Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Feb 17, 2013 in Uncategorized Posts | 13 comments

Christ-Mythicist (or so it’s thought) Neil Godfrey Agrees With Me

John Loftus of Debunking Christianity made it clear that one of the worst things he could take up in his efforts to debunk Christianity was to argue Jesus did not exist. In one of his more recent statements to this effect he wrote: “Christians will be more likely to listen to me than someone who claims Jesus probably didn’t exist at all.” He follows with this: “I am a focused, passionate man, who is single mindedly intent on debunking Christianity. This issue [mythicism] will not do the job for the simple fact of what evangelicals like David Marshall think of such a claim. It’s too far removed from what they will consider a possibility. I’d like to hear of the vast numbers of Christians who abandoned their faith because they were convinced Jesus didn’t exist. I just don’t see that happening at all. Christians will not see their faith is a delusion until they first see that the Bible is unreliable and untrustworthy, and that the doctrines they believe are indefensible, which is my focus. Now it might be that Christians could come to the conclusion the Bible is unreliable upon reading arguments that Jesus never existed, but they will be much less likely to read those very arguments because that thesis is too far removed from what they can consider a possibility.”

Exactly. I agree 100% with what John Loftus writes here about the value of the Christ Myth idea for debunking Christianity. LINK.

  • Edward Jones

    I dare to make the following speculative paraphrase or addition to  John Loftus’ statement: “Christians will be more likely  to listten to me than someone who claims Jesus probably didn’t exist at all”, ‘when I make the counter claim that Jesus not only existed but was a uniquely significant person of history’.
    That this is an entirely reasonable speculative statement which John might well make, I refer to his: Debunking Christianity: Ed Jones on A viable Solution to the “Jesus Puzzle”, posted just 14 days after his post: The Christian Reaction to Jesus Mysticism  containing John’s statement.
    Note the 7th and 8th comments to A viable solution – , and John’s Link to where he found it and Hoffmann’s gracious reply: “Ed: Thank you so much for that — filled with widom and understamdong – like Job”.       

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NZMJ7JRYKH7WR6YTXJGG3PU65E John Grove

    The whole question on whether or not Jesus was historical is rather moot because in reality he is so disconnected to what was written about him he may as well been mythical. He probably was a courageous who saw the hypocrisy of the religious and got killed for it, end of story. And from this, legends grew about him.

  • ehj1919

    John, You can well understand the depth of my appresiation for this post: Christ-Mythicists (or so it’s thought) Neil Godfrey agrees with me, posting my (“it’s thougtht”) presumptous paraphrase to your comment.
    Here in blogosphere this is a meaningful courageous act.
    I have wasted far too much time attempting to ccomment/reply to Neil’s dogmatic nonsense.
    You are a breath of fresh air to my aged state – 1919 is my birth year, the month Jan. Thank you so much. Ed 

    I am quite isolated, my position is rejected0 in mythicist blogosphere as well as all social (church) experience. 
     

     

  • ehj1919

    New Post: Christ-Mythicist (or so it’s thought) Neil Godfrey Agrees With Tolstoy.

    Post: Vridar; Why Bias is Impossible to Avoid and Hard to Detect, concluding quote: “The simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already without the shadow of doubt, what has been laid before him”. Leo Tolstoy. The classic definition of BIAS, mankind’s universal thought restriction. More famously Tolstoy writes: “The whole Christian civilization so brilliant on the surface, grew up on an obvious, strange sometimes conscious but for the most part unconscious misunderstanding and contradiction of the authentic teachings of Jesus the Liberator (of the Sermon on the Mount) . .There is such an obvious contradiction that sooner or are later, probably very soon, it will be exposed and will put an end either to the acceptance of Christian religionwhich is necessary to maintain power; of to the existence of an army and any violence supported by it.”

    is

    For 19 centuries Christian mankind has lived this way . . .

  • ehj1919

    New Post: Christ-Mythicist Dawkins (or so it’s thought) Agrees With Zuesse. “What’s known today as Christianity started with Paul, and was then developed by his followers, who wrote the canonical Gospels and the rest of the NT. The religion of the NT actually has nothing to do with person of the historical Jesus. This is shown to explain the entire Christian myth”.

  • Edward Jones

    Richard Dawkins: “My skeptical ear detects a very distinct ring of plausibility in his gripping tale. Zuesse’s account of the origins of Christianity is provocatively interesting . . and I find it clearly and forcefully written:”.

  • ehj1919

    Supplements to: Debunking Christianity: Ed Jones on A viable historical
    solution to the “Jesus Puzzle”. Note the
    LINK to where John Loftus found the
    essay, and Joe Hoffmann’s comment: “Ed: Thank you so much for that – filled
    with wisdom and knowledge – like Job!” Crucial
    new historical understandings of the “Jesus Puzzle” by certain of our top NT
    Studies scholars made possible by present historical methods knowledge, now
    largely confirmed by the first outsider historical science probe of the
    writings of the NT made possible by present methods of historical science investigation
    (Eric Zueese’s Christ’s Ventriloquist). Schubert M. Ogden: “We now know not
    only that none of the writings of the OT is prophetic witness to Christ, but
    also that none of the writings of the NT is apostolic witness to Jesus. The
    sufficient evidence for this point is that present historical methods and
    knowledge have shown that they all, the letters of Paul, the Gospels, as well
    as the later writings of the NT, depend on sources earlier than themselves and
    thus are not the original and originating faith and witness of the apostles
    that the early church mistook them to be in judging them to be apostolic ”. This is a judgment based on historical evidence
    determined from within the Guild of NT Studies. Eric Zuesse : “What’s known today as
    Christianity started with Paul, and was then developed by his followers, who
    wrote the canonical Gospels and the rest of the NT. The religion of the NT
    actually has nothing to do with the person of the historical Jesus. The NT was
    written and assembled to fulfill Paul’s Roman agenda, not Jesus’ Jewish one.
    This is shown to explain the entire Christian myth.” This is a judgment based on historical scientific
    evidence determined by an outsider. Hence we now have convincing evidence, both
    from the methodologies of history from inside the Guild and the methodologies
    of historical science from the outside, that the writings of the NT, Paul’s
    letters, the Gospels, as well as the later writings of the NT, are not reliable
    sources for knowledge of Jesus. Our most certain historical evidence of the
    whole of the Jesus event can only come from within the Guild of NT Studies,
    applying its specialized knowledge in the areas of philology, form and
    redaction criticism, literary criticism, history of religions, and NT theology.
    Significantly, no evidence, from within
    or from without, has been raised to question the basic tenet of the Guild that
    we have a NT source containing apostolic witness to Jesus. Only from within the
    Guild of NT Studies might a scholar have acquired sufficient understanding of
    the Guild’s areas of special knowledge, which necessarily applies, for one to fully
    access the historical evidence necessary to identify this NT source of apostolic
    witness to Jesus, as Eric Zuesse’s Christ’s Ventriloquist” probe demonstrates. E.g., Eric’s probe fails to recognize that
    there were two distinctly different post Easter movements (denominations)
    during this earliest period 30 CE – 65
    CE of Jesus traditions, each with its own understanding of the significance of the
    Jesus event, marked by “an extraordinarily intimate, more precisely
    adversarial, relationship” (Hans Dieter Betz). Both were pre-Christian, pre-Gospel,
    in partly pre-Pauline. (To be continued)

  • ehj1919

    The above comment continued.

    The chronologically the first movement was the Jerusalem
    Jesus Movement which began with the key disciples returning to Jerusalem,
    having fled to their native Galilee emboldened by Peter’s and others visions,
    purposing to again take up the teaching of their revered Master. It was from
    this Jesus Movement, later led by James the brother of Jesus, that we have our
    most certain source of apostolic witness to Jesus, identified by Betz to be the
    Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:3 -7:27, not a sermon Jesus once delivered but a
    special collection Jesus’ most characteristic sayings). This was soon followed by a pre-Pauline
    Jerusalem Jewish Hellenist movement with their traditions of dying and rising
    heroes or gods which suggested notions that the significance of the Jesus event
    was the salvific effects of the death and resurrection suggesting great man royal
    messianic titles, Son of God, Savior, claiming to abrogate the Torah. For
    temple authorities this was in effect treason. In the Acts story of the stoning
    of Stephen, leader of this Hellenist group, Paul is introduced as a participant,
    caring for the garments of those casting the stones, in an apparent put-down by
    temple authorities of some kind of anti-Torah demonstration. Next we find Paul,
    having his “vision” experience on the road to Damascus as persecutor, leading
    to his conversion to this Hellenist group. It was from this Damascus group that
    Paul received his Christ myth gospel. To this point there is no evidence that
    Paul was aware of the Jerusalem Jesus Movement. In taking his gospel to the
    Gentile world, first to Antioch meeting with ready success, this had the effect
    of severing true knowledge of Jesus from his teachings and his Jewish roots. As
    winners in the struggle for dominance, Paul’s Christ myth movement could label
    the Jesus Movement heresy to effectively remove it from the pages of history.
    The writings of the NT were written by followers of Paul’s Christ myth movement,
    not followers of the Jesus Movement to become the source for Christianity,
    creating perhaps the greatest human mistakes of history – Earl Doherty’s “Jesus
    Puzzle”. All of these developments are
    sufficiently documented in the NT as it can be read from a historical science
    perspective over against authorial intent. Only because Matthew chose (apparently
    a historical choice from among circulating versions of an original sermon) to
    include the Sermon on the Mount in his Gospel, received intact from the province
    of the Jerusalem Jesus Movement, do we have a source containing the original
    and originating faith and witness to the apostles, an alternative to the
    writings of the NT. See Essays on the Sermon on the Mount by Hans Dieter
    Betz.

  • ehj1919

    Our most certain sufficient
    historical evidence for knowledge of Jesus, who he was and what he said, rests
    “solely on the basis of the original and originating faith and witness of the
    apostles”. (Schubert M. Ogden). Over against this basic fact of the history of
    religions, one must take account of The FATEFUL HISTORICAL MISTAKE which took
    place in the earliest apostolic period 30 CE-65 CE at the very beginning of
    post-Easter Jesus traditions (taking account of the fact that this was before
    Christianity, before the word Christian was coined in Antioch in the 70’s), to
    create the “Jesus Puzzle”. During this period there were two distinctly
    different movements related to the Jesus event, standing in deepest adversarial
    relationship. The first, the Jerusalem
    Jesus Movement, which began (within the first weeks of post-Easter) with the
    key disciples returning to Jerusalem purposing to again take up the teachings
    of Jesus. It was from the Jesus Movement with its collections of sayings that
    we have our primary NT source containing this apostolic witness. This was soon
    followed by a Jewish Hellenist movement interpreting the Jesus event in terms
    of notions suggested by their traditions of dying and rising heroes or gods inventing
    concepts of the salvific effects of Jesus’ death and resurrection and royal
    titles like messiah. Son of God. Paul,
    first as persecutor, then converting to this group, adopted its notions, which became
    the source of his Christ of faith myth to become the arch enemy of the Jesus movement.
    In taking his kerygma to the Gentile world, meeting with ready success, it became
    Gentile Christianity in Antioch in 70 CE, as known above all from the writings
    of the NT, the scriptural source for orthodox Christianity. Under these Gentile conditions some 40 years
    later, the writings of the NT took place, MISTAKENLY to be named the official
    canon, the apostolic witness to Jesus. Only since the 80’s have certain of our
    top NT scholars under the force of present historical methods and knowledge
    come to a full objective historical understanding of this mistake, not only to
    say none of the writings of the NT are apostolic witness to Jesus, but to
    understand the how and the why of this fateful mistake. This is a human
    mistake, one of those ultimate mistakes related to humanities pervasive
    difficulty in coming to terms with Ultimate Reality, the issue of God-man
    relationship, which bears testimony to unknowing mankind’s pervasive fallible
    mistake prone history – mankind’s fateful propensity to develop “eyes that cannot
    see”, forming “tinted glasses” which limit “vision” to sense perceived reality.

    A brief history of this fateful mistake: In
    this apostolic period, 30 CE – 65 CE, there were two movements each with its
    own interpretation of the significance of the Jesus event, characterized as
    standing in the strongest adversarial relationship, holding completely
    different images of Jesus. Chronologically the first, the Jerusalem Jesus
    Movement which began with the key disciples, having fled to their native
    Galilee, overcome with grief and utter
    disillusionment, emboldened by Peter’s and others vision (some form of
    extrasensory cognition), at high risk, returning to Jerusalem, purposing to
    again take up the teaching of their revered Master. This was soon followed by a
    group of Hellenist Jews hearing talk of Jesus rising from the dead (as the visions
    began to be so interpreted), with their traditions of dying and rising gods,
    together with Jewish animal sacrificial rites, taking up the notion that the
    significance of the Jesus event was the salvific effects of his death and
    resurrection which abrogated the Torah. This was in effect treason for temple
    authorities. The Acts story (reading from a historical perspective over against
    authorial intent) of the stoning of Stephen, the leader of this Hellenist group,
    seems to reference a put-down by temple authorities of some kind of anti-Torah
    demonstration. Just here Paul is introduced, named as a participant holding the
    garments of those casting the stones. Next we have Paul telling of his “vision”
    on the road to Damascus, to where this Hellenist group fled, as persecutor, then
    converting to this group with their Christ myth beliefs. It was from this group
    that Paul received his Christ kerygma, to become Gentile Christianity as known
    above all from the writings of the New Testament, the letters of Paul, the
    Gospels, as well as the later writings of the New Testament, to finally become the
    source for orthodox Christianity. In taking his Christ kerygma to the Gentile
    world, severing Jesus from his sayings and his Jewish roots, meeting with ready
    success, becoming the winners in the struggle for dominance, Paul’s followers
    could declare the Jerusalem Jesus Movement heresy to effectively remove it from
    the pages of history. Only because Matthew included the Q material, which contained
    the Sermon on the Mount derived from the Jesus Movement, do we have an
    alternative source which contains our sole original and originating faith and
    witness of the apostles, our most certain source of knowledge of the real
    Jesus. (See “Essays on the Sermon on the Mount” by Hans Dieter Betz).

  • ehj1919

    Och! I made a mistake, Godfrey DOES not agree with Tolstoy. History shows that Tolstoy was a confirmed theist. Godfrey replies to the mention of the historical fact that the world’s greatest physicist were theist: “Rubbish! That a minority of scientist still cling to some form of primitive religious notion is of no significance whatever whatever except to modern day relics of cave-man superstitions found among true believers today.”

  • http://twitter.com/EnigmaBabylon Enigmatic Babylonian

    Why should we care what emotionally crippled imbeciles want to believe? Christ Mythicism is a hypothesis which neatly explains the obvious historical bullshit and theological incoherence of Christianity, not a religion which is in need of adherents. Not to mention it is incumbent upon us to be skeptical of characters who are universally claimed by pious frauds to be in possession of divine magical powers. Christ and Muhammad mythicism should be no more controversial than Moses mythicism (which is essentially a knock-down case, given that we know Biblical ‘history’ is flagrant fabrication and myth-copying, especially all that Exodus nonsense).

    I am not interested remotely in converting people, or whether their pathetic, hidebound little pin heads are open to reason. If they want to die fools, good riddance.

  • http://twitter.com/EnigmaBabylon Enigmatic Babylonian

    Tolstoy was very likely an atheist. His Christianity was moralistic and practical, the man had very little truck with theology or sorcery.

  • http://twitter.com/EnigmaBabylon Enigmatic Babylonian

    This is a good point. In my experience the prime motivations for denying Christ Mythicism are people who want to use him as a sock puppet (whether they identify as Christians or atheists, etc.) Yet as Schweitzer amply demonstrated there is absolutely no evidence or information in the extant texts (canon or otherwise) that can be treated as historical. If Jesus existed, he’s not the guy in the Bible.