I misread you. I was talking about Caiaphas’s ossuary not Joseph’s. No geochemical studies have been performed with respect to the ossuary of Caiaphas.
I misread Allen. There was no soil analysis done where the Caiaphas ossuary was housed.
For a fair take on historical matters related to Christianity, the web site History for Atheists, authored by an atheist, is worth a look for those interested.
2 Likes
Tim O’Neill is not an atheist.
This is interesting:
History for Atheists regularly features responses to and critiques of Jesus Mythicism – the idea that not only was Jesus not what Christianity claims, but also that there was no historical Jesus at all. Despite this being a thesis with little academic support and accepted by no more than a handful of fringe scholars, it is enthusiastically supported by many atheists, particularly of the New Atheist variety.
So we can conclude that Boris is with the New Atheists that support a handful of fringe scholars.
4 Likes
That, I do not know one way or the other. But his History of Atheists seems reasonably balanced.
I have been taking @Boris_Badenoff to be an apologist for mythicism. His style of argumentation seems so similar to what we see with Christian apologetics – repeated bold assertions, with no apparent evidence to back it up. And I find him completely unpersuasive – which is similar to my reaction to Christian apologetics.
2 Likes
Can we all take a step back for a moment, and recall this is supposed to be @Boris_Badenoff’s introduction to the community? There is lots of disagreement, and Boris seems happy enough to engage, but in the end we should accept that, right or wrong, this is Boris’ opinion.
I’m adding this because I’m starting to see comments about the kind of kind of person Boris is. Disagree all you like, but let’s not make personal judgments.
1 Like
No evidence to back what up exactly? That’s my whole point here. There’s no evidence for an historical Jesus not to mention the Jesus of the gospels. Look what is offered as evidence: A bone box full of the bones of who knows who. But I’m the one making bad arguments?
1 Like
We don’t have any accounts written about any “historical” Jesus. So trying to find this personage in the historical record is pointless. The stories about Jesus and Moses are not based on any other particular sun gods or godmen but are instead the result of religious syncretism. The life of Moses is comparable to stories about King Sargon but not entirely. The figure of David in the stories of 1-2 Samuel finds its earliest parallels in Syria and Mesopotamia in the stories of Esarhaddon of Assyria and Idrimi of Alalakh as well as the Greek myths of Hercules. Idrimi was the youngest of his brothers, fled to the desert to escape a threat, struggled for his kingdom with his band of followers. He supervised the building of a house and the regulation of the proper cult in the city and entrusted it to his son. We already have the sources for the Bible’s stories about Moses, David and Jesus.
1 Like
Yes. I have had no experience (nor ever personally examined) the Caiaphas ossuary. I addressed the James Ossuary because of my familiarity with it and the fact that it is in the category of ossuaries which many (including some on PS and this thread) have claimed are forgeries.
One problem I recall with some of these ossuaries is the Israeli governments officially designated scholars sometimes do various tests but don’t release all of the data to the public and academic community. I recall my associates being frustrated by that at times.
I have never heard of Tim O’Neill before, but I generally take people at their word until demonstrated false. Maybe he is not a true atheist or Irishman. From his site:
I am an atheist, sceptic and rationalist who is a subscribing member of the Atheist Foundation of Australia and a former state president of the Australian Skeptics. I have contributed to many atheism and scepticism fora over the years and have a posting record as a rationalist that goes back to at least 1992.
2 Likes
No evidence for mythicism. Actual evidence of myth construction would make for a better case.
It doesn’t actually matter to me whether Jesus existed. I did agree that the arguments from Christian apologetics are not at all persuasive.
2 Likes
Well I don’t believe a word that comes out of him. Tim O’Neill has said the Christian Church has never fought against advancing science and dismisses atrocities like Crusades, heresy hunting and witch burning as being exaggerated. Like Bart Ehrman and other former Christians he just can’t admit that he fell for the greatest story ever sold.
“No evidence for mythicism. Actual evidence of myth construction would make for a better case.”
This is what myth construction looks like:
The Chiastic Structure of the Gospel of Matthew
A. Jesus, Israel & the Gentiles, Fulfillment, God With Us (1:1 – 25)
B. Jesus Acknowledged as King by a Few (2:1 – 3:17)
C. Jesus Overcomes Three Temptations in the Wilderness (4:1 – 11)
D. Jesus Gathers and Prepares the Disciples for Ministry (4:12 – 25)
E. First Major Discourse: Blessings, the New City on a Hill (5:1 – 7:28)
F. Jesus Calls to Israel as the Prophet Like Moses (8:1 – 9:34)
G. Second Major Discourse: Jesus Trains the Disciples to Call More Disciples (9:35 – 11:1)
H. Division in Israel, Jesus Announces Concern for Gentiles (11:2 – 12:45)
I. Third Major Discourse: Kingdom Growth as a Household (Mt.12:46 – 13:58)
H.’ Division in Israel, Jesus Enacts Mission to Gentiles (14:1 – 17:27)
G.’ Fourth Major Discourse: Jesus Trains the Disciples to Shepherd Other Disciples (18:1 – 19:2)
F.’ Jesus Calls to Israel as the Prophet Like Moses and Heir of David (19:3 – 22:46)
E.’ Fifth Major Discourse: Woes, Fall of Jerusalem, the Old City on a Hill (23:1 – 25:46)
D.’ Jesus Prepares His Disciples for His Death (26:1 – 35)
C.’ Jesus Overcomes Temptation Three Times in the Garden, Peter Fails Temptation Three Times (26:36 – 75)
B.’ Jesus Presented to the World as King and Rejected (27:1 – 66)
A’. Jesus, Israel & the Gentiles, Fulfillment, God With Us (28:1 – 20)
The lack of a written record of Jesus, as pointed out multiple times in the comments, is not proof Jesus didn’t exist.
I agree with @nwrickert you are an apologist for mythicism which even atheists say is only supported by a handful of fringe scholars. Try as you may you do not have a convincing argument. If you can not convince the non-religious how do you expect to convince others?
3 Likes
Seems plausible at least there was a historical figure or figures on which the Biblical Jesus was based. What I find unconvincing are the supernatural claims made for him. Finding evidence outside the Bible that there was indeed a historical Jesus would add no support to those claims.
4 Likes
I have convinced others by just getting them to examine the subject for themselves. That doesn’t take more than a few minutes because there’s nothing to see. Without the miracles the stories about Jesus are meaningless. People believed Hercules was a real person and there are parallels between the stories about Hercules and those about Jesus. When a culture dies its religion and gods go with it. This is what is happening now. Right now.
1 Like
Bart Ehrman has been forced to admit that “Mythicism is seeping into the popular consciousness at an alarming rate.” That’s what is really important, not “scholarship.” Bible scholars are always forced to catch up with the rest of us, kicking and screaming all the way, but in the end they are the ones who have to revise their claims to fit in with popular opinion and science. I see you as an apologist for Christianity and a person with a deeply held faith in Jesus. And like all believers the Jesus you believe in doesn’t exist in the pages of the New Testament or history, but just in your imagination.
1 Like
That is what @Boris_Badenoff fails to comprehend. If the religious believe and non-religious don’t care there is no one left to convince.
3 Likes