Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed

[Brainache]

Sure, when is he coming here?

You don't have email?

You could try reading his books.

You could probably find transcripts from his lectures if you looked for it.

Or, try Robert Eisenman, he isn't a tool of the consensus by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[pakeha]

Apparently the person is not Robin Lane Craig, but Robin Lane Fox of Oxford.

He apparently goes against the scholarly consensus in thinking the 'Gospel According to John' might actually have been written by the disciple of Jesus!

I misspoke earlier.

I meant this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Lane_Fox



Talk to him about how persuasive Richard Carrier is.

Yes, he's the fella quoted in the Mail article
"The distinguished Oxford classics professor Robin Lane Fox has found himself in the middle of a sexism row after reviewing a fashion exhibition at the Garden Museum in south London.

Despite the apparently innocuous subject matter, the historian of antiquity managed to offend his students by writing in the article: ‘A woman’s evening dress should look like an apparently stormable fortress.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...xs-Oxford-professor-father.html#ixzz2y068sluT
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"

Sure, when is he coming here?

The sooner the better; my collection of evening frocks is simply hopeless and I could use some advice!

 

[Brainache]

Yes, he's the fella quoted in the Mail article
"The distinguished Oxford classics professor Robin Lane Fox has found himself in the middle of a sexism row after reviewing a fashion exhibition at the Garden Museum in south London.

Despite the apparently innocuous subject matter, the historian of antiquity managed to offend his students by writing in the article: ‘A woman’s evening dress should look like an apparently stormable fortress.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...xs-Oxford-professor-father.html#ixzz2y068sluT
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"





The sooner the better; my collection of evening frocks is simply hopeless and I could use some advice!

The Daily Mail, is there a finer paper in all the world?

I actually like this line: ‘A woman’s evening dress should look like an apparently stormable fortress.’ I think anyone who takes offense at that is just looking for any excuse to be outraged.

Hilarious.

Thanks Pakeha.

 

[Craig B]

OK. Don't discuss it then. But don't whine that I don't address arguments you are too lazy to make.

Your general manner is revolting, and I will not long encourage it by addressing you. But on this point please note that some of the MJ proponents refuse to look at any evidence derived from critical analysis of NT texts. They become indignant at the very suggestion that they should consider it. Now this has nothing to do with people who propose such analysis being lazy, and you are being wilfully obnoxious.

 

[dejudge]

Dale Martin teaches a History course at Yale University which deals with the HJ question.

You should at least do some research on Dale Martin.

Dale Martin is a Christian Scholar who actually BELIEVES Jesus was 100% DIVINE and 100% human.

Dale Martin Believes the Nicene Creed.

Essentially Dale Martin believes in a MYTH Jesus.

Dale Martin's Jesus is a MYTH--God Incarnate.
Please, examine Dale Martin's claims from around the 38th minute.
https://winteryknight.wordpress.com...debates-dale-martin-on-the-divinity-of-jesus/

It is clear that you don't know that Christians Scholars who believe Jesus was GOD INCARNATE are professors at Universities.

Dale Martin a Christian Scholar admits he PRAYS to God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost and believes in the doctrine of the Trinity.

Incredibly, Dale Martin is teaching at Yale what he does NOT personally believe.

Dale Martin proves the HJ argument is fundamentally false or is not based on evidence.

How in the world can a person teach exactly what they do NOT BELIEVE?

 

[proudfootz]

Your general manner is revolting, and I will not long encourage it by addressing you. But on this point please note that some of the MJ proponents refuse to look at any evidence derived from critical analysis of NT texts. They become indignant at the very suggestion that they should consider it. Now this has nothing to do with people who propose such analysis being lazy, and you are being wilfully obnoxious.

Again, it is revolting that you write this as if the fault lies only on one side.

I'm aware that some HJ proponents refuse to look at arguments from the MJ side.

Do you consider yourself wilfully obnoxious when you post such things?

Surely it would be as easy to type a few sentences addressing my question rather than excuses why one shouldn't be bothered and vapid insinuations one hasn't been to school or hasn't read anything on the subject?

These are insults to everyone's intelligence and not at all conducive to reasoned debate.

 

[proudfootz]

You don't have email?

You could try reading his books.

You could probably find transcripts from his lectures if you looked for it.

Or, try Robert Eisenman, he isn't a tool of the consensus by any stretch of the imagination.

So rather than discuss it here I should contact this fellow and try to convince him?

...and you are going to contact Dr Carrier or Earl Doherty and try to convince them?

Is that the challenge?

What does the winner of this contest you propose earn for their efforts?

 

[proudfootz]

Yes, he's the fella quoted in the Mail article
"The distinguished Oxford classics professor Robin Lane Fox has found himself in the middle of a sexism row after reviewing a fashion exhibition at the Garden Museum in south London.

Despite the apparently innocuous subject matter, the historian of antiquity managed to offend his students by writing in the article: ‘A woman’s evening dress should look like an apparently stormable fortress.’

The sooner the better; my collection of evening frocks is simply hopeless and I could use some advice!

The personal life of this or any person has no place in this discussion.

Whether or not there is a persuasive argument for the existence of a real man behind the Christ myth has nothing to do with such trivia, any more than where they are employed does.

 

[proudfootz]

You should at least do some research on Dale Martin.

Dale Martin is a Christian Scholar who actually BELIEVES Jesus was 100% DIVINE and 100% human.

Dale Martin Believes the Nicene Creed.

Essentially Dale Martin believes in a MYTH Jesus.

Dale Martin's Jesus is a MYTH--God Incarnate.
Please, examine Dale Martin's claims from around the 38th minute.
https://winteryknight.wordpress.com...debates-dale-martin-on-the-divinity-of-jesus/

It is clear that you don't know that Christians Scholars who believe Jesus was GOD INCARNATE are professors at Universities.

Dale Martin a Christian Scholar admits he PRAYS to God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost and believes in the doctrine of the Trinity.

Incredibly, Dale Martin is teaching at Yale what he does NOT personally believe.

Dale Martin proves the HJ argument is fundamentally false or is not based on evidence.

How in the world can a person teach exactly what they do NOT BELIEVE?

I'm sure whether one believes in some version of christianity is neither here nor there.

After all, we never see accusations of anti-christian bias flung at non-HJers!

That would be ad hominem and fallacious.

 

[tsig]

Again, it is revolting that you write this as if the fault lies only on one side.

I'm aware that some HJ proponents refuse to look at arguments from the MJ side.

Do you consider yourself wilfully obnoxious when you post such things?

Surely it would be as easy to type a few sentences addressing my question rather than excuses why one shouldn't be bothered and vapid insinuations one hasn't been to school or hasn't read anything on the subject?

These are insults to everyone's intelligence and not at all conducive to reasoned debate.

From the HJ perspective that was considered a carefully reasoned response, you weren't called a Holocaust denier or a creationist or an academic incendiary.

 

[proudfootz]

From the HJ perspective that was considered a carefully reasoned response, you weren't called a Holocaust denier or a creationist or an academic incendiary.

Don't worry, I will be...

If only there were some evidence to discuss we wouldn't have so much worry about who wants to sack the cities and burn all the books.

But I wouldn't go so far as to claim that posters like Stone are 'all HJ has to offer' - anyone indulging in such generalizations would be silly.

Scholars on every side of the debate have made valuable contributions to the study of early christianity, and I don't consider it impossible there might have been under the mountain of myth a real man somewhere.

 

[Craig B]

If only there were some evidence to discuss we wouldn't have so much worry about who wants to sack the cities and burn all the books.

Yes. As I wrote:

... please note that some of the MJ proponents refuse to look at any evidence derived from critical analysis of NT texts. They become indignant at the very suggestion that they should consider it. Now this has nothing to do with people who propose such analysis being lazy, and you are being wilfully obnoxious.

So you will not admit that any evidence has been presented. Fine.

 

[dejudge]

But I wouldn't go so far as to claim that posters like Stone are 'all HJ has to offer' - anyone indulging in such generalizations would be silly.

Can you name some of the posters who have something to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Brainache have to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Craig B have to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Foster Zygote have to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Phil2112 have to offer for the HJ argument?

The answer is the same unknown non-existing piss poor evidence.

Scholars on every side of the debate have made valuable contributions to the study of early christianity, and I don't consider it impossible there might have been under the mountain of myth a real man somewhere.

Who are those Scholars on the HJ side who have made a valuable contribution?

Can you recall that Richard Carrier admitted that Bart Ehrman's "Did Jesus Exist?" is a failure in logic and facts and that he will NOT recommend it?

Can you recall that Richard Carrier also admitted all methodologies for the HJ argument that he has encountered are FALLACIOUS?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1026

HJ Scholars have made a valuable contribution--they have EXPOSED that the un-evidenced HJ argument is baseless and a known established disaster.

 

[proudfootz]

Yes. As I wrote: So you will not admit that any evidence has been presented. Fine.

Not since I've been here.

All I've heard is how awful those 'MJers' are.

But I am going to the other thread where the evidence is supposed to be presented.

ETA: have you a piece of evidence you'd like discussed - this would be a good time to clue me in!

 

[proudfootz]

Can you name some of the posters who has something to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Brainache have to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Craig B have to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Foster Zygote have to offer for the HJ argument?

What evidence does Phil2112 have to offer for the HJ argument?

What I'll have to do is review this thread and see if there is anything on offer here. That will take some time.

The answer is the same unknown non-existing piss poor evidence.

That might prove to be the case, but I will have to see for myself.

Who are those Scholars on the HJ side who have made a valuable contribution?

Can you recall that Richard Carrier admitted that Bart Ehrman's "Did Jesus Exist?" is a failure in logic and facts and that he will NOT recommend it?

Can you recall that Richard Carrier also admitted all methodologies for the HJ argument that he has encountered are FALLACIOUS?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1026

HJ Scholars have made a valuable contribution--they have EXPOSED that the un-evidenced HJ argument is baseless and a known established disaster.

Some have pointed out Ehrman's contributions in making the rampant forgeries in the New Testament canon more widely known.

There may be others.

 

[pakeha]

The personal life of this or any person has no place in this discussion.

Whether or not there is a persuasive argument for the existence of a real man behind the Christ myth has nothing to do with such trivia, any more than where they are employed does.

Of course you're right.

 

[proudfootz]

Of course you're right.

I do apologize if I seemed a bit harsh.

No harm intended.

 

[truthseekershelley]

Just wondering how a "myth" can prove anything?

1. a traditional story, esp. one concerning the early history of a people or explaining some natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.

synonyms:

folk tale, folk story, legend, tale, story, fable, saga, mythos, lore, folklore, mythology More "ancient Greek myths" traditional stories or legends collectively. "the heroes of Greek myth"

2. a widely held but false belief or idea.

reference google definitions.

 

[pakeha]

I do apologize if I seemed a bit harsh.

No harm intended.

No harm taken.
My post was was a foolish and thoughtless attempt at lightheartedness.
At the end of the day, Robin Lane Fox's published comment about a vengeful flower fairy has nothing to do with our discussion here.

 

[dejudge]

Just wondering how a "myth" can prove anything?

Have you wondered how Adam and Eve can prove anything?

Have you wondered how the God of the Jews can prove anything?

Have you wondered how the Angel Gabriel can prove anything?

Have you wondered how Satan the Devil can prove anything?

Have you wondered how the Angel Moroni can prove anything?

Have you wondered how Romulus can prove anything?


I wonder why people use Myth Fables to argue for the history of their Jesus.

Maybe they don't know that the NT are Myth Fables and cannot prove anything.

Maybe they don't know what a Myth is.

Myth---a widely held but false belief or idea.

The Historical Jesus is a Myth.