome whose civilization flourished for a millennium under it's own gods, when it turned to Christ it perished.
Are you really so ingnorant that even right here in the "good o USA" that our first universities(Havard,Princeton ect...)were started by the christian church?
I g n o r a n t --is how the word is spelled.
But enough of that if wnat futher proof checkout this cite http://www.tektonics.org/TK-S.html.
J.P. Holding, a.k.a. Tectonic is a librarian. He has no better credentials than anyone on this BSS. He is not an expert in the field so please stop holding him up as one.
I see you suffer from the privite pipeline to ultimate reality complex like Slater.
Why do you keep complaining that others can't know what happened in 33CE when you claim that you do?
Please inform us as to HOW YOU KNOW "that christology is highly syncretic and heavily myth-ladened"?"
Because we still have the older myths that it is made from. What could be simpler than that?
Example: the high holy day of Christianity is called Easter. That should be more than enough proof right there.
Did you discover these "facts" in one of Slater's ChristMythers "scholarly works" or those other "well balanced" Jesus Smear works?
As far as"evidence for the supernatural" I consider the resurrection of Jesus the best we have, apperantly you do not so what do you think happened?
We have no evidence whatsoever that there even was a Jesus let alone that he was resurrected. While four gospels mention the empty tomb only three speak of a resurrection. None of the three stories match. The events take place in one evening or in forty days depending on which version. They take place in downtown Jerusalem or in a town sixty miles away. They all claim that Jesus was dead for the three days and three nights that fulfils prophesy. Yet they also say he died late Friday afternoon and was up and at-um by sunrise Sunday. That's only two nights and a couple of hours past one day.
Not only isn't the resurrection of Jesus proof of the supernatural they aren't even self consistent. Very sloppy job of lying.
Whatever, I at least try and answer questions and present evidence for my views. You seem content to enjoy evading both.
You answer questions? When did you ever do that? You just stop writing for awhile when you can't answer.
Question for you then, if you are turning over a new leaf. Why does the NT claim that there were twelve Apostles when it names fourteen?
This is textual evidence for my view that Jesus Paul preached was and is the same "historic" Jewish Rabbi who was crucified AD 33.
The problem with that is that there is no historic record of Rabbi Jesus being crucified at all.
That's what this whole two-part thread is about. There is no historic record of Jesus. The only question is were these early savior myths attached to an actual person who has been forgotten or simply to a fictional character?
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2002 : 12:39:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Justin Marytr wore the "Philosophers Robe"
What has he to do with Theodosius the Great?
Agustine taught Retoric,
He also wrote the City of God in which he attempts to explain why Rome whose civilization flourished for a millennium under it's own gods, when it turned to Christ it perished
As usual Slater you avoid the whats clearly set before you. quote:
Justin Marytr wore the "Philosophers Robe"
What has he to do with Theodosius the Great?
Lets think about that "Justin wore a Philosophers Robe hmmmm? So he must have been a Philosopher!". Therefore,as usual you are completly wrong about saying ALL THE EARLY CHURCH despised pagan lititure.Also as I said Augustine taught RETORIC and contrary to your alligation his City of God preserved many ancient classical sources including a work completly lost Varro's History of Religions.Yes Slater I've already admmited that there were Idoits back then who "burnt books ect.." but over all the church as preseved more ancient texts than destroyed. quote:
But enough of that if wnat futher proof checkout this cite http://www.tektonics.org/TK-S.html.
J.P. Holding, a.k.a. Tectonic is a librarian. He has no better credentials than anyone on this BSS. He is not an expert in the field so please stop holding him up as one.
You got me there Slater how foolish of me to think [i A LIRARIAN] whould have any positive information about Ancient Libarys and Books. quote:
Please inform us as to HOW YOU KNOW "that christology is highly syncretic and heavily myth-ladened"?"
Because we still have the older myths that it is made from. What could be simpler than that?
;.
I noticed that at the top of News Paper it says "Aug 29th 2002" am I to imply that the Paper "Believes" that Agustus was in some sense 'divine' and hence the name of the month after him ? HELL NO! and thats as about much as logical as your: Example: the high holy day of Christianity is called Easter. That should be more than enough proof right there. quote:
As far as"evidence for the supernatural" I consider the resurrection of Jesus the best we have, apperantly you do not so what do you think happened?
We have no evidence whatsoever that there even was a Jesus let alone that he was resurrected. While four gospels mention the empty tomb only three speak of a resurrection. None of the three stories match. The events take place in one evening or in forty days depending on which version. They take place in downtown Jerusalem or in a town sixty miles away. They all claim that Jesus was dead for the three days and three nights that fulfils prophesy. Yet they also say he died late Friday afternoon and was up and at-um by sunrise Sunday. That's only two nights and a couple of hours past one day.
Not only isn't the resurrection of Jesus proof of the supernatural they aren't even self consistent. Very sloppy job of lying.
Slater the exsistence of Threads like this one are all the more proof that the natuarlistic theories[/i]for explaning away the solid evidence for the Rresurrection of Jesus is so weak that skeptics like yourself have to resort to lame excuses like "Jesus never existed" or"He's just a compilation of earlier myths" No serious scholarship endorses either one these "cultic" views. quote:
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2002 : 13:17:53 [Permalink]
|
Therefore,as usual you are completly wrong about saying ALL THE EARLY CHURCH despised pagan lititure.
No, idiot, Theodosius the Great reigned from 379 CE to 395.
over all the church as preseved more ancient texts than destroyed.
Rewriting history again I see. Then why was the renaissance called the renaissance?
You got me there Slater how foolish of me to think [i A LIRARIAN] whould have any positive information about Ancient Libarys and Books.
We are speaking of history and religion here in case you haven't noticed. When we get to the Dewy Decimal System you can refer to him
I noticed that at the top of News Paper it says "Aug 29th 2002" am I to imply that the Paper "Believes" that Agustus was in some sense 'divine' and hence the name of the month after him ? HELL NO! and thats as about much as logical as your: Example: the high holy day of Christianity is called Easter. That should be more than enough proof right there.
Have you the slightest clue as to who Easter was and who was resurrected on her feast day? Hint: it wasn't Jesus.
Slater the exsistence of Threads like this one are all the more proof that the natuarlistic theories for explaning away the solid evidence for the Rresurrection of Jesus is so weak that skeptics like yourself have to resort to lame excuses like "Jesus never existed" or "He's just a compilation of earlier myths" No serious scholarship endorses either one these "cultic" views.
Solid evidence? What solid evidence? The NT stories don't match, not even close.
You have shown no scholarship whatsoever, only the mindless bleating of a sheep.
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2002 : 19:12:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
... how foolish of me to think [i A LIRARIAN] whould have any positive information about Ancient Libarys and Books
It's very, very hard to resist, but I will. 
Edited by - ReasonableDoubt on 08/29/2002 19:18:55 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
