What this thread clearly shows is how futile a quest for the historical Jesus really is. Human beings don't need facts in order to build their strong opinions. This is myth-building in action. At least we know the person in the center of the myth really exists this time. Most probably at least .Kapyong wrote:That's twice you've dodged what I asked you.
The subject here is not Carrier's arrogance.
I asked you, and I repeat,
Please provide an example where Carrier made
"statements of fact that are unguarded, undocumented or outright misstatements of fact".
Twice at least you have made claims about Carrier, and failed to back them up.
Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:44 am
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
You mean John T?Ulan wrote:the person in the center of the myth really exists this time.
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
Thor wrote:.
Praeparatio Evangelica ... [?]
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/index ... _Gospel%29
Here Eusebius argues the physical improbabilities of Greek beliefs. Take note of the father and the son being one and the same, a concept or idea promoted by shamelessness of those who hold such beliefs.For how could the same person be both father and son, Asclepius and Apollo at once? And how could he be changed again into Heracles, since Heracles has been acknowledged by them to be the son of a mortal woman Alcmena? And how could the sun go mad and slay his own sons, seeing that this also has been ascribed to Heracles?
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/euseb ... _book3.htm - CHAPTER XIII
MrMacSon wrote:This is quite interesting b/c it aligns with first of the Aristotlean "Three Laws of Thought" - a (post-Plato) philosophy of logic seemingly lost for the last couple of millennia.
I don't think Eusebius was making a claim in asking that question.Leucius Charinus wrote:Mac could you please elaborate on these Aristotlean "Three Laws of Thought", and how they align with Eusebius' propaganda, and especially in his claim that "how could the same person be both father and son, Asclepius and Apollo at once?". Much obliged.
I wasn't promoting "Euesebius propaganda".
Probably more than one of the 3 laws of thought apply - See
- Leucius Charinus
- Posts: 2834
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
- Location: memoriae damnatio
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
Thanks Mac.MrMacSon wrote: Probably more than one of the 3 laws of thought apply - See
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
The mythicists demand I provide proof and then when I do using cut&paste of Carrier's own words they just ignore it.Ulan wrote:What this thread clearly shows is how futile a quest for the historical Jesus really is. Human beings don't need facts in order to build their strong opinions. This is myth-building in action. At least we know the person in the center of the myth really exists this time. Most probably at least .Kapyong wrote:That's twice you've dodged what I asked you.
The subject here is not Carrier's arrogance.
I asked you, and I repeat,
Please provide an example where Carrier made
"statements of fact that are unguarded, undocumented or outright misstatements of fact".
Twice at least you have made claims about Carrier, and failed to back them up.
Thanks for proving my point about about cognitive dissonance.
Cognitive Dissonance: Rejection of the information that is inconsistent with one's beliefs.
Now to demonstrate further the effects of CD, once again I ask they provide a cut&paste of Carrier proving that Ehrman got Carrier's ideology/theory wrong and then let's compare and contrast to see who can be more trusted to write the truth, Carrier or Ehrman.
Of course one of the ways to avoid the truth besides ignoring the truth is to attack the messenger.
What is the harm in pursuing the truth?
Because the truth will set you free and CD does not want to be set free.
John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift
-
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:07 am
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
Thanks for the link.
I randomly scrolled forward to a part where Carrier was speaking and clicked on it to see if he is still doing the same ole same ole.
The answer is yes.
@the 31 minute mark, Carrier claims that Jesus is based on traditional pagan myths because in all of the epistles of Paul that were cited in the debate, Paul never says Jesus was an earthly figure. That all of the things Paul said about Jesus, took place in the heavenly realm but not on earth.
There is no historical and/or earthly Jesus in the writings of Paul.
Carrier's wacko mythicist theory is so easily dis-proven you have to wonder what type of people still believe he can be trusted to write the truth?
Galatians 3:1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before you eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified!
Paul may not have seen the actual crucifixion of Jesus but he knows people in Galatia who did, Peter and James the Just the brother of Jesus are two other examples.
Carrier is beyond the status of a crank exegesis.
Ehrman addresses that same canard in "Did Jesus Exist?".
Hey, maybe Carrier is just trying to fleece the mythicist crowd just like the fundamentalist pastors do to their flock? It can be a very prosperous business model if you don't have any moral ethics.
Also, I could be wrong because I took just one small snippet out of the long debate and perhaps Carrier has some factual arguments. If there are any, please tell me were I can find them.
Thanks in advance,
John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
Could you please name the bible where you found this version of the passage?John T wrote:
Galatians 3:1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before you eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified!
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
That's the NRSV version.Thor wrote:Could you please name the bible where you found this version of the passage?John T wrote: Galatians 3:1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before you eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified!
Re: Can Richard Carrier be trusted to write the truth?
Yes that is correct it comes from the New Revised Standard Version.Ulan wrote:That's the NRSV version.Thor wrote:Could you please name the bible where you found this version of the passage?John T wrote: Galatians 3:1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before you eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified!
The mythicists don't like the phrase "publicly exhibited" because it goes against their religious belief that Jesus wasn't real, so they mark it up to be taken down by translating it another way, so as not to allow the view that Jesus was a real person crucified before the public.
Paul never meet the earthly Jesus but he knew people who did. Paul said he was not lying when he spent 15 days with Cephas (Peter) and meet James the Lord's brother in Jerusalem. Gal: 1:18-20
Peter also preached the gospel in Antioch and I have little doubt there were people still alive at the church of Galatia/Antioch that witnessed the Pentecost along with Peter.
Paul and Peter had a long on going argument over the requirement of circumcision and it seemed that wherever Paul went, authorities from James the Just (the brother of Jesus) would soon follow and tell them they must be circumcised to be saved.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift