Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by neilgodfrey »

Chris Hansen cites three Chinese sources in his 2020 article in the Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism.
Recent academic mythicist and agnostic works include Yan Changyou, ‘Yesu—chuanshuo zhong de xugou renwu’, Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 2 (1983), pp. 122-28
And rebuttals,
Despite the debate on Jesus’ historicity having resulted in numerous rebuttals to these mythicists and agnostics,5

. . .
5. For the most notable, see Hu Yutang, ‘Lishi shang de Yeshu’, Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 1 (1981), pp. 84-100; . . . . Tang Yi (ed.), Jidujiao shi (Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 1993), p. 25; . . .
Hansen, Christopher M. “Lord Raglan’s Hero and Jesus: A Rebuttal to Methodologically Dubious Uses of the Raglan Archetype.” Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 16 (2020): 129–49. http://jgrchj.net/volume16/JGRChJ16-7_Hansen.pdf

A machine translation of the Tang Yi rebuttal to mythicism:
The "Nazarene" in the "Basilica Scrolls

Since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, historians have made great strides in the study of the history of Palestine before and after the 1st century AD. Historians have gained a deeper and clearer understanding of the troubled Aethinians and have found striking similarities between them and the early Zoroastrian community.

In the 4th century Epiphanes (c. 315-403) mentioned that there was a Jewish sect called Nazarenes in Syria and Balkanistan from the 4th century BC until the 4th century AD. They used the same scriptures as the Essenes and also taught about the salvation of the Messiah and the imminent coming of the end of the world, and that the Nazarenes were probably an offshoot of the Essenes.

In the early part of the 2nd century, some Jewish texts refer to Jesus of Nazareth as a migrant who was active in the area of Judea and Galilee, and who was so numerous and growing so fast that the Jewish leaders were deeply disturbed and regarded them as heretics.

But Jesus of Nazareth was a real figure in history, an "Umbrella Man" who opposed the corrupt life of the Jewish priestly aristocracy,
He became a member of a small sect of Judaism, the Parshallites. >His disciples, out of pious faith, became propagandistically attracted to the Messiah if the Jewish prophets had defined him as a miraculous figure and gradually made him an object of worship - the Yahweh.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

The other references are much longer and an text readable version of each is accessible at

Hu Ytang: Lishi shang de Yeshu

Yan Changyou: Yesu—chuanshuo zhong de xugou renwu

The complete chapter from which I've taken the translated page above is at Jidujiao shi / Tang Yi .
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by Giuseppe »

Unfortunately, Chris removed (for some obscure reason) his useful pdf about old and new mythicists.

What remained from his work is this comment:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionp ... 5085368798

Some names I am unaware of.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by neilgodfrey »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 8:46 pm Unfortunately, Chris removed (for some obscure reason) his useful pdf about old and new mythicists.

What remained from his work is this comment:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionp ... 5085368798

Some names I am unaware of.
Interesting that McGrath protests against Hansen's list on grounds that a justifiable list should include "only historians". He is unaware that historians (Moses Finley and Donald Akenson) have expressed dismay at the invalidity of the methods used by theologians. The same criticism of the so-called "historical methods" of biblical scholars were critiqued by Philip Davies and Thomas Thompson and Neils Peter Lemche. So if we do include only historians, as McGrath insists, then it would seem that theologians must be excluded.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Also interesting, in my view, is how McGrath expands his set of "historians:"
I think that if you limit yourself to historians, including Classicists and those who study ancient religion using the methods of historical inquiry, Rauser's number might still be off, but not by quite so much.
That defines a broad interdisciplinary population. I doubt there would be any reasonable expectation that the subgroup within that population who hold academic credentials from departments with "history" in their names would admire the way those others in the population who don't hold such credentials apply "the methods of historical inquiry."

Although broader than what many people (I think) would describe as historians, the population is also selective among experts who might explore the human past. For example, McGrath, on the page from which the above quote was taken, cites his 2019 essay

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionp ... wrong.html

that discusses the application of probabilistic and posibilistic reasoning to the same questions. Nevertheless, his proposed population of qualified commentators doesn't include experts in probabilistic and possibilistic reasoning. Such expertise isn't rare in the academy. For example, it's easily found in philosophy departments, to stay within the "humanities" umbrella.

Some might imagine with disdain what a real historian would make of McGrath's (and those he admires) claims to use historical methods. I might wonder how his and their claims to use domain-independent epistemological methods might be received among genuine credentialed experts in that field.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by neilgodfrey »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:59 am
Although broader than what many people (I think) would describe as historians, the population is also selective among experts who might explore the human past. For example, McGrath, on the page from which the above quote was taken, cites his 2019 essay

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionp ... wrong.html

that discusses the application of probabilistic and posibilistic reasoning to the same questions. Nevertheless, his proposed population of qualified commentators doesn't include experts in probabilistic and possibilistic reasoning. Such expertise isn't rare in the academy. For example, it's easily found in philosophy departments, to stay within the "humanities" umbrella.

Some might imagine with disdain what a real historian would make of McGrath's (and those he admires) claims to use historical methods. I might wonder how his and their claims to use domain-independent epistemological methods might be received among genuine credentialed experts in that field.
When McGrath (in that linked essay) brackets historical researchers with medical experts then my eyes involuntarily roll and I cannot believe he has ever read a single serious work on the nature of history or the philosophy of history or "what historians do" by anyone in a history department.

Moses I. Finley was among the most influential classicists in the last century and he very politely expressed "dismay" if not quite "disdain" for the methods -- which are still standard among today's biblical scholars -- by which Goguel assessed some historical aspect of Jesus.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by mlinssen »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Jun 16, 2021 8:46 pm Unfortunately, Chris removed (for some obscure reason) his useful pdf about old and new mythicists.

What remained from his work is this comment:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionp ... 5085368798

Some names I am unaware of.
Chris Hansen deleted his entire profile from Academia.edu, about 3 to 6 months ago. Attached the latest version that I have, 9 months old now:
Mythicist_Agnostic_Religion_and_Philosop (2).docx
Mythicist-agnostic Chris Hansen
(65.26 KiB) Downloaded 100 times
Last edited by mlinssen on Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by neilgodfrey »


Someone who has contact with Chris might want to pass on one more scholar to his list. Paul Laffan in his acknowledgements in The Fabricated Christ writes:

I owe an immense debt of gratitude to the late Heikki Räisänen, who read a draft of this book and offered encouragement, criticism, and advice.

Laffan, Paul. The Fabricated Christ . Fortress Academic. Kindle Edition.


I spoke too soon. No, The Fabricated Christ by Paul Laffan is not arguing against the historicity of Jesus at all. Laffan clearly accepts the historicity of Jesus but presents arguments for the gospels being fabrications of that Christ Jesus.
Last edited by neilgodfrey on Fri Jun 18, 2021 5:31 am, edited 3 times in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by Giuseppe »

Thank you both, mlinssen and Neil!!!
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by neilgodfrey »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Jun 18, 2021 3:53 am Thank you both, mlinssen and Neil!!!
Apologies, Giuseppe -- I have had to backtrack on my comment above.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Chinese mythicism and rebuttals

Post by Giuseppe »

Not only. I have seen the file doc uploaded by mlinssen, and it is not what I would have wanted, i.e., the file pdf written by Chris previously on academia.edu. :roll:
Post Reply