So just what is the argument with the cock? Is it supposed to be showing that the original Christians worshipped a penis?
I suppose it's supposed to prove that the catholic church has muddled with christian origins, lied and covered up the truth that all early christianity is a solar myth, even St. Peter, and that the catholic church (who seems to be the only existing christian church in the world according to the mythicists) is still covering up the evidence. Because there are a lot of people out there convinced that we have nothing else and better to do all day long than conceal the evidence about the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene or the existence of essene gospels or chronovisors in some dark chambers of some dark vatican institution and basement.
So just what is the argument with the cock? Is it supposed to be showing that the original Christians worshipped a penis?
I suppose it's supposed to prove that the catholic church has muddled with christian origins, lied and covered up the truth that all early christianity is a solar myth, even St. Peter, and that the catholic church (who seems to be the only existing christian church in the world according to the mythicists) is still covering up the evidence. Because there are a lot of people out there convinced that we have nothing else and better to do all day long than conceal the evidence about the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene or the existence of essene gospels or chronovisors in some dark chambers of some dark vatican institution and basement.
I figure its got to be something crazy like that. Look, even if we buy into the crazy and seriously accept the statue could be of Peter, how do we know it wasn't made by some unknown pagan artist who was mocking early Christian belief?
Joined: Jun 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 164 Location: Lancashire England Karma: 3
Re: Ehrman's e-book "Did Jesus Exist?" « Reply #214 on Apr 29, 2012, 12:25pm »
Bob Dylan tried to alert us to the existence of the Cock many years ago of course, albeit somewhat elliptically in Meet me in the Morning: "little rooster crowing, must be something on his mind". Obviously a reference to Cock/Peter, but doesn't say how it turned up in the US of A.
Joined: Jun 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 164 Location: Lancashire England Karma: 3
Re: Ehrman's e-book "Did Jesus Exist?" « Reply #215 on Apr 29, 2012, 12:51pm »
The Jesus Mythers can't seem to agree on anything other than that Jesus didn't exist - and even that is debatable. Having decided that Jesus didn't exist, then have to explain how he was created, and then the fun starts. It really is a case of too many cooks. Jesus was a. Mithras b. Odysseus. c. a spiritual being inhabiting a Platonic heavenly realm. d an amalgam of any number of dying and rising gods. e. invented by whoever wrote Mark's gospel.
Or maybe a mixture of all the above. It doesn't really matter, as long as they can find something. It all reeks of desperation to me.
I am not sure what motivates the Mythers. Some no doubt want Jesus not to have existed because it buttresses their atheism. (God doesn't exist, and neither did his son). For many, I suspect it is because they are attracted by something that appears new and well, a little bit exciting. Something to create a stir with in company (actually, I don't believe in Jesus either. OO how daring!) And as one or two people here have suggested, some of them have just gone from religious fundamentalism to the other extreme. I think it is a shame that people like Richard Carrier, who is clearly a gifted and intelligent young man, should waste their time on this pap, when they could be contributing something worthwhile to our understanding of history.
The Jesus Mythers can't seem to agree on anything other than that Jesus didn't exist - and even that is debatable. Having decided that Jesus didn't exist, then have to explain how he was created, and then the fun starts. It really is a case of too many cooks. Jesus was a. Mithras b. Odysseus. c. a spiritual being inhabiting a Platonic heavenly realm. d an amalgam of any number of dying and rising gods. e. invented by whoever wrote Mark's gospel.
Or maybe a mixture of all the above. It doesn't really matter, as long as they can find something. It all reeks of desperation to me.
Re: Ehrman's e-book "Did Jesus Exist?" « Reply #218 on Apr 29, 2012, 8:23pm »
Incidentally, Allegro was actually a recognised academic expert in the field (he worked on the Dead Sea Scrolls and held a relevant academic post at an internationally-recognized University). So much expenditure of energy on this thread on people who are neither experts nor at Universities. Perhaps though such people need to be dealt with and there does seem to be the stirring of an academic response. Perhaps Ehrman deserves praise for getting the ball rolling? If those so ignorant of history and historical reasoning as Dawkins and Myers (however much admired by some of the internet classes) try to support the Jesus-mythicists, then they need rebutting.
My alltime favorite explanation for why Jesus mythicism is not accepted in academia comes from none other than the archaeologist, historian, mythologist, and linguist D. M. Murdock/Acharya S (hey, she said she's all those things on her book cover - she wouldn't lie, would she??).
In The Christ Conspiracy, she wrote about the "Christian bias" controlling the academic process:
It is clear that scholars have known about the mythological nature of the Bible, yet they have gone to immense lengths to hide it, including using sophisticated language, like the priestly counterparts who have utilized the dead language Latin to go over the heads of the uneducated masses. It is possible that any number of these scholars are also Masons or members of some such secret brotherhood who are under the blood oath. Or they may merely be products of their occupation, in that many universities and colleges are under the dominion of the fraternities and the grand master, the Pope, i.e., the Catholic Church.1
Just in case you can't get the point about the Masonic control and the pope as grandmaster, she mentioned earlier in the book that "unbeknownst to the masses, the pope is the Grand Master-Mason of the Masonic branches of the world."2
1. The Christ Conspiracy, 376.
2. The Christ Conspiracy, 348.
Yes, the reason Bart Ehrman rejects mythicism is because he fears the great Freemasonic cabal led by the pope! NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!
And she and her fanboys wonder why this woman is not taken seriously.
Since Carrier has been allied with Murdock, I think it fair to ask him his views on this. Is he willing to state these views are crazy, or will he add some element of credibility to them? I realize the mythers live in a Big Tent, so he may be reluctant to call the views of some of his allies what they are - crazy. But that's the downside to living in a big tent with crazies.
Incidentally, Allegro was actually a recognised academic expert in the field (he worked on the Dead Sea Scrolls and held a relevant academic post at an internationally-recognized University). So much expenditure of energy on this thread on people who are neither experts nor at Universities. Perhaps though such people need to be dealt with and there does seem to be the stirring of an academic response. Perhaps Ehrman deserves praise for getting the ball rolling? If those so ignorant of history and historical reasoning as Dawkins and Myers (however much admired by some of the internet classes) try to support the Jesus-mythicists, then they need rebutting.
I have written something on Allegro's past which I will cut and paste below:
Allegro began as an academic but went off the deep end. He did some work on the Dead Sea Scrolls but his views grew more eccentric as the years progressed. Beginning in the late 1950's, he alluded to the figure of the Teacher of Righteousness having parallels to Christ but the textual examples he cited were nonexistent or misrepresented1 and his claims denied in a letter to the London Times by others working on the scrolls.2 Allegro later announced in an article for Harper's that the names of Jesus and Peter meant, respectively, “Essene” and the title of an Essene official.3 Thus far he is the only scholar to come to such a conclusion.
In 1968, he published his final work on the Copper Scroll but it was so error ridden that John Strugnell had to write a 114-page article providing the necessary corrections.4 With his academic reputation slipping quickly, Allegro came to believe there was a conspiracy against him. However, these difficulties were minor compared to the furor that followed in 1970.
It was then that Allegro went from sloppy and sensationalistic to completely off the wall with The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross: A Study of the Nature and Origins of Christianity within the Fertility Cults of the Near East. In this book, Allegro announced Jesus never existed but was invented under the influence of psychotropic mushrooms. He also apparently discovered in the few short years since the Harper's article that the name of Jesus now meant “semen that saves” and that of Peter meant “mushroom.”5 Most scholars who read the book thought it far more likely Allegro was under the influence of “sacred mushrooms” than were the early Christians.
Linking Christianity to sex and drugs was bound to get attention and Allegro's sensationalistic effort quickly earned him publicity. However, his book was quickly savaged and prompted a public rebuke by fifteen leading scholars6 that included experts in Semitic languages, Old Testament studies, Church history, Oriental laws, Assyriology, comparative religion, Islamic studies, and Ethiopian Studies. This diverse group from different religious perspectives were united in their condemnation of Allegro's book as “not based on any philological or other evidence which they can regard as scholarly” and concluded by stating “the work is an essay in fantasy rather than philology.”7
Rarely had an academic been so publicly taken to the woodshed by his peers. Allegro's sensationalism and increasingly shoddy work ended in the quick demise of his academic career. His publisher apologized for ever releasing the book and Allegro soon resigned from his university post.8 He spent the remaining years of his life writing on an alleged conspiracy to suppress the Dead Sea Scrolls and his mushroom cult hypothesis. He was never again taken seriously on a scholarly level.
1. Jenkins (2002), 180.
2. VanderKam and Flint (2005), 324.
3. Yamauchi, “Jesus Outside the New Testament: What is the Evidence?” in ed. Moreland and Wilkins (1996).
4. VanderKam and Flint (2005), 323.
5. VanderKam and Flint (2005), 324.
6. The comments were endorsed by G. M. Driver , P. R. Ackroyd, G. W. Anderson, J. N. D. Anderson, James Barr, C. F. Beckingham, Henry Chadwick, John Emerton, O. R. Gurney, E. G. Parrinder, J. B. Segal, D. Winston Thomas, Edward Ullendorff, G. Vermes, and D. J. Wiseman.
7. Blaiklock (1984), 8fn.
8. VanderKam and Flint (2005), 324.
Bibliography
Blaiklock, E. M. Jesus Christ: Man or Myth? (Thomas Nelson, 1984).
Jenkins, Philip Hidden Gospels: How the Search for Jesus Lost Its Way (Oxford University Press, 2001).
VanderKam, James & Flint, Peter The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Significance for Understanding the Bible, Judaism, Jesus, and Christianity (Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005).
Wilkins, Michael J. and J. P. Moreland, eds. Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus (Zondervan, 1996).
Joined: May 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 493 Karma: 15
Re: Ehrman's e-book "Did Jesus Exist?" « Reply #222 on Apr 30, 2012, 2:09am »
Nice summary of the rise and fall of Allegro. Meanwhile, Carrier's latest response to Ehrman is even more limpwristed than I thought it would be. He's definitely making more mistakes now he's getting bogged down with this tit for tat business, and his tone isn't improving either.
Joined: Jun 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 164 Location: Lancashire England Karma: 3
Re: Ehrman's e-book "Did Jesus Exist?" « Reply #223 on Apr 30, 2012, 7:15am »
I've probably posted this quip before, but it always makes me smile, and on a Monday morning who doesn't need a good reason to smile? Anyway, Allegro obviously thought that Jesus was a fungi to be with.
I've probably posted this quip before, but it always makes me smile, and on a Monday morning who doesn't need a good reason to smile? Anyway, Allegro obviously thought that Jesus was a fungi to be with.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Calendar]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/calendar.gif "[Calendar]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://i41.tinypic.com/k9cg80.png "[avatar]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://i.imgur.com/ZY7Pk.png "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://i1071.photobucket.com/albums/u504/unklee99/f075d7d4.jpg "[avatar]")
