Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Upcoming Deeper Waters Debate

  1. #11
    Thanks Old Man... Bill the Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central VA
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,756
    Amen (Given)
    7097
    Amen (Received)
    7335


    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals --- Manya the Holy Szin --- The Quintara Marathon ---

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common --- Stephen R. Donaldson ---

  2. Amen Apologiaphoenix, LostSheep amen'd this post.
  3. #12
    Department Head Apologiaphoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Corryton
    Faith
    Trinitarian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,618
    Amen (Given)
    288
    Amen (Received)
    2702
    I fully hope to do so. The more and more I read up on the issue, the more I am further convinced it is absolute lunacy.

  4. Amen LostSheep, Premo316 amen'd this post.
  5. #13
    tWebber Boxing Pythagoras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Faith
    Heathen
    Posts
    2,026
    Amen (Given)
    305
    Amen (Received)
    857
    Quote Originally Posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
    I fully hope to do so. The more and more I read up on the issue, the more I am further convinced it is absolute lunacy.
    At the popular level, I find that it is intensely fueled by people who don't understand the difference between historical Jesus research and simply taking the gospels at face value. The problem is that such people tend to think the historicity of the New Testament is a binary prospect: either the whole thing is literally factual, or else the whole thing should be discarded from historical research.

    At the scholarly level, I don't think Carrier's and Price's particular mythicist hypotheses are "absolute lunacy," but I would certainly classify them as being unreasonably speculative. Price's work tends to rely on ideas regarding the dating and authorship of the NT texts which are not really supported by the prevailing scholarship. Carrier's formulation (though, I admit that I haven't gotten his latest book, yet, so I'm basing this on previous writings I've read of his) tends to require some fairly eisegetical reading of his source documents.

    That is, of course, not to say that the lunatic fringe mythicists are themselves a myth. There are certainly a number of pseudo-scholars and anti-theists who have latched onto mythicism with a fairly zealous fervor, as if its promulgation will spell the downfall of that oh-so-hated Christianity. Of course, it is the lunacy of people like this, combined with the apparent scholarship of people like Carrier and Price, which leads to popular-level mythicism, so perhaps your point is fair, after all...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •