2019-04-17

Mischievous Mythicists At It Again

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

We saw it first on Valerie Tarico’s website, and now, right on the eve of Easter, it pops up in full bloom on Alternet:

 

https://www.alternet.org/2019/04/what-if-jesus-never-existed/

Or go to the original base:

What if Jesus Never Existed? An Interview with History Writer David Fitzgerald

 

The following two tabs change content below.

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!

10 Comments

  • 2019-04-17 07:54:17 GMT+0000 - 07:54 | Permalink

    Hmmm I was going to send AlterNet a copy of my book when it came out, but then I thought, nah.. Oh well.

    • GraeMac
      2019-04-17 10:31:06 GMT+0000 - 10:31 | Permalink

      It’s not too late to.

  • 2019-04-17 14:04:38 GMT+0000 - 14:04 | Permalink

    While we’re at it, here is a recent article on RawStory : https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/evidence-jesus-ever-existed-weaker-might-think/
    I did notice that the article cites an article of mine on rationalrevolution, which I’m dubious about in terms of the level of scholarship if they are citing me that way, but anyway :p

    Overall I think the piece is coherent and puts forward a relatively good profile of the case.

  • db
    2019-04-17 16:04:57 GMT+0000 - 16:04 | Permalink

    • A required quote for any Easter posting:

    Neil Godfrey (28 October 2018). “Response #4: Non Sequitur’s Tim O’Neill presentation, …. Your turn“. Vridar.

    [O]n the whole the “scholars” do not argue for the historicity of Jesus but work on other questions on the assumption that he existed. When asked to justify that assumption the responses are, too often unfortunately, logically invalid, question begging, divorced from normative scholarly approaches to sources, misrepresenting the questions posed, and…. condescending, abusive. On the principle that all authorities ought to be held to account, such responses deserve to be set aside and the question should be pursued.

    • db
      2019-04-17 17:40:43 GMT+0000 - 17:40 | Permalink

      • Or, if you are an “old school” fan:

      Bauer, Bruno (1842). Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte der Synoptiker (in German). 3. O. Wigand. p. 308.

      Everything that the historical Christ [Jesus] is, everything that is said of him, everything that is known of him, belongs to the world of imagination, that is, of the imagination of the Christian community, and therefore has nothing to do with any man who belongs to the real world.

      • MrHorse
        2019-04-17 21:38:59 GMT+0000 - 21:38 | Permalink

        … everything that is said of him [Christ Jesus], everything that is known of him, belongs to the world of imagination, that is, of the imagination of the Christian community, and therefore has nothing to do with any man who belongs to the real world.

        There is often talk of Christ Jesus being a composite figure, but that could mean he was (and is) a composite of various communities’/sects’ beliefs in different Jesuses* or Christs^ [or Chrestuses^].

        ישוע / Yeshua, Ἰησοῦς / Iēsous

        • db
          2019-04-17 22:58:51 GMT+0000 - 22:58 | Permalink

          • Every region or congregation had likely chosen one or another Gospel as its authoritative holy text

          Per Carrier (23 September 2016) [now bolded]. “Three Things to Know about New Testament Manuscripts”. Richard Carrier Blogs.

          As Trobisch points out, calling any book “The Gospel According to” was extremely unique and bizarre in the history of ancient literature, so much so that there is no possible way the four Gospels all came to have such a peculiar title form, consistently throughout all known manuscripts, by accident.

          Accordingly, this means whoever produced this singular c. 150 A.D. edition [of the New Testament] (I’ll just call it the C150 edition), also named the four Gospels.
          […]
          Since every region or congregation had likely chosen one or another Gospel as its authoritative holy text, then to bring in the most regions and congregations, the editor of C150 cobbled together a political alliance among the largest possible number of those, using the four Gospels found in our canon. Hence those four were chosen. Because when their constituents were added up, they far outnumbered Marcion’s.

  • MrHorse
    2019-04-28 01:58:04 GMT+0000 - 01:58 | Permalink

    ^ Χριστός / Christus: ‘annointed [one]’

    Χρήστός / Chrēstós: ‘good’, ‘useful’

    • Neil Godfrey
      2019-04-28 09:31:17 GMT+0000 - 09:31 | Permalink

      Apologies, MrHorse — your comment had been caught up in spam for some mysterious reason. It is here now…

    • Martin Klatt
      2019-04-28 15:28:05 GMT+0000 - 15:28 | Permalink

      How about “the slippery[one]”?

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.