Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#141  Postby kyrani99 » Mar 14, 2016 9:28 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
kyrani99 wrote:I believe that Jesus was a historical figure, a prophet, for two reasons:-
1. some of the statements he made require great insight, eg "the kingdom of heaven is within you",
2. Mohammed talked about Jesus and did not believe that he was crucified.


Do you imagine that you're actually deducing something, here? The bible already tells you that Jesus is a person of great insight and that he said those things. Your statement (1) amounts to saying you believe what the bible tells you, and maybe because the bible tells you that it is telling the truth.

Your statement (2) doesn't allow you to deduce anything, either. Mohammed might merely be repeating stories he's heard.

If you want to believe Jesus is a historical figure on the basis of this kind of 'reasoning', you might as well say you believe it because that's what you want to believe. Maybe you could make an argument; you just haven't done any more than rationalize it to yourself, so far. This gives off a whiff of expediency.


You can see the answer I gave to dejuror.
I DO NOT have confidence in Jesus as a historical figure "because of the Bible".
I would say comfortably 85% of the NT is fiction and a lot of it, whether it was intended that way or not, does harm. And another 10% of it has no real value. That leaves about 5% and maybe I am being optimistic to say even that, is valuable. Some of the words and teaching of Jesus point directly at Truth.

You should consider that a theist, a true theist, not someone parading as a theist (I have seen plenty of them out to deceive others and try to lay down the letter of the law to hurt others).. a true theist does not believe because of reason. They believe because of direct spiritual evidence. They can't explain it but so what? The enlightenment experience, even when fleeting, brings knowledge, but it is not the sort of knowledge that you can discuss intellectually. That is why there are koans, myths, parables and various other metaphors. They are all statements that to point to Truth, but which cannot be understood by the rational mind. Thus they read things that strike a chord with them.

For instance in discussion of the teachings of St Thomas you see theologians and academics try to use logic.
for example
J. D. Crossan, a scholar in contemporary historical Jesus research, writes:
"The six uses [of 'let him hear'] in Thomas have the double 'hear' in Gos. Thom. 8, 21 (as in Mark and Luke), but the single 'hear' in 24, 63, 65, 96 (as in Matthew). It is used mostly to conclude parables (8, 21, 63, 65, 96), but once to introduce an aphorism (24). Since Coptic has no participle, the opening is the equivalent of the Greek relatival format." (In Fragments, p. 70)


IMO and from my own spiritual experience, I can say to you that this intellectual reasoning does not lead to spiritual understanding. You do not gain anything meaningful from such reasoning. It is an attempt to apply logic and attempt to understand using reason but this is futile because the statements that point to Truth cannot be deciphered using logic and reason. They can only be understood through direct experience, enlightenment experience.

Unfortunately we surmise that if there is something true in a book then the rest might be true too. And if we see a fault in a book then we begin to doubt the rest as well. This is faulty reasoning. There can be a grain of truth in a book, in amongst a load of trash. There can also be faults in a book of facts.
It is a case of having the insight to recognize the gem in amongst the garbage and the garbage in the pot of gold.
For a patient to heal the shaman uses any device, which will alter the patient's belief about reality.
User avatar
kyrani99
Banned Troll
 
Name: Kyrani Eade
Posts: 965
Female

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#142  Postby Cito di Pense » Mar 15, 2016 2:37 am

kyrani99 wrote:I would say comfortably 85% of the NT is fiction and a lot of it, whether it was intended that way or not, does harm. And another 10% of it has no real value. That leaves about 5% and maybe I am being optimistic to say even that, is valuable. Some of the words and teaching of Jesus point directly at Truth.


You don't have any means to say how you know this with such precision. It's classic cherry-picking. The parts that are true are the parts that sound good to you. If you say it's because it sounds good to someone else, well, they like different parts than you do. "Jesus said...." is an invention by the writers who wrote "Jesus said...." It doesn't matter who said whatever you like to see said. You just like it. You should try writing down all the specific parts that you particularly like and storing it away for a few years. When you look at it again, you'll like something else.

kyrani99 wrote:J. D. Crossan, a scholar in contemporary historical Jesus research, writes:


Well, there you go. Now you have somebody else to quote, as well. Well done, you. Do you understand the credentialling system used by the official set of "scholars of contemporary historical Jesus research"? They're people who went to seminary school and then failed to pursue their careers in the church, as such.

You've a very long road ahead of you to show that the parts you like are identified by everyone, and you're left citing some other authority as the source of your confidence. Why are you playing this game in public? Why do you cling to [i]any of it as sayings of a particular individual? You find your profundities anywhere you find your profundities, which is what makes your exercise so entirely subjective. Is this your first time defending your beliefs in public? If so, you can be forgiven the level of naiveté exposed here.

kyrani99 wrote:it is not the sort of knowledge that you can discuss intellectually. That is why there are koans, myths, parables and various other metaphors. They are all statements that to point to Truth, but which cannot be understood by the rational mind. Thus they read things that strike a chord with them.


Then why are you parading your beliefs as if they were derived rationally? I don't want to know what you believe, and yet here you are, setting it all down in a public forum. It's not that writing down your beliefs is intrinsically offensive; it's more that it's such a trivially easy thing to do. It's a five-finger exercise for a computer keyboard. Try playing music, instead, which is a lot more difficult. It's the degree of difficulty that impresses me when you claim to have worked something out.

kyrani99 wrote:
It is a case of having the insight to recognize the gem in amongst the garbage and the garbage in the pot of gold.


Sure it is. And you know it and show it by agreeing with Crossan?
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Amir Bagatelle
Posts: 28347
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#143  Postby dejuror » Mar 15, 2016 4:03 am

kyrani99 wrote:
As far as Jesus the prophet is concerned, I am giving you evidence.


You cannot give me evidence when there is none.

kyrani99 wrote:
Some of the words /teachings of Jesus haven't been tampered with. I would say most probably because those that sought to corrupt and exploit his teachings have no idea what they mean. A person who has had enlightenment experience, even if not very deep, would recognize them. They would realize that they could only have been uttered by someone with deep enlightenment, i.e., a prophet. So those words and teachings are evidence that Jesus or some prophet, what ever his name was,( eg the Gnostics have talked about a "Teacher of Righteousness"), existed.


What words of Jesus are you talking about?

Christian writings state their Jesus was born of a ghost.

In addition, the Teacher of Righteousness is a figure of Faith [Fiction].

kyrani99 wrote:
It is like for instance, say a great mathematician was supposed to have lived but there is no historical evidence. Some of the things the mathematician had said were written down. No one at the time understood what they meant but later on reviewing them by others, who are mathematicians recognize the incredible theories and proofs. Those theories and proofs indicate that a mathematician must have existed.


It is illogical to assume Jesus existed because mathematicians existed.

Your assumptions are not evidence.

kyrani99 wrote:
The other evidence is the recognition of Jesus, partly from his work/ teachings, but more so because there is a spiritual connection between those that are enlightened, and very strongly by those that are deeply enlightened, i.e., by another prophet. So Mohammad's recognition/ confirmation is evidence. Likewise, there are things that Mohammad said that again could only have been said by a prophet. These are statements that point directly to the Oneness. They are evidence.


Your claim about Mohammad is irrelevant and is not historical evidence of Jesus.

Mohammad was not a 1st century contemporary.

You must know that it is claimed Mohammad had a spiritual connection with God.

Your response is evidence that those who argue for an historical Jesus are in denial---you never ever had any historical evidence for Jesus and cannot or is unable to admit it.
dejuror
 
Posts: 4711

Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#144  Postby kyrani99 » Mar 15, 2016 6:11 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
kyrani99 wrote:I would say comfortably 85% of the NT is fiction and a lot of it, whether it was intended that way or not, does harm. And another 10% of it has no real value. That leaves about 5% and maybe I am being optimistic to say even that, is valuable. Some of the words and teaching of Jesus point directly at Truth.


You don't have any means to say how you know this with such precision. It's classic cherry-picking. The parts that are true are the parts that sound good to you. If you say it's because it sounds good to someone else, well, they like different parts than you do. "Jesus said...." is an invention by the writers who wrote "Jesus said...." It doesn't matter who said whatever you like to see said. You just like it. You should try writing down all the specific parts that you particularly like and storing it away for a few years. When you look at it again, you'll like something else.


I am not talking about "sounds good" or "whatever you like", I am talking about what holds true spiritually.
Problem that you have is that you see rational argument and logic as the ONLY way to truth. This is not the case.

kyrani99 wrote:J. D. Crossan, a scholar in contemporary historical Jesus research, writes:


Cito di Pense wrote:Well, there you go. Now you have somebody else to quote, as well. Well done, you. Do you understand the credentialling system used by the official set of "scholars of contemporary historical Jesus research"? They're people who went to seminary school and then failed to pursue their careers in the church, as such.

You've a very long road ahead of you to show that the parts you like are identified by everyone, and you're left citing some other authority as the source of your confidence. Why are you playing this game in public? Why do you cling to [i]any of it as sayings of a particular individual? You find your profundities anywhere you find your profundities, which is what makes your exercise so entirely subjective. Is this your first time defending your beliefs in public? If so, you can be forgiven the level of naiveté exposed here.

And you know it and show it by agreeing with Crossan?


Who's agreed with Crossan? I used him as an example of how rational thinking with respect to religion does NOT arrive at meaning. You can't use logic and reason. The truth is found through direct spiritual experience.

Cito di Pense wrote:
kyrani99 wrote:it is not the sort of knowledge that you can discuss intellectually. That is why there are koans, myths, parables and various other metaphors. They are all statements that to point to Truth, but which cannot be understood by the rational mind. Thus they read things that strike a chord with them.


Then why are you parading your beliefs as if they were derived rationally? I don't want to know what you believe, and yet here you are, setting it all down in a public forum. It's not that writing down your beliefs is intrinsically offensive; it's more that it's such a trivially easy thing to do. It's a five-finger exercise for a computer keyboard. Try playing music, instead, which is a lot more difficult. It's the degree of difficulty that impresses me when you claim to have worked something out.


I thought this was a debate about whether Jesus was a historical figure or not. I have said NOTHING about "my beliefs".
I am simply pointing out that there is evidence that can be found outside of reason.
For a patient to heal the shaman uses any device, which will alter the patient's belief about reality.
User avatar
kyrani99
Banned Troll
 
Name: Kyrani Eade
Posts: 965
Female

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#145  Postby Blip » Mar 28, 2016 8:33 am


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
A new thread, 'Can personal experience be evidence of the paranormal?', has been created here from posts in this thread.

Please let me know if you spot any posts that should be back here.
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 20421
Female

Country: United Kingdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#146  Postby Arnold Layne » Mar 28, 2016 9:30 am

Cheers, Blip.

Good idea! :thumbup:
I'm a Pixiist
User avatar
Arnold Layne
 
Posts: 2711

Country: France
France (fr)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#147  Postby chairman bill » Jul 15, 2017 8:19 am

Sorry to be reviving a zombie thread about Christianity, in particular, because more than 3 days have passed ...

This might be of interest to some - Christian Mythology – I Beg to Differ with C.S. Lewis
https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com/2015/09/05/christian-mythology-i-beg-to-differ-with-c-s-lewis/
Socialists: winning the fight against people-hating fascists of the right & (alleged) centre.
User avatar
chairman bill
RS Donator
 
Posts: 28091
Male

Country: UK: fucked since 2010
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#148  Postby proudfootz » Jul 15, 2017 2:29 pm

I liked Lewis as a stylist when I was young.

Never could abide his fiction, though.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10714

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#149  Postby DavidMcC » Jul 29, 2017 12:10 pm

dejuror wrote:
Nicko wrote:
Animavore wrote:The real life Jesus of the likes of Ehrman is far more cohesive than the usual myther Jesus which usually relies on some conspiracy. Or they say Apollo and Zeus aren't real, why Jesus? But Jesus doesn't do anything too spectacular and most of his miracles are of the type claimed and believed by contemporary cult leaders today. Add in a When Prophecy Fails-type scenario and you have yourself a plausible story.

Richard Carrier has some plausible scenarios too, but who really knows? I can't agree mythers are denialists like creationists. Even if some of their rather elaborate theories are a bit of a stretch. I don't think history is subject to Occam's razor in the same way as science.


I'm slightly familiar with Carrier's view on this topic.

I agree that it seems unreasonable that, given all the "sons of God" who died and were resurrected that were floating about in the local mythology only to be Euhemerised at a later date, we should simply believe that Jesus is the one who actually existed.


Which Jesus actually existed?

The one in the NT?

Jesus of Nazareth in the NT was born of a Ghost and was God Creator.

There is NO other Jesus of Nazareth who is documented to have ACTUALLY existed by any contemporary writer of antiquity.

HJers are in DENIAL.

They argue that their Jesus was an OBSCURE character while using Tacitus Annals 15.44

Tacitus Annals does not mention or identified any OBSCURE character called Jesus of Nazareth.

HJers MUST be denialists.

THEIR HJ is undocumented in and out the Christian Bible.

I hardly think that the fairy tale that HJ was "born of a ghost" constitutes a valid argument against the existence of HJ. Rather, it is a reflection of the religiosity of the local people in Palestine at the time.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 65
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#150  Postby DavidMcC » Jul 29, 2017 12:14 pm

Given the circumstances of the Palestinian Jews during the Roman occupation of their country, when the authorities decided to levy extra taxes on the people, to pay for a new Roman temple, in Tiberius, it is hardly surprising that they should look for a saviour.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 65
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is Jesus mythicism "denialism"?

#151  Postby Leucius Charinus » Aug 01, 2017 10:51 am

DavidMcC wrote:Given the circumstances of the Palestinian Jews during the Roman occupation of their country, when the authorities decided to levy extra taxes on the people, to pay for a new Roman temple, in Tiberius, it is hardly surprising that they should look for a saviour.


Before or after a tax agent?
"It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Christians is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. "

Emperor Julian (362 CE)
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
 
Posts: 809

Print view this post

Previous

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest