Litwa on Marcion as ancient Mythicist

[Peter Kirby]

David Litwa should know that he is presenting personal naive speculation

today's biblical studies blur the lines between speculation and research

Do we need a section of "Biblical Criticism & History" for anti-'biblical studies' studies?

[JarekS]

I think we should stick to logic when it comes to questions where biblical criteria do not provide an answer and only leave us with the alternative 0 or 1. The text itself makes it impossible to distinguish historical tradition from invented tradition. The probability of 0 and 1 is the same. Coin toss?
To answer such a question, we need to use criteria outside biblical studies and try to ask ourselves additional, complementary questions. What was Marcion doing with his strange theological views in Rome these few years, where at the same time he was financing the local commune and supplying them with letters and books. And why is his canon still included in our NT canon?
The only answer is that when two people do the same thing and one is better and more effective, the other one can only throw insults at him.
The dominant side usually does not react to the barking of the losers.

[Peter Kirby]

David Litwa should know that he is presenting personal naive speculation

And how do you believe that your own presentation efforts should be summed up?

[RandyHelzerman]

But the Talmud placed Jesus under Janneus. The Jesus lived under Pilate was a myth, according to that Talmudic tradition.

Don't quite follow the reasoning here. The Talmud asserts that Jesus *actually existed*-in our historical spacetime--yet, because they got the dates wrong, they are Mythicists?

If I believed Jesus was born at Christmas, crucified on Good Friday, and raised on Easter morning, I'm a mythicist?

:-\

If Marcion is a mythicist, then surely we are in late-stage, decadent Mythicism. The word "Mythicism" has been stretched to the point that it has lost all meaning, except as an honorific (Horray to our side!) and a shibboleth.

[Peter Kirby]

But the Talmud placed Jesus under Janneus. The Jesus lived under Pilate was a myth, according to that Talmudic tradition.

Don't quite follow the reasoning here. The Talmud asserts that Jesus *actually existed*-in our historical spacetime--yet, because they got the dates wrong, they are Mythicists?

If I believed Jesus was born at Christmas, crucified on Good Friday, and raised on Easter morning, I'm a mythicist?

:-\

If Marcion is a mythicist, then surely we are in late-stage, decadent Mythicism. The word "Mythicism" has been stretched to the point that it has lost all meaning, except as an honorific (Horray to our side!) and a shibboleth.

I've been around these kinds of discussions for a little over 25 years, and you strike me as a very reasonable person.

Acts 17:18 is ostensibly written about some reasonable people, and their putative words are limited:

A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to debate with him. Some of them asked, “What is this babbler trying to say?” Others remarked, “He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.

Metaphorically speaking, you are a philosopher arguing with the zeal of a Saint Paul, on fire for the good news.

[JarekS]

David Litwa, Bart Ehrman and many others appear in two divergent roles. On the one hand, there are professionals who stick to formal rules in publications for OUP, CUP and Brill, and as authors of bedtime stories published in Harper One. Popular science books are simply dishonest in principle. Almost every sentence should start with the words: "it would seem", "some data indicate", "in my humble opinion". But this is not the case because it is difficult to write a book this way.
If Litwa had included the quoted statement in a university publication, the reviewer would have formally ridiculed it, asking a rhetorical question - how does the author know what he is writing?
Nobody argues with me, which I admit with sadness.

[Secret Alias]

If Litwa had included the quoted statement in a university publication, the reviewer would have formally ridiculed it, asking a rhetorical question - how does the author know what he is writing?

We got another one.

[RandyHelzerman]

Metaphorically speaking, you are a philosopher arguing with the zeal of a Saint Paul, on fire for the good news.

*chuckle* Except the wisdom I share isn't just foolishness to this world, its foolishness toot court. As such, I think your remarks were too deep for me; don't quite get what you mean. After I read Lucretius, I did become and Epicurean, tho....

I hope Giuseppe (or anybody else) didn't take offense, it was an honest question, asked in goodwill, and I've had very enjoyable discussions with him in the past. Its just too darn easy to come across wrong in a text-only forum.

[Peter Kirby]

Metaphorically speaking, you are a philosopher arguing with the zeal of a Saint Paul, on fire for the good news.

*chuckle* Except the wisdom I share isn't just foolishness to this world, its foolishness toot court. As such, I think your remarks were too deep for me; don't quite get what you mean. After I read Lucretius, I did become and Epicurean, tho....

I hope Giuseppe (or anybody else) didn't take offense, it was an honest question, asked in goodwill, and I've had very enjoyable discussions with him in the past. Its just too darn easy to come across wrong in a text-only forum.

I'm agreeing with you.

Something I held back on saying but will say now: in my 25+ years of experience, most of the reasonable people get bored of retreading the same points over and over.

[RandyHelzerman]

But the Talmud placed Jesus under Janneus. The Jesus lived under Pilate was a myth, according to that Talmudic tradition.

Let me rephrase.....What is "Mythicism?" I'm trying to think of what Richard Carrier, Marcion, Robert Price, and the Talmud have in common, and its a riddle I just can't solve.