Misplaced Pages

User talk:BruceGrubb/archive 1: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:BruceGrubb Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:41, 20 December 2009 editAkhilleus (talk | contribs)13,976 edits edit warring on Christ myth theory: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 19:21, 20 December 2009 edit undoBruceGrubb (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,222 edits edit warring on Christ myth theoryNext edit →
Line 21: Line 21:


These are excellent Bruce. Will definately be using them in my defense. Many thanks.] (] · ] · ]) 18:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC) These are excellent Bruce. Will definately be using them in my defense. Many thanks.] (] · ] · ]) 18:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

== edit warring on ] ==

{{uw-3rr|Christ myth theory}}

I notice that you edited the page as ]: . Logging out to edit war is not a good idea. ] (]) 16:41, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:21, 20 December 2009

I occasional go through and clean out the talk page of old comments that are out of date. Those looking for archives are invited to refer to the history.

Jesus Myth comments

The biggest problem for the whole Historical Jesus position is supporters like Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell who try to prove every point of the Gospels as historical fact and wind up reducing the whole Historical Jesus position to self-characture. It is like the old joke with friends like these you don't need any enemies; their efforts to show that Jesus not only existed but was everything the Gospels claim actually happened just tarnishes the whole Historical Jesus position. It certainly doesn't help matters then who are supposed to be scholars make claims that can easily be disproved, quote broad statements by authors whose works were written half a century ago, or make overly broad comments in a book that they themselves are editing.

You can look for 'creationism' in antrosource and get several promising hits on the first page alone while a search for 'Jesus historical' gets you "There is not a shred of evidence that a historical character Jesus lived, to give an example, and Christianity is based on narrative fiction of high literary and cathartic quality. On the other hand Christianity is concerned with the narration of things that actually take place in human life." (abstract) "It is not possible to compare the above with what we have, namely, that there is not a shred of evidence that a historical character Jesus lived."(body text) Fischer, Roland (1994) "On The Story-Telling Imperative That We Have In Mind" Anthropology of Consciousness. Dec 1994, Vol. 5, No. 4: 16 and then things like the possible useful though tangential and annoyingly unabstracted "On the Reliability of Oral and Traditional History" by Clifton Amsbury from 1995 and "More on the Reliability of Oral and Traditional History" by Ernest S. Burch, Jr. from 1996 and then some really strange articles that make you wonder how they come up in the search. Using 'Jesus Myth' gets the maybe of "Myth and History: A General Model and Its Application to the Bible" by Karin R. Andriolo from 1981 but nothing on the level the 'creationism' search produces. One gets less the impression of a scholarly consensus and more of 'don't want to touch this thing with a 10 foot pole'.

A related problem is trying to say Jesus myth hypothesis is also called the "nonhistoricity hypothesis", "Christ-myth theory", "Christ-myth", or "Jesus-myth" creates enormous problems when you find scholars who clearly are using different definitions.

Call out

WikiProject Alternate History is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active editor, please add your name back to the Active members list. You can also list yourself as a Supporter if you feel you cannot dedicate the time necessary to be an active member.

Please also see the Project talk page for more information concerning this Call Out. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

RfC

Please see Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Rorschach test images. SlimVirgin 16:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Quotes

These are excellent Bruce. Will definately be using them in my defense. Many thanks.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

User talk:BruceGrubb/archive 1: Difference between revisions Add topic