• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

'Batman & Jesus' movie -- trailer just released

GDon

Graduate Poster
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
1,567
A couple of days ago, Mythicist Milwaukee released a trailer for "Batman & Jesus", a documentary that they assisted in creating on whether there was a historical Jesus. The movie is due to be released in 2017.

The trailer can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnS8FjMQx0k

More information on the project can be found on the Mythicist Milwaukee webpage here: http://www.mythicistmilwaukee.com/batman-jesus-the-movie/

According to the webpage:

... it is important to be able to present the very best information, research, and evidence available today to verify and support the claims being made.

To achieve this, filmmaker Jozef is working with Mythicist Milwaukee to bring together some of the many diverse leading voices and scholars in the secular community to speak in the film about what we truly know about the life of Jesus, including Dr. Richard Carrier, author David Fitzgerald, and hiphop artist Killah Priest.​

I'm guessing the movie will include aspects of 'astrotheology', as according to their blog page (my bolding below): http://www.mythicistmilwaukee.com/mythicistmilwaukeeblog/?tag=Acharya+S+/+DM+Murdock

Mythicism is not a religion. It is the study of ancient astrotheology and mythology in comparison to modern day religious supernatural beliefs. On our blog and through our research, we try to further that study. We try to bring to light the parallels between ancient and modern religions in effort to show their mythological origins.​
The "Batman & Jesus" movie trailer itself says it features the following: "Dr Richard Carrier, David Fitzgerald, Aron Ra, Dr Robert Price, Killah Priest & More."

But Mythicist Milwaukee is also the group that is putting on the debate between Dr Price and Dr Ehrman on whether there was a historical Jesus, in October this year: http://www.mythicistmilwaukee.com/mythinformation-conference-2/ So they deserve kudos for that.
 
Last edited:
Just thinking about what a great scene this would be:

Luke 10:41 Jesus answered and said unto her, "Martha, Martha, you are careful and troubled about many things"
Luke 10:42 And Batman responded: "WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME???"
 
Just thinking about what a great scene this would be:

Luke 10:41 Jesus answered and said unto her, "Martha, Martha, you are careful and troubled about many things"
Luke 10:42 And Batman responded: "WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME???"


Luke 10:43 And Jesus said unto Batman "Stay down, you'd be dead if I wanted it".

Luke 10:44 And Batman in his anger rose up and smote Jesus with a restroom sink.
 
Just thinking about what a great scene this would be:

Luke 10:41 Jesus answered and said unto her, "Martha, Martha, you are careful and troubled about many things"
Luke 10:42 And Batman responded: "WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME???"
One billion thumbs up. :thumbsup:
 
Looks like an exciting and controversial topic. Hope Mythicist Milwaukee doesn't get into too much trouble over it. Goodness knows they've enough on their plates. [emoji6]
 
Last edited:
Looks like an exciting and controversial topic. Hope Mythicist Milwaukee doesn't get into too much trouble over it. Goodness knows they've enough on their plates. [emoji6]

What trouble is that? I've never heard of them so I googled the name, but didn't see anything about trouble.

I see they have some kind of conference scheduled for later this month. Is that it?
http://www.mythicistmilwaukee.com/mythinformation-conference-2/
MYTHINFORMATION CONFERENCE IV | SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2017

PREVIOUS CONFERENCES

We've held three "Myth Cons" to-date - with the 2016 conference featuring one of the secular world's most anticipated debates between Dr. Robert Price and Dr. Bart D. Ehrman arguing the existence of a historical Jesus Christ. Previous conference speakers have included:

Hip-hop artist Killah Priest of the Wu-Tang Clan
Buzzed Belief Debate with Dr. Robert Price and Bart D. Ehrman
Freedom from Religion Foundation president Dan Barker
Mythicist Author and Historian Dr. Richard Carrier
Black Nonbelievers founder/president Mandisa Thomas
Atheist Republic CEO Allie Jackson
The Friendly Atheist's Hemant Mehta
Mythicist Author David Fitzgerald
ChicagoNow.com blogger James Kirk Wall
Author Arthur George
TV host Matt Dillahunty...
 
There is controversy over some of the guests that have been invited. PZ Myers discusses this here:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2017/09/15/seeing-through-all-the-noise/

"All the speakers at this skeptic conference are anti-SJWs..."

Even after Seth Andrews and Aron Ra pulled out (on account of a sustained anti-PR campaign against MythCon) there are at least a few speakers who don't fit that description.

Even if it were accurate, though, so what? Skepticon is all social justice all day and no one seeks to deplatform those folks.
 
There is controversy over some of the guests that have been invited. PZ Myers discusses this here:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2017/09/15/seeing-through-all-the-noise/

Thanks for that. I'm not a big PZ Myers fan normally, but he seems to have a point. If this conference was planning on giving a platform to racists and sexists they deserve all the criticism they get.

Is that really what the organisers were planning, or is it another storm in a tea-cup like that Atheism+ business?

Just who are these horrible Nazi sexist Atheists that are scheduled to appear?
 
A couple of days ago, Mythicist Milwaukee released a trailer for "Batman & Jesus", a documentary that they assisted in creating on whether there was a historical Jesus. The movie is due to be released in 2017.

I'd wager that with a name like that, they had already made up their mind before production started 😁
 
Thanks for that. I'm not a big PZ Myers fan normally, but he seems to have a point. If this conference was planning on giving a platform to racists and sexists they deserve all the criticism they get.

Fair point, assuming that PZ took pains to document the people against whom he inveighs advocating for social or political inequality on account of gender, sex or ethnicity.

But do I assume too much? :rolleyes:

Just who are these horrible Nazi sexist Atheists that are scheduled to appear?

This lady, for one. Also, her bf. YouTubers both.

https://twitter.com/ArmouredSkeptic/status/909663635168952320
 
Last edited:
Fair point, assuming that PZ took pains to document the people against whom he inveighs advocating for social or political inequality on account of gender, sex or ethnicity.

But do I assume too much? :rolleyes:



This lady, for one. Also, her bf. YouTubers both.

https://twitter.com/ArmouredSkeptic/status/909663635168952320

I'm still none the wiser here. Pretend for a moment that I'm an old Luddite who doesn't do "Twitter" and who doesn't want to wade through endless tweets of strange memes that mean nothing to me. Help me out on this.

From what I can gather these people are Conservatives. They have a right-of-centre world view and therefore PZ and his "SJW Snowflake" followers label them Nazis and refuse to attend the conference. Is that about it?

Tempest in a Tea-party?
 
From what I can gather these people are Conservatives. They have a right-of-centre world view and therefore PZ and his "SJW Snowflake" followers label them Nazis and refuse to attend the conference. Is that about it?


That would be about it except that one of these particular conservatives sort of opened the door to the literal Nazi accusation when they started flying the Kekistani flag which is clearly derived from Nazi/KKK designs.

I suppose it comes down to whether you see Kekistan as an essentially parodic movement or as one of the more lighthearted aspects of actual alt-right white nationalism. But as a Luddite, I don't expect you have the tools to sort this one out. :p
 
Last edited:
That would be about it except that one of these particular conservatives sort of opened the door to the literal Nazi accusation when they started flying the Kekistani flag which is clearly derived from Nazi/KKK designs.

I suppose it comes down to whether you see Kekistan as an essentially parodic movement or as one of the more lighthearted aspects of actual alt-right white nationalism. But as a Luddite, I don't expect you have the tools to sort this one out. :p

Thanks for that.

The Tribe of Benjamin?
...But the Israelites had compassion for Benjamin their kin, and said, ‘One tribe is cut off from Israel this day. 7 What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since we have sworn by the Lord that we will not give them any of our daughters as wives?’...
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges+21&version=NRSVA

This thread started out as a discussion of a movie about the Mythical Jesus, I'm just trying to get it back on track by mentioning the Tribe of Benjamin. This was the tribe that Paul claimed to be a member of.

It has been argued by Scholars (Eisenman et al) that "the tribe of Benjamin" was a term used in second temple Judaism for people like Herod and his family (Arabs who had recently converted to Judaism). "Sons of Benjamin" are mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls:
... Supporting them are those who have violated the covenant. The sons of Levi, the sons of Judah, and the sons of Benjamin, those exiled to the wilderness, shall fight against them
(3) with [...] against all their troops, when the exiles of the Sons of Light return from the Wilderness of the Peoples to camp in the Wilderness of Jerusalem...
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sitchin/guerradioses/guerradioses02a.htm

Those Dead Sea fundamentalist Jews saw Benjamin as one of their enemies.

I just find it interesting that this particular neo-Nazi happens to be named "Benjamin".

Wooooooooooooooo...
 
Wake me up when they've found a "mythicist" arguing in accordance with standard ancient historical practice. I look forward to seeing their genre analysis of the gospels and comoarisons with other bioi :rolleyes:

Mythicism is a crankhood not even suitable for pop history.
 
Wake me up when they've found a "mythicist" arguing in accordance with standard ancient historical practice. I look forward to seeing their genre analysis of the gospels and comoarisons with other bioi

Between biography and hagiography, it isn't obvious that the gospels (or similar works such as Philostratus' Life of Appolonius) fall clearly into the former genre. For that matter, we cannot rule out the Hebrew prophetic/midrashic literature which predate Greek notions of biography.

Jesus of Nazareth supposedly spent much of his sermonizing relating moral parables to his audience, stories which didn't need to be rooted in history to have a worthwhile moral point. Who's to say that his disciples didn't do likewise?
 
Between biography and hagiography, it isn't obvious that the gospels (or similar works such as Philostratus' Life of Appolonius) fall clearly into the former genre. For that matter, we cannot rule out the Hebrew prophetic/midrashic literature which predate Greek notions of biography.

Jesus of Nazareth supposedly spent much of his sermonizing relating moral parables to his audience, stories which didn't need to be rooted in history to have a worthwhile moral point. Who's to say that his disciples didn't do likewise?

Plutarch's bioi are also mainly concerned with making moral points more than history, yet they are valuable sources (when you keep that in mind). It's a feature of the genre, actually.

I'm not saying one can exclude Hebrew tradition. But a great deal is obviously to be learned from examining the Gospels as Greek literature written in a Greek literary tradition. Mythicists tend to ignore this - I imagine few of them can read Greek in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Yup, Carrier and Price have to be the only ones making an effort to do that.

However, if you read the Price link, he makes no mention of other Greek literature, instead resorting to anachronistic diversions. Carrier just barely does, but fails to make the connection to e.g. Plutarch's lives, instead he refers back to pre-Hellenistic times, which is just silly.
 
Last edited:
Yup, Carrier and Price have to be the only ones making an effort to do that.


Quite a bold claim. Doherty also touches on the problem of genre, saying that the "entire genre of wisdom collections of the time [was] a genre which the earliest layer of Q belonged to." It is his contention that Luke and Matthew hung biographical details on an earlier document which certainly could not be characterized as biography, both of them borrowing heavily from Mark.

As to Mark itself, it isn't too difficult to find a mythicist friendly treatment of that one: https://www.facebook.com/MythicistMKE/posts/1429299583829509

Haven't read MacDonald yet, but he surely isn't a lightweight in the field, and definitely cares about genre.
 
Quite a bold claim. Doherty also touches on the problem of genre, saying that the "entire genre of wisdom collections of the time [was] a genre which the earliest layer of Q belonged to." It is his contention that Luke and Matthew hung biographical details on an earlier document which certainly could not be characterized as biography, both of them borrowing heavily from Mark.

As to Mark itself, it isn't too difficult to find a mythicist friendly treatment of that one: https://www.facebook.com/MythicistMKE/posts/1429299583829509

Haven't read MacDonald yet, but he surely isn't a lightweight in the field, and definitely cares about genre.

Odyssey and the Illiad? Rather than contemporary Greek literature? Are you really bringing up this as an example of serious genre analysis?

"In his death and burial, Jesus emulates Hector, although unlike Hector Jesus leaves his tomb empty. Mark’s minor characters, too, recall Homeric predecessors: Bartimaeus emulates Tiresias; Joseph of Arimathea, Priam; and the women at the tomb, Helen, Hecuba, and Andromache."

Seriously? This reeks of just-so story pseudohistory. I'm sure the author has a very vivid imagination. The Odyssey and Illiad influenced probably ALL Greek literature. What's interesting is how the gospels compare to Greek literature written around the time they were composed. Any summary of a remotely serious analysis would mention this.
 
Last edited:
What's interesting is how the gospels compare to Greek literature written around the time they were composed. Any summary of a remotely serious analysis would mention this.


There may be some reason to expect the authors of the gospels to focus solely on Greek literature written around the time the gospels were composed, but you have not mentioned what that reason might be.

Personally, I would not expect a highly syncretic nascent religious movement willing to blend Hebrew monotheism with Greek cultural elements (in the process creating something surprisingly new) to play by such a conservative set of rules. The presence of obviously midrashic retellings of stories from the Torah certainly militates against the hypothesis that the authors felt constrained to the Greek biographical format.
 
Matthew 28 1After the sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene went to see the tomb. 2And Jesus said, "Is she with you?" 3And Batman said, "I thought she was with you."
 
There may be some reason to expect the authors of the gospels to focus solely on Greek literature written around the time the gospels were composed, but you have not mentioned what that reason might be.

Personally, I would not expect a highly syncretic nascent religious movement willing to blend Hebrew monotheism with Greek cultural elements (in the process creating something surprisingly new) to play by such a conservative set of rules. The presence of obviously midrashic retellings of stories from the Torah certainly militates against the hypothesis that the authors felt constrained to the Greek biographical format.

The gospels were written by culturally Greek people. In Greek. I don't know where you grt "solely" from, but it's blindingly obvious that contemporary literature is more relevant than the Illiad.

You are making things up and putting them in my mouth. I NEVER said that Greek biographies were the ONLY relevant comparison, only that thwy are conspicuous in their abscence in these crackpot theories. I get that it's difficult to have it pointed out that your hero-Authors dance around an incredibly obvious comparison just because it happens to undermine their point, but that doesn't make it okay.
 
When those people read the epistle indicating that the gospel was "first for the Jew, then for the Greek" did they identify with the latter group rather than the former?

You realize that Paul is the 'Apostle to the Gentiles" and that you are grossly abusing that quote, right? And that not all gospel authors were Jews?

Not that I'm surprised - ignorant nonsense typical of mythicist crackpots.
 
You realize that Paul is the 'Apostle to the Gentiles" and that you are grossly abusing that quote, right? And that not all gospel authors were Jews?

Not that I'm surprised - ignorant nonsense typical of mythicist crackpots.

Resorting to smears of "ignorant nonsense" really helps your case. I defer to your clearly superior wisdom in all matters henceforth.
 
When those people read the epistle indicating that the gospel was "first for the Jew, then for the Greek" did they identify with the latter group rather than the former?


Huh? When the people who wrote the gospels read a letter about the gospels they had yet to write?

What are you asking?
 
The gospel predates the gospels, just as events predate the news.

Your point here being? Many of Mark's narratives are obviously "framing" source material that appears to consist mostly of quotations in order to explain them. It looks a lot like a pedagogical collection and contextualizing of source material in the form of quotes and basic narratives of key events.

The most important thing here is that there is no contradiction between Mark not being concerned with the factuality of every event relayed, while at the same time understanding himself to be communicating a moral/spiritual truth about a real person. This is instead entirely in the spirit of Greek literature.
 
Back
Top Bottom