Search Results for “history for atheists”

Did Paul Quote Jesus on Divorce? — Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #5

Continuing from Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #4 An examination of the claim that “Paul refers to his teachings that Jesus made during in his earthly ministry, on divorce . . .” Source-Data Interpretation External facts / context related to interpretation 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 To the married I give this command (not I, but … Continue reading “Did Paul Quote Jesus on Divorce? — Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #5”

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #4

The point of this post is to demonstrate how easy it is to read documents from the perspective of commonly accepted knowledge and mistakenly misread them, thinking they say what we have always assumed they say, and to fail to register that the original texts are not quite as clear in their meaning — nor … Continue reading “Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #4”

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #3

The “again” in the title harks back to another time I responded point by point to Tim O’Neill’s erroneous declarations: Bad History for Atheists #1, #2, #3, #4 Continuing here to respond to the youtube presentation at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_hD3xK4hRY — previous posts: #1 (wrongly saying it pays academics to find “different” and “new” or “contrarian” arguments), … Continue reading “Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #3”

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again – and not just Probably) — #2

Tim O’Neill makes a statement about history that I have never encountered in any work by any historian explaining to readers what he or she does. The only persons I have heard make the claim come from theological faculties when they try to place the evidence for Jesus on the same (or even higher) level … Continue reading “Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again – and not just Probably) — #2”

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #1

But the fact is this huge consensus exists. So in history, that means something. After all, academics work in an environment where it pays to find reasons to disagree with each other. — Tim O’Neill Since watching Tim O’Neill’s 28-minute video Did Jesus Exist? Yes (Probably) I have been toying with the idea of bringing … Continue reading “Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #1”

Bad History for Atheists (4) — Psychoanalyzing Dissenters

This is the final post covering my response to Tim O’Neill’s interview on MythVision. For other posts, parts one, two, three. In 1959 Khrushchev declared that there were no political prisoners in the USSR, only mentally ill people (Bukovsky). Arrests and trials became their last resort . . . . The authorities preferred other means, … Continue reading “Bad History for Atheists (4) — Psychoanalyzing Dissenters”

Bad History for Atheists (3) — Proof-texting, Circularity, Fake Facts, Insults

At about 57 mins of the MythVision podcast O’Neill underscores the importance of Paul’s claim to have met James the “brother of the Lord”. Not only is Paul’s claim from a contemporary of Jesus but it is even from one who is opposed to his source: Paul is saying, says O’Neill, “Yeh, I have met … Continue reading “Bad History for Atheists (3) — Proof-texting, Circularity, Fake Facts, Insults”

Bad History for Atheists (2) — Troubles Reading the Sources and Engaging with Different Viewpoints

I do care about bad history. — O’Neill (13 min 50 sec) Bad history is carelessly getting basic facts wrong. It is also failing to acknowledge and engage honestly with other points of view concerning the sources. Two instances of “bad history” At about 27 minutes we are told that “mythers” say there is no … Continue reading “Bad History for Atheists (2) — Troubles Reading the Sources and Engaging with Different Viewpoints”

Bad History for Atheists (1) — Louis Feldman on Justin’s Trypho and “proving Jesus existed”

I took time out last night to follow up a comment left on Vridar and listen to Derek Lambert’s MythVision interview with Tim O’Neill, author of the blog History for Atheists. If one sets aside the revealing psychological portrait that emerges from the incidental comments O’Neill lets drop about himself throughout the interview and focuses … Continue reading “Bad History for Atheists (1) — Louis Feldman on Justin’s Trypho and “proving Jesus existed””

Much More Fully Informed History for Atheists — A Scholarly Introduction to the Two Jesus Parallels

In mid-March this year James McGrath alerted readers to a new post by Tim O’Neill of History for Atheists, Jesus Mythicism 4: Jesus as an Amalgam of Many Figures, commending it for its take down of “amalgam Jesus” theorists for supposedly uncritically and emotionally concocting excuses to disbelieve in a historical Jesus. O’Neill inferred in … Continue reading “Much More Fully Informed History for Atheists — A Scholarly Introduction to the Two Jesus Parallels”

Still Better Informed History for Atheists — More Scholars assess the Two Jesus Parallels

In my recent response to Tim O’Neill’s attempt to dismiss the significance of the parallels between Jesus son of Ananias in Josephus’s Jewish War and the Jesus of the gospels, in particular the Gospel of Mark, as without any scholarly merit (see Jesus Mythicism 4: Jesus as an Amalgam of Many Figures), I set out … Continue reading “Still Better Informed History for Atheists — More Scholars assess the Two Jesus Parallels”

Even Better Informed History for Atheists: The Lincoln – Kennedy Parallels Fallacy

Along with his contradictory rationalizations to (1) declare the parallels between Jesus son of Ananias and the gospels’ Jesus to be “hopelessly flimsy”, yet at the same time are real and strong enough to (2) point to real-world parallel historical, socio-political, religious and onomastic events and situations anyway, Tim O’Neill further adds a common sophistical … Continue reading “Even Better Informed History for Atheists: The Lincoln – Kennedy Parallels Fallacy”

Better Informed History for Atheists — Scholars assess the Two Jesus Parallels

A week ago James McGrath alerted readers to a new post by Tim O’Neill of History for Atheists commending it for its take down of “amalgam Jesus” theorists for supposedly uncritically and emotionally concocting excuses to disbelieve in a historical Jesus. It has taken me a week since that alert but I have finally caught … Continue reading “Better Informed History for Atheists — Scholars assess the Two Jesus Parallels”

Response #2 to History for Atheists’ “JESUS THE APOCALYPTIC PROPHET”

The first part of my response to Tim O’Neill’s Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet is @ Examining the Evidence for Jesus as an Apocalyptic Prophet. There we pointed out that there is no support in our historical sources (primarily Josephus) for the common assertion that Judaeans and Galileans in the early first century were pining for an imminent overthrow … Continue reading “Response #2 to History for Atheists’ “JESUS THE APOCALYPTIC PROPHET””

"I’ve even been cited by atheists with approval (which I really don’t know how to take, so thanks, I think, but I’m not sure, Vrider (even though I feel like I need to take a shower now))."

-- Jim West, – September 2010
"By the way, my thanks to Neil for an ongoing superb job of exposing Jim’s review for what it is: a farcical and none too effective exercise in mythicism assassination, nothing to do with rational, let alone unbiased, scholarship. I’m also happy to see even Jim giving Neil credit where credit is due."

— Earl Doherty, June 2011
"I still wonder at all the material you turn out for Vridar. The more I read your stuff (and I still do, of course), the more I realize how much we all owe you. Your voice is unique."

— Earl Doherty, November 2013 (personal email)
"I’d like to thank you for this very nice representation of what I was trying to show in the book. It’s always gratifying when a reader zeroes in on exactly those aspects I thought were most interesting and most central to my argument. Thank you for this careful and engaged reading of my work – much appreciated!"

— Eva Mroczek, – June 2017
"I find your blog most interesting and appreciate your ongoing effort to keep to the evidence for the issues discussed!"

-- Thomas L. Thompson, - April 2020
"Fantastic. I’m so glad you’re helping to spread these ideas!"

Nancy Fraser - June 2019 (personal email)
It is worth saying another word of appreciation here for Neil Godfrey's effort to make Bruno Bauer accessible in English.

-- Peter Kirby, - May 2023
"Thanks for your very elaborate review! I realized that I hadn’t added your blog to our blogroll. This oversight has been corrected. Looking forward to more segments."

— Anthony Le Donne, – September 2009
"Neil, this is actually rather useful. Good job."

— R. Joseph Hoffmann, – June 2014
"Neil, You’ve done a clean job in your posting on ‘Jesus the Healer’. It reflects well on you. Best, John"

— John Moles, September 2011 (personal email)
"I want to say here that this site is so resourceful and highly on top of the most modern scholarship in the areas discussed here. . . I know of no other site which offers a wide range of topics related to careful critical analysis of historically and scripturally related issues."

-- Martin Lewadny, - March 2009
"I have found your website really valuable as an interpretive filter for Biblical scholarship, especially the origins of Christianity and historicity of Jesus issue. Your clarity of expression, fair comments and personal insights are much valued. I refer to your site frequently as yet more names and publications pop up requiring an academic critique and helpful recommendations for book purchases. So, please continue to delve deeply and share this intellectual sustenance with your grateful readers."

— Mary Booker, – February 2020 (personal email)
"Neil Godfrey and Tim Widowfield, who both write at Vridar . . . happen to be some of the most astute and well-read amateurs you can read on the internet on the subject of biblical historicity. I call them amateurs only for the reason that they don’t have, so far as I know, advanced degrees in the subject. But I have often been impressed with their grasp of logic and analysis of scholarship. I don’t always agree with them, but I respect their work."

— Richard Carrier, – March 2014
"I always enjoy reading Neil’s blog because I think that he is careful, thorough, intellectually fair, and honest."

— April DeConick, – November 2007
This is superb work, Neil, and reminds me of Albert Schweitzer’s work from a century ago. . . . .

I commend you for being the first to even TRY to translate Bruno Bauer’s brilliant Kritik der Evangelien und Geschichte ihres Ursprungs, which is now more than 150 years old.

. . . . .Thank you for your historic effort.

-- Paul Trejo, M.A., - November 2022
Editor, An English Edition of Bruno Bauer’s 1843 Christianity Exposed
"I think you have a high quality blog that provides a positive public service by discussing academic topics within a wider audience."

— Russell Gmirkin, – October 2016
"Many thanks for this post, and for the quality of your blog."

— Philippe Wajdenbaum, – November 2018
Congratulations, Vridar, . . . I declare, Vridar, your own hard work translating Bruno Bauer will make a major difference in future studies of Bruno Bauer and the evolution of Hegel’s philosophy of religion.

-- Paul Trejo, - April 2023
"Very good. This post is going straight to the March 2016 Biblical Studies Carnival."

—N.T. Wrong, – March 2016
"Thanks for this detailed interaction! I’ll try to offer something more substantial than 'Thank you' in response at some point, but I didn’t want to wait . . . to express appreciation for your detailed interaction with what I’ve written!"

— James McGrath, – June 2009
"Thanks much for this book review. I think it expands, and contributes to, the effort in honouring Thomas that we with Lukasz originally had in mind with this volume. Best, Emanuel"

-- Emanuel Pfoh - August 2020
"Neil, for what it is worth it is obvious to me that if you had earlier in life tracked into a graduate program at one of the world’s leading research universities you would be one of the world’s formidable ones. You are doing essentially the same quality now (apart from the philology and languages) except mostly sticking to commenting on others’ work as informed comment/discussion."

— Gregory Doudna, – January 2019
https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=145080#p145080
Neil made a good synthesis of the work without being an “expert” of the field.

-- Enrico Tuccinardi, - October 2022
"Vridar is consistently thought-provoking, well-informed, and asking the right questions. There are intelligent, thoughtful comments and commenters regularly offering productive discussion. Books and publications are covered with a range of perspectives with attempts at fair and accurate representation of others’ arguments and content (where there are occasional and inevitable missteps on that I notice Neil making corrections and apologies where warranted, which wins points with me). Please carry on."

— Gregory Doudna, – January 2019
"Here I give an admittedly subjective short list, in random order, of useful, high level and regularly updated weblogs on the study of the Old Testament . . . ‘Vridar: Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science’ (http://vridar.org/) by Neil Godfrey"

-- Klaas Spronk, - Bibliotheca Orientalis LXXI, 3/4 (2014)
"For an excellent example of generally high-quality scholarship by someone who isn’t a biblical studies professor, see Neil Godfrey’s work posted on the website vridar.org."

— Tom Dykstra, – JOCABS 2015
"These reviews of yours are so bloody weird!"

— James Crossley, – April 2010
"Note that I do not use the term ‘amateur’ pejoratively. . . . In fact, Godfrey is extremely well read and his librarian skills have brought many important academic works to my attention."

Raphael Lataster - August 2019

Neil Godfrey on Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 2: Certainty and Uncertainty in History: “In my next post I might address more specifically some of the points you raise in your comment here. Carrier…” Nov 21, 22:46
Neil Godfrey on Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 2: Certainty and Uncertainty in History: “Can you give me the source for Price’s discussion? I don’t recall having read that one. I don’t see how…” Nov 21, 22:28
db on How Did We Get Here? Part 1: “As I understand, Tim will examine US historical events over a long-period, to understand the underlying structures and patterns that…” Nov 21, 18:36
db on How Did We Get Here? Part 1: “Are you warning of potential decline for the US in the 21st century, or opining that it will happen? As…” Nov 21, 17:42
DARRYL Thomas on How Did We Get Here? Part 1: “I think you nailed it. History repeats. But left unspoken is the imminent threat of a grim, worldwide catastrophic event…” Nov 21, 17:05
Paul Trejo on How Did We Get Here? Part 1: “Long term history? Let’s just take the past 80 years. The Baby Boomer heaven is over. It began when WW2…” Nov 21, 15:08
db on How Did We Get Here? Part 1: “OP: “I decided to suspend my Facebook and Threads accounts” A sound addiction treatment. If you followed “The Young Turks‬”…” Nov 21, 15:08
Clarke W Owens on Jesus Mythicism and Historical Knowledge, Part 2: Certainty and Uncertainty in History: ““It is not the facticity of the events that is in question It is at this narrative level where problems…” Nov 21, 14:26
Thomas Worthington on How Did We Get Here? Part 1: “It’s worth bearing in mind that, as of 21st Nov, Trump has actually polled less than 50% of the votes…” Nov 21, 13:02

Search Results for: history for atheists

Did Paul Quote Jesus on Divorce? — Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #5

Like this:

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #4

Like this:

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #3

Like this:

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again – and not just Probably) — #2

Like this:

Getting History for Atheists Wrong (Again) — #1

Like this:

Bad History for Atheists (4) — Psychoanalyzing Dissenters

Like this:

Bad History for Atheists (3) — Proof-texting, Circularity, Fake Facts, Insults

Like this:

Bad History for Atheists (2) — Troubles Reading the Sources and Engaging with Different Viewpoints

Like this:

Bad History for Atheists (1) — Louis Feldman on Justin’s Trypho and “proving Jesus existed”

Like this:

Much More Fully Informed History for Atheists — A Scholarly Introduction to the Two Jesus Parallels

Like this:

Still Better Informed History for Atheists — More Scholars assess the Two Jesus Parallels

Like this:

Even Better Informed History for Atheists: The Lincoln – Kennedy Parallels Fallacy

Like this:

Better Informed History for Atheists — Scholars assess the Two Jesus Parallels

Like this:

Response #2 to History for Atheists’ “JESUS THE APOCALYPTIC PROPHET”

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: