Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Davros of Skaro

Did Jesus Exist Debate: Carrier VS MacDonald

503 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

jmccr8
13 minutes ago, Will Do said:

 

Yes. You just defined the story of revelation.

One revelation expands on the revelation that came before.

It's as natural as the flow of a river is to its riverbed.

 

 

Hi Will

My revelation was that a story is a story.

jmccr8

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
25 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will

My revelation was that a story is a story.

jmccr8

 

I understand Jay. 

 

25 minutes ago, Davros of Skaro said:

Does that mean that the Koran, and the Mormon Bible are legit revelations?

 

Some revelations are better than others. 

Whether a revelation are words in a book or in how a particular person lives their life, there's always a stipulation that occurs when a revelation is encountered and that is that one has to look at each revelation only, for those teachings that are eternally true. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
3 minutes ago, Will Do said:

 

I understand Jay. 

 

 

Some revelations are better than others. 

Whether a revelation are words in a book or in how a particular person lives their life, there's always a stipulation that occurs when a revelation is encountered and that is that one has to look at each revelation only, for those teachings that are eternally true. 

 

 

Hi Will 

Thanks.:tu:

As for your response to Davros how is that any different than I am marching to the song I wrote?

jccr8

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Davros of Skaro
5 minutes ago, Will Do said:

Some revelations are better than others. 

Whether a revelation are words in a book or in how a particular person lives their life, there's always a stipulation that occurs when a revelation is encountered and that is that one has to look at each revelation only, for those teachings that are eternally true. 

So just just cherry pick the the Islamic, and Mormon revelations?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
15 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will 

Thanks.:tu:

As for your response to Davros how is that any different than I am marching to the song I wrote?

jccr8

 

I think we all have to write our own songs. I mean it gets old after a while, singing someone else's song. But it is good training.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
1 hour ago, Davros of Skaro said:

So just just cherry pick the the Islamic, and Mormon revelations?

 

I wouldn't say that it's something random though. Picking cherries just for the sake of picking something without considering their truthfulness. 

Those teachings that every revelation has, have to be assessed whether or not they should be ignored or be appreciated for their universal truth.

 

 

Edited by Will Do
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Davros of Skaro
32 minutes ago, Will Do said:

I wouldn't say that it's something random though. Picking cherries just for the sake of picking something without considering their truthfulness. 

Those teachings that every revelation has, have to be assessed whether or not they should be ignored or be appreciated for their universal truth.

You should call Truth Wanted. They are seeking truth. The number is right there.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
54 minutes ago, Will Do said:

 

I think we all have to write our own songs. I mean it gets old after a while, singing someone else's song. But it is good training.

 

 

Hi Will

A lot of music is about how someone(not the singer) wrecked their truck, lost their girlfriend, married their cow, whatever and some of it is produced to sell and the musicians adapt and produce at beat everyone moves to whether they care or even understand the words they sing for their money.

jmccr8

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
39 minutes ago, Will Do said:

I wouldn't say that it's something random though. Picking cherries just for the sake of picking something without considering their truthfulness. 

Hi Will

One should consider that not all cherry pickers are equal or defined as of yet. Fist you have the low hanging cherry  pickers and then there are those that like the sweet freshly dropped cherry on the ground type and then there are those that climb the tree to get the top most cherries and others that wait for you to gather your cherries so they can rob you. And in the end they are all cherries.:D

jmccr8

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
7 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will

A lot of music is about how someone(not the singer) wrecked their truck, lost their girlfriend, married their cow, whatever and some of it is produced to sell and the musicians adapt and produce at beat everyone moves to whether they care or even understand the words they sing for their money.

jmccr8

 

True.

And then there are other musicians who build themselves elaborate recording studios, write elaborate orchestrations, and perform their songs for free. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will

One should consider that not all cherry pickers are equal or defined as of yet. Fist you have the low hanging cherry  pickers and then there are those that like the sweet freshly dropped cherry on the ground type and then there are those that climb the tree to get the top most cherries and others that wait for you to gather your cherries so they can rob you. And in the end they are all cherries.:D

jmccr8

 

Yeah but there's a catch.

Have they learned from the teachings how to bake a pie using them there cherries? :D

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
45 minutes ago, Will Do said:

 

True.

And then there are other musicians who build themselves elaborate recording studios, write elaborate orchestrations, and perform their songs for free. 

 

 

Hi Will

Wasn't a good year last year and this year doesn't look good for public events was going to  try and do a couple in the core area last year but the way with covid  masks and distancing so might have to wait till next year to do much depending on how the vaccine works. works.

jmccr8

Edited by jmccr8
it ain't rite but it better than it was
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
3 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will

Wasn't a good year last year and this year doesn't look good for public events was going to  try and do a couple in the core area last year but o way with covid so Might have to wait till next year to do much depending on how the vaccine works. works.

jmccr8

 

I hear ya bro. Life kinda sucks right now.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
5 minutes ago, Will Do said:

 

Yeah but there's a catch.

Have they learned from the teachings how to bake a pie using them there cherries? :D

 

 

Hi Will

Good question did humans create cherry pie by themselves or did alien chefs come here and teach us how to make angel food cake?

jmccr8

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will

Good question did humans create cherry pie by themselves or did alien chefs come here and teach us how to make angel food cake?

jmccr8

 

You know me. I'll go with aliens did it. :D

 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
1 minute ago, Will Do said:

 

I hear ya bro. Life kinda sucks right now.

 

 

**** happens and we roll with it.

jmccr8

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

**** happens and we roll with it.

 

I forgot to mention how bad life really sucks right now. A lifelong buddy of mine died Monday. He was healthy but the vid took him any way. :angry:

 

 

  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
1 minute ago, Will Do said:

 

I forgot to mention how bad life really sucks right now. A lifelong buddy of mine died Monday. He was healthy but the vid took him any way. :angry:

 

 

Hi Will

Sorry to hear that but hope you stay focused on your life and that of your family and friends.

jmccr8

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
23 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

ps

Quite a few of the mythicists claim that no such person ever existed, and that his teachings were a deliberate construction from an amalgam of earlier mythologies, by people who wanted to gain control over other people,  and basically invented a new religion, and the person who was   its origin

It is these people whom  "the   guild"  holds the greatest of their disdain/contempt for 

Just to tie off the postscript, in any group as large and as broadly defined as those who express some degree of Jesus skepticism, there is bound to be considerable variation among them in what they specifically believe about Christian origins, their scholarly rigor or even whether they participate in scholarship at all.

Recall that poll of English adults a few years ago (talking Jesus is searchable, ... doesn't the name sound like a child's doll or action figure?). About 20% of a representative sample of English adults said that Jesus having been 'a fictional or mythological character' better described their view than that he was 'a real person who actually lived.' That poll result supports an estimate of several million people in England alone who express Jesus skepticism. They can't all be equally contemptible.

Further, some high-profile Jesus skeptics hold others within the same community in contempt. E.g. Richard Carrier had little respect for Acharya S. Many living skeptics view long-ago skeptical figures like Kersey Graves as having been comically mistaken. So what, then, if the guild, too, harbors contempt for some skeptics?

(Seriously, you don't need scare quoutes/inverted commas around the guild. Really - they call themselves the guild; there is no disprespect, the rest of us are only following suit.)

 

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
On 1/15/2021 at 10:53 PM, Will Do said:

 

I forgot to mention how bad life really sucks right now. A lifelong buddy of mine died Monday. He was healthy but the vid took him any way. :angry:

 

 

I am so sorry for your loss, Will. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 1/17/2021 at 11:23 AM, eight bits said:

Just to tie off the postscript, in any group as large and as broadly defined as those who express some degree of Jesus skepticism, there is bound to be considerable variation among them in what they specifically believe about Christian origins, their scholarly rigor or even whether they participate in scholarship at all.

Recall that poll of English adults a few years ago (talking Jesus is searchable, ... doesn't the name sound like a child's doll or action figure?). About 20% of a representative sample of English adults said that Jesus having been 'a fictional or mythological character' better described their view than that he was 'a real person who actually lived.' That poll result supports an estimate of several million people in England alone who express Jesus skepticism. They can't all be equally contemptible.

Further, some high-profile Jesus skeptics hold others within the same community in contempt. E.g. Richard Carrier had little respect for Acharya S. Many living skeptics view long-ago skeptical figures like Kersey Graves as having been comically mistaken. So what, then, if the guild, too, harbors contempt for some skeptics?

(Seriously, you don't need scare quoutes/inverted commas around the guild. Really - they call themselves the guild; there is no disprespect, the rest of us are only following suit.)

 

You use  "the guild"  in a derogatory tone  The commas were to show i dont agree with your thoughts on the guild, although I understand and respect your  opinion.

I've read a figure higher than that for Poms :) who dont believe that Christ was an historical figure.

quote

But, the Church of England survey found that four in 10 people did not believe Jesus was a real person, with a quarter of 18 to 34 year olds believing he was a mythical or fictional character.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34686993  2015

Two caveats 

What was the definition of  "Historical figure" used, and how was it interpreted by the respondents 

eg did the y assume that the form of Christ as a divine figure was integral to his historical existence ?  

and second, public opinion is not expert opinion, for very good reasons  :) 

quote 

Saying Jesus never existed is “the historical equivalent of being an anti-vaxxer or denying the moon landing”, says author and historian John Dickson.

Dickson is hoping his new book Is Jesus History?, which is available from today, might speak to those who are sceptical about whether there’s much substantial evidence or historical scholarship around the figure of Jesus.

“The nutty claim that Jesus never lived drives me crazy,” he told Eternity. “In historical scholarship it really isn’t a serious contention. And yet there was one survey that found something like 11 per cent of Australians thought that Jesus had never lived. That just blows my mind.”

https://www.eternitynews.com.au/australia/dont-believe-jesus-ever-existed-scholars-of-history-would-seriously-disagree/  2019

http://www.johndickson.org/bio

 

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

You use  "the guild"  in a derogatory tone  The commas were to show i dont agree with your thoughts on the guild, although I understand and respect your  opinion

You "hear" text?  The guild is the ordinary and usual term for the group. I have a nuanced attitude toward them. It is obvious to anybody who reads my posts that I am a fan of Ian Mills and Laura Robinson, highly respectful of James McGrath (as much as we disagree on some points), and harbor hope that someday Bart Ehrman will come around on the topic of this thread. And as I outed myself the other day, I am a dues paying member of SBL, the guild made flesh here in North America.

8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I've read a figure higher than that for Poms :) who dont believe that Christ was an historical figure.

It could be, whatever kind of critter a Pom is. I cited a poll which I believe was designed and executed well enough to take its results seriously. It also established what, in my opinion, is an especially clear and useful standard for being counted as a Jesus skeptic. Not perfect - I don't count as a Jesus skeptic under that standard, even though I think of myself as one. Surely relatively so among the dues paying members of SBL.

8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

But, the Church of England survey found that four in 10 people did not believe Jesus was a real person, with a quarter of 18 to 34 year olds believing he was a mythical or fictional character.

The BBC article adds the "don't know" respondents with those who express skepticism to arrive at its 40%. That overstates Jesus skepticism, since some of the don't know's are people who simply haven't formed an opinion or wished not to share it.

There was a follow-up question, so that based on the two questions taken together, you could estimate that in round numbers, at least 1 in 3 English adults polled have formed and shared some opinion about a historical Jesus but don't accept "Jesus was a real person who actually lived" as a satisfactory description of their opinion.

The 1 in 5 who expressed overt skepticism directly were enough to make the point I had in mind. I settled for them.

8 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

“the historical equivalent of being an anti-vaxxer or denying the moon landing”, says author and historian John Dickson.

Dickson is hoping his new book 

Why doesn't John Dickson address the question? When scientists confront anti-vaxxers, they present evidence. When historians of science confront moon landing deniers, they present evidence. When John Dickson confronts Jesus sketpics, he calls names.

I didn't bother to look him up.

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
6 hours ago, eight bits said:

You "hear" text?  The guild is the ordinary and usual term for the group. I have a nuanced attitude toward them. It is obvious to anybody who reads my posts that I am a fan of Ian Mills and Laura Robinson, highly respectful of James McGrath (as much as we disagree on some points), and harbor hope that someday Bart Ehrman will come around on the topic of this thread. And as I outed myself the other day, I am a dues paying member of SBL, the guild made flesh here in North America.

It could be, whatever kind of critter a Pom is. I cited a poll which I believe was designed and executed well enough to take its results seriously. It also established what, in my opinion, is an especially clear and useful standard for being counted as a Jesus skeptic. Not perfect - I don't count as a Jesus skeptic under that standard, even though I think of myself as one. Surely relatively so among the dues paying members of SBL.

The BBC article adds the "don't know" respondents with those who express skepticism to arrive at its 40%. That overstates Jesus skepticism, since some of the don't know's are people who simply haven't formed an opinion or wished not to share it.

There was a follow-up question, so that based on the two questions taken together, you could estimate that in round numbers, at least 1 in 3 English adults polled have formed and shared some opinion about a historical Jesus but don't accept "Jesus was a real person who actually lived" as a satisfactory description of their opinion.

The 1 in 5 who expressed overt skepticism directly were enough to make the point I had in mind. I settled for them.

Why doesn't John Dickson address the question? When scientists confront anti-vaxxers, they present evidence. When historians of science confront moon landing deniers, they present evidence. When John Dickson confronts Jesus sketpics, he calls names.

I didn't bother to look him up.

:nw::clap: The last paragraph is an astounding way of explaining the value of evidence in the application  of critical thinking. Well done. 
 

According to my Philosophy professor the way we handle ism’s including Jesusism’s is we use critical thinking. The Guild demonstrates this for me. We look at the whole mess, all of it even the parts we have a hunch that probably won’t make the cut, then we sift through all the crap and bring it down to just the facts and conclude from there. If I missed anything please feel free to refine. 

 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
2 hours ago, Sherapy said:

If I missed anything please feel free to refine. 

Oooh ... I think you pretty well covered it :su

It is a bit strange to compare Jesus skepticism with Holocaust or moon landing denial (to stay with historical topics). The essence of Holocaust or lunar denial is to assert that all of that evidence is faked, and to hold that opinion against not only scholarship, but living and recently living eyewitnesses and abundant physical evidence.

One of these three things is not like the other. Jesus? Ancient history, not recent. No witnesses' statements recorded, not even back then, no physical evidence noted down, not even back then. But what really sticks out: both "sides" in the question of Jesus largely agree with each other about

(1) what the existing evidence is, and
(2) what the specific problems with the evidence are

The difference between us is almost purely a question of personal opinions: the inherent plausibility of the competing hypotheses of Christian origins and the power of the available evidence to distinguish among the leading contenders.

The Holocaust and moon landing events simply cannot be made analogous to this.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
19 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Saying Jesus never existed is “the historical equivalent of being an anti-vaxxer or denying the moon landing”, says author and historian John Dickson.

Searching for this guy leads to a critical bias that was not mentioned in your text :

"John Dickson is an author, speaker, historian, minister and media presenter. He is a public advocate for the Christian faith and is highly regarded for his ability to unpack complex ideas in a straightforward and accessible way for the modern skeptic."

 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.