• In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 758 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 3:50 am

Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

#98: Aug. - Sept. 2011 (Non-Fiction)
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

tat tvam asi wrote:Did you really just post a link to Tecktonics to try and refute the mythicist material? That's got to be lowest of the low concerning apologetics.....
You may not like his style Tat,but what particular points can you refute? Take the extremely late dates given in "The Christ Conspiracy" for the gospels for instance.Can you name a single qualified N.T. scholar and textual critic that remotely agrees with these late dates?

Not even skeptical textual critics like Ehrman would agree with these and for obvious scholarly reasons like the dating of papyri fragments among others. Early church fathers like Ignatius and others quote from the gospels so they must have existed at that time for them to be able to quote from them.

The reality is that the astrological interpretations given are both absurd and contradictory. Christ was not crucified at the Winter solstice but at Passover which is in the Spring so all these parallels about the 'crucifixion' of the sun at the winter solstice,which is itself nonsense, can't match even on this one point.

There is no biblical justification for dating Christ's birth on December 25th which has been pointed out even by other mythicists like Carrier.

What was introduced later by the Catholic church is irrelevant to the primary documents.

I appreciate you may find the style annoying but mythicists should address the substantial arguments and references. Scholars of Tacitus don't agree with your conspiracy theory either.

Tacitus confirms both Christianity's origin in Jerusalem and Christ's crucifixion by Pilate.

The idea that Christianity originated in Alexandria in the second century is supported by no reputable historian or scholar.
There was obviously a Christian church in Rome at the time Paul wrote his letter to them which is dated around 60 A.D. if memory serves, so it was already well established at the time it was written.

Whether the Roman Christians had a written copy of a gospel at that time is debatable but they clearly knew the gospel message as Paul makes clear in his letter. That's how they became Christians,by believing this message.

To suggest that Paul is writing in Romans about the sun and zodiac is nonsense,and in terms of justification by faith in the sun's alleged 'death and resurrection' ,not to mention his clear dismissal of pagan religious concepts in chapter one, which on mythicism he's supposed to be advocating!

No, Romans is clearly dealing with man's moral standing before God and the need for righteousness and reconciliation which can not be achieved by keeping the moral law. It could be achieved by keeping the moral law perfectly, but we don't so we have a problem.

To posit on astrotheology, that Paul is saying that believing in the physical sun's 'death and resurrection' would confer moral righteousness is to spectacularly misunderstand all of these concepts of morality,law, righteousness and justification.

I've been over Doherty's arguments about Paul's supposed "non historical sub lunar Christ" and these do not stand up to textual scrutiny of these letters including Hebrews.

So you dislike criticism of mythicism and astrotheology, but there are good and substantial reasons for why they are false.

No one disputes that paganism included worship of the sun, moon,stars and the natural cycles,or that there was an astrological element to this in paganism,but to suggest that this or anything like this,is what Paul and the apostles were teaching is ridiculous.
Last edited by Flann 5 on Thu Aug 25, 2016 4:27 am, edited 7 times in total.
User avatar
Robert Tulip

2B - MOD & SILVER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6497
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
18
Location: Canberra
Has thanked: 2717 times
Been thanked: 2659 times
Contact:
Australia

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Hi FTL and Tat, nice to see you commenting here. Booktalk tends to be free and easy about allowing moronic fundy trolls to post, as long as they are not too rabid in their insults to reason. I would not quite put Flann5 in that category since he is generally polite and mostly factual and intelligent within his religious framework. That framework does however have a few major areas of stupidity, such as rejection on principle of a naturalistic worldview, belief in Biblical inerrancy, creationism and a supernaturalist interventionist God, failure to appreciate that scriptural meaning is more symbolic than literal, and interest in kooky sites such as Tektonics. Given those limits, you might find it challenging to have a constructive conversation with him.
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Robert Tulip wrote: I would not quite put Flann5 in that category since he is generally polite and mostly factual and intelligent within his religious framework. That framework does however have a few major areas of stupidity, such as rejection on principle of a naturalistic worldview, belief in Biblical inerrancy, creationism and a supernaturalist interventionist God, failure to appreciate that scriptural meaning is more symbolic than literal, and interest in kooky sites such as Tektonics.
Hi Robert, How are you? I don't question your intelligence either but you are wedded to a philosophical naturalist worldview. Yes I believe God created the universe. How do you account for it? Did it create itself?
You make the laws of nature primary,but without nature itself there are no inherent laws so what made nature and it's laws?

Are the universal,abstract (not material) laws of logic just conventions or produced by Dan Barker's brain? What about the informational reality of D.N.A. Information is neither matter or energy. So you have laws of nature,abstract laws of logic and non material information. How do you account for these non material realities in a naturalistic material world of cause and effect?
What caused them?

As far as innerancy is concerned I point to prophecy and fulfillment as evidence. It's disputed by skeptics but I've given arguments elsewhere in relation to various prophecies debating against the arguments of the skeptics in these cases.
People should judge these on the relative merits of the arguments.

I'm not completely literalist but context and genres are considered. I do think the historical books are historical. If God exists as I believe he does then supernatural intervention is reasonable at times, and while the universe functions according to the laws God has established, it's not reasonable that the creator of these laws must himself be bound by them.


You have a particular theory about the cosmos and some astronomical data which you link with astrological ages. I can't say I fully understand your theory, but in all honesty and without intending to be insulting about it,the astrotheological biblical interpretations are just trying to stick square pegs in round holes. Astrotheology doesn't really make a good hermeneutic for interpreting the bible, and when applied, tends towards absurdity,in my view.
User avatar
Chris OConnor

1A - OWNER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 17016
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
21
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 3507 times
Been thanked: 1310 times
Gender:
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

I hope all of you consider joining this discussion of God: The Most Unpleasant Character in All Fiction - by Dan Barker, foreword by Richard Dawkins

Even if we assume the God of the Bible to be real this book makes a legitimate argument for why no rational moral person should respect or worship that deity. Obviously, Christians will disagree. But it will prove interesting to see what sort of justifications Christians offer for the atrocities committed in the Bible by their God.
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Chris OConnor wrote:I hope all of you consider joining this discussion of God: The Most Unpleasant Character in All Fiction - by Dan Barker, foreword by Richard Dawkins

Even if we assume the God of the Bible to be real this book makes a legitimate argument for why no rational moral person should respect or worship that deity. Obviously, Christians will disagree. But it will prove interesting to see what sort of justifications Christians offer for the atrocities committed in the Bible by their God.
What I find Chris,with the new atheist arguments is a lot of distortion. Walker,Dawkins and I expect Barker make statements about racist ethnic genocide for example.
Christians point out that the Canaanites were judged for their abominations and evil practices including child sacrifice. Also that God warned the Israelites that if they did the same things" the land would vomit them out" in the same way.

To just assert it's racist genocide is to deliberately ignore what these accounts themselves are saying.

To take another example where I assume Barker's charge of God being filicidal refers to his view that God "murdered his son". Here again in Phillipians 2 Christ is described as being co-equal with the Father and voluntarily assuming the position of a servant and humbling himself to become human and offer his life as an atonement for mans sins.

No one who is co-equal in power and being could be coerced to do anything they were not willing to do. So it's just simplistic then to say that God murdered his son.
Rather it's an expression of God's love that rather than just condemn men for their sins he provides a just basis for forgiveness in becoming human and enduring himself the just penalty for rebellion against God.

I don't say there aren't difficulties as when the Israelites are told not to spare the children in some cases. Still even this has to be viewed in an eternal context which is alien to atheist thought, but an integral part of the biblical view.

A consequentialist evaluation of future moral and other effects is impossible for humans but not for God. So if God is the giver of all life who is to say he can not take that life, though death is not the end of existence from a biblical view anyway.

So God may have just and sufficient reasons for doing this taking these factors into account.

What annoys me is the sheer laziness of the new atheist critics in ignoring contexts and clear statements such as the reasons for the judgement on the Canaanites.

For the most part it involved driving them out and if they chose to stand and fight that was their choice. In the biblical context they were well aware of the miraculous deliverance from Egypt and that they were dealing with God. They also knew their practices were morally reprehensible as they had consciences just like us.

Besides whenever people repented God did not bring judgement as with Ninevah.

Of course atheists don't believe these are historical accounts or that these miraculous events occurred but as Peter J Williams points out,the morality must be judged while maintaining the internal integrity of the accounts with all the supernatural aspects included.
I've provided a couple of responses from Williams and Copan and am not inclined to be constantly correcting the sloppiness of Barker and co in terms of all they ignore, and the contexts of various accounts.

It's strange too that they miss the central message of God providing a basis for reconciliation by enduring the penalty of man's rebellion against him.
It's sad and even perverse to then make this into an argument that God is so evil he "murdered his own son."
Last edited by Flann 5 on Thu Aug 25, 2016 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Chris OConnor

1A - OWNER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 17016
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
21
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 3507 times
Been thanked: 1310 times
Gender:
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Flann 5, you clearly have some opinions about the subject matter in the next non-fiction discussion so please get a copy and join us. I think it is really important for everyone to always consider opposing views. Don't point-blank dismiss this book.
User avatar
FTL99
Float like a butterfly, post like a bee!
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:32 pm
12
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Robert Tulip wrote:Hi FTL and Tat, nice to see you commenting here. Booktalk tends to be free and easy about allowing moronic fundy trolls to post, as long as they are not too rabid in their insults to reason. I would not quite put Flann5 in that category since he is generally polite and mostly factual and intelligent within his religious framework. That framework does however have a few major areas of stupidity, such as rejection on principle of a naturalistic worldview, belief in Biblical inerrancy, creationism and a supernaturalist interventionist God, failure to appreciate that scriptural meaning is more symbolic than literal, and interest in kooky sites such as Tektonics. Given those limits, you might find it challenging to have a constructive conversation with him.
I have to agree with you Robert, Flann5 appears to be a type of "moronic fundy troll" who has clearly not read through this thread at all or he would realize all of his arguments have been quite thoroughly and decisively debunked to the point of utter embarrassment.

I will not waste my time with such trash from a troll. I have no interest in a pissing contest with a troll like Flann5. Acharya S has passed away and cannot defend herself from such trolls.

Those links Flann5 posted were written by Christian apologist extremists out to shore up their Christian faith and euphoria at all costs - even if it means being dishonest. Besides, the quotes and links posted throughout this thread debunk both articles. All Flann5 did was take a big dump in this thread posting very disrespectful misinformation and malicious smears about Acharya when she is no longer alive to defend herself. It makes this entire forum look bad and certainly doesn't encourage me to post here at all.

Keep in mind that Jonathan Burke, like so many other mythicist critics, has absolutely no relevant qualifications or degrees whatsoever:
Jonathan Burke's Employment:

1. Deloitte & Touche (Taipei).
Document editor, trainer. June 2008 to October 2011. Document editing, technical communication, personnel training.
2. Duban Corporate Communications (Taipei).
Director of Training · August 2009 to present. Department director, curriculum development, client liaison, trainer hiring & training.
3. Adonit (Taipei).
Customer Service Director. October 2011 to present. Department director, personnel management, documentation, customer communication, corporate trainer, policies & procedures.

Jonathan Burke's Education:

1. University of Tasmania '95. Bachelor of Arts, Classics
2. Monash University '09. Master of Information Management & Systems.
3. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology '11-present. PhD of Industrial Management.
Supervisors: Shuo-Yan Chou

monash. academia. edu/JonathanBurke/
Response to Jonathan Burke

Shattering JP Holding's Anti-Mythicist book

These characters are unaware of the many highly respected scholars who do believe the gospels were written in the second century because it appears they've never studied it. Ignorance is bliss, as the saying goes.

When Were the Gospels Written?

Bart Ehrman: Gospels not written by eyewitnesses, no Jesus in historical record



LOL, even more honest, less-biased and less bigoted Christian New Testament scholars disagree with Flann5 and his sources:
"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"

- F.F. Bruce, a founder of the modern evangelical movement, Who Was Jesus?, page 84, by Murdock

"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2 "...According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3

1. Metzger, HLS, 8.
2. Meier, II, 536.
3. Geisler, CA, 320.

- Who Was Jesus? 259

"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."

- Dr. John Dominic Crossan, Who Was Jesus? 24

"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"

- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Who Was Jesus? 84

http://www.freethoughtnation.com/forums ... 975#p11975
The Truth about Judeo-Christianity

Rabbi: Did Jesus actually exist?

A Brief History of Jesus's Winter Solstice Birthday

The Astrotheological Origins of Christianity

Mythicism and the Ph.D.: A Brief History

Evemerist vs. Mythicist Position

It's too bad Acharya is no longer alive to defend herself from the trash and malicious smears by trolls: Acharya S/D.M. Murdock Memoriam
User avatar
Chris OConnor

1A - OWNER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 17016
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
21
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 3507 times
Been thanked: 1310 times
Gender:
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

FTL99 wrote:It makes this entire forum look bad and certainly doesn't encourage me to post here at all.
Allowing dissenting views to speak freely is a strength of BookTalk.org not a weakness.
User avatar
FTL99
Float like a butterfly, post like a bee!
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:32 pm
12
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

Chris OConnor wrote:
FTL99 wrote:It makes this entire forum look bad and certainly doesn't encourage me to post here at all.
Allowing dissenting views to speak freely is a strength of BookTalk.org not a weakness.
No it is not - in this case you are not allowing dissenting views you are allowing trolls to hi jack great threads and post whatever trash they can find posting links to known discredited Christian extremist trolls who have no intention of honest debate but instead are out to shore up their faith and euphoria at all costs - even if it means being dishonest. These guys post a mountain of trash and expect us to address every single lie and it's just so much one can't keep up, which they rely on. If you think that is a strength - good luck. Count me out.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2199 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: Christ in Egypt: The Mythicist Position

Unread post

FTL99 wrote:. . . I have to agree with you Robert, Flann5 appears to be a type of "moronic fundy troll" who has clearly not read through this thread at all or he would realize all of his arguments have been quite thoroughly and decisively debunked to the point of utter embarrassment.
Personally, I find this kind of dismissive name-calling more embarrassing than anything Flann5 has said. Though I disagree with him frequently, he is very definitely not a troll. Feel free to ignore him if you want.
-Geo
Question everything
Post Reply

Return to “Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection - by D.M. Murdock”