Carrier v. Litwa: What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: Carrier v. Litwa: What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?

Post by schillingklaus »

If Carrier hates the biblical god or any other god whatsoever, he cannot be deemed atheist; for atheism requires the denial of the existence of any god whatsoever.
dbz
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2021 9:48 am

Re: Carrier v. Litwa: What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?

Post by dbz »

Adair, Aaron (5 November 2022). "Litwa Carrier Bible Christ". Fleeing Nergal, Seeking Stars.
At one point in the discussion Adair talks about how celestial mythicism offers a strong explanation of the ”twin traditions” of Jesus in the first centuries BCE and CE whereas historicism does not have a good one.
[...]
Mythicism
  1. Does not theorize the author believed anything more than what he said (no theorized qualification of Revelation 12 as non-literal).
  2. Does not theorize the author believed Jesus was crucified literally in another earthly location.
  3. Does not theorize that Paul meant the “archons of the eon” worked through human agents; only that, just as Paul stated, he believed to be the “archons of the eon” who killed Jesus.
  4. Can explain and perhaps even predicts contradictory earth narratives in which the earthly killers really represent Satan.
Historicism
  1. Theorizes the author meant 12:1-5 nonliterally.
  2. Theorizes that the author believed literally in a crucifixion in Jerusalem.
  3. Must theorize Paul knew about Pilate and believed he was at least indirectly responsible for Christ’s death.
  4. There is great difficulty in imagining any explanation of contradictory earth narratives, at least two separate hypotheses must be conceived for the context change to 100 BC and the central detail change of Pilate being replaced by Herod; whereas mythicism already accounts for both.
Ask yourself which of these hypotheses is least speculative explanation of the data.
Covington, Nicholas (10 November 2022). "Aaron Adair Debates Mythicism on Gnostic Informant". Hume's Apprentice.
• "About The Jesus Mythicism Controversy | Aaron Adair PhD". YouTube. Gnostic Informant. 8 November 2022.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Carrier v. Litwa: What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?

Post by ABuddhist »

schillingklaus wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 6:08 am If Carrier hates the biblical god or any other god whatsoever, he cannot be deemed atheist; for atheism requires the denial of the existence of any god whatsoever.
With all due respect, it is possible to hate fictional characters because of their abhorrent traits.
dbz
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2021 9:48 am

Re: Carrier v. Litwa: What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?

Post by dbz »

ABuddhist wrote: Fri Nov 25, 2022 6:42 pm With all due respect, it is possible to hate fictional characters because of their abhorrent traits.
For moi, it would be "Big Brother" the character and symbol in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell :notworthy:

off topic FYI:
Post Reply