Have you seen the trailer for the Beast?

[scisyhp]

supposidly this, half story driven/half documentary will give more evidence disproving the existance of Jesus.

http://www.thebeastmovie.com/

What are your thoughts on it?

[MuggleOrSquib]

Interesting. Thanks for the link.
My thoughts? Well, while we question much of the story of Arthur, and while much of the Illiad and Odyssey may well be fantastic and/or anachronistic, and much of the Epic of Gilgamesh is probably religio-mythological, all of these accounts are generally coming to be seen as having an historical core. Gilgamesh, whom I personally believed to have been purely mythological, is now being treated as an historical Sumerican king.

So, lets find some other potent mythological figure who is clearly (from studying the history) a fabrication. Perhaps William Tell, or Robin Hood? Hiawatha would be a better choice, but he appears to have been a historical figure. Nichiren Dai-Shonen would also be a good choice, but fails again because he was an historical figure. We don't know enough about KRT, AQHT, or DNIL or Ugaritic history in general to know if these guys were OR weren't based in history.
The story of the Angels of Mons is well worth taking into account, because we KNOW the source story (by Arthur Machen?) and have good documentation about the legends which quickly grew from it. However that is a single event, and not comparable to the accounts of either Jesus or Hiawatha.
OK, well what about Rama or Krsna? There are aspects of their stories (the Ramayana and the Mahabharata) which appear to claim some sort of historicity, while most non-Hindus consider one or both mythological. Hmmm, it seems I've raised a good question. Primary difference is that for the earliest known audience (if not the authors) of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana both stories are of the ancient past, even as the story of Jason and the Argonauts was to the Greek audience.

Alright, so let's refine our search for a parallel. Ah, there is still the question 'Why look for a parallel?' I suggest looking for parallels because modern and ancient humanity are not THAT different, and if we can show that X occurred in one case, we have a stronger case that X occurred in our target case.

OK, so having established that, how am I suggesting we refine our search? I think we should search for a non-historical Hiawatha type figure whose original story comes into existence within less than a century of his claimed lifetime. Or, if there is no such figure other than Jesus of Nazareth, come up with a good argument for this being demonstrable only once in human history.

Those are my thoughts on it. Sorry for beign so long-winded.

Be Well,
Bob Griffin

Naturalism is for atheists only. Thanks for understanding.

[XaositectCrayon]

why does it need be disproven? Does Jesus personally offend you?

besides all things are half truths... I believe this is no different than to focus on the lies while the truths about it all slip away.