Multiple definitions of Mythicism may cause Confusion when discussing mythicism

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Multiple definitions of Mythicism may cause Confusion when discussing mythicism

Post by mlinssen »

dbz wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:38 am
Leucius Charinus wrote: Sun Apr 24, 2022 6:18 pm
dbz wrote: Sun Apr 24, 2022 2:48 pmArguably the Jesus myth theory should be the antithesis of the Jesus historicity theory.
The antithesis of the Jesus historicity theory is either a myth theory OR a fiction theory (or a combination of these) since both are capable of delivering an ahistorical Jesus theory.
Given that the antithesis of the Jesus historicity theory is the Jesus ahistoricity theory.

Then per the OP, perhaps the only way to avoid "Confusion when discussing mythicism" is never to use the term "mythicism" and to discuss the topic only in the context of two opposing viewpoints of (a)historicity.
Yes, but then you wouldn't nicely play along with the Churchian game of confusion and convolution!
But they've already worked towards that escape clause with the minimal Jesus concept - they'll do just about anything in order to keep moving the target
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8881
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Multiple definitions of Mythicism may cause Confusion when discussing mythicism

Post by MrMacSon »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 12:02 am So an historical Jesus is a possible solution.
And a mythical Jesus (perhaps even as a "Noble Lie") is a possible solution.
But a fictional Jesus is irrational and not a possible solution.
  • Exactly. God is Good. Jesus is my Saviour. He can be yours too.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2842
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Multiple definitions of Mythicism may cause Confusion when discussing mythicism

Post by Leucius Charinus »

MrMacSon wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 4:40 am
Leucius Charinus wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 12:02 am So an historical Jesus is a possible solution.
And a mythical Jesus (perhaps even as a "Noble Lie") is a possible solution.
But a fictional Jesus is irrational and not a possible solution.
  • Exactly. God is Good. Jesus is my Saviour. He can be yours too.
According to Bruno Bauer, considered to be a mythicist, the writer of Mark's gospel was "an Italian, at home both in Rome and Alexandria"; Matthew's gospel was written by "a Roman, nourished by the spirit of Seneca"; and Christianity is essentially "Stoicism triumphant in a Jewish garb." Bauer classed all of the Pauline letters as forgeries, and the NT writings to have been fabricated in the 2nd century. As far as I can tell Bauer classed Jesus, and Peter and Paul (and the rest of the "Christians" in the NT) as fictional.

I don't understand your earlier reaction. (And I did thank you for your Litwa extracts)
Post Reply