I feel sorry for Runner and his ilk who so doggedly refuse to look reality in the face.

David

Good, logical thinking, Mr Morris.

Unfortunately, religion has very little to do with logic, and - in the context of your article - a great deal to do with politics. Can you imagine, for example, an American presidential candidate declaring themself atheist, or even agnostic? Would not get to the starting gate. Whatever their personal views might be, they would need to keep them tightly under cover, in much the same way that religious folk had to hide their faith in the time of Stalin or Mao.

It will take another couple of generations, unfortunately, before the shackles of belief in some abstract deity are lifted. But please, don't let that stop you trying.

It's a typical post where opinion is quoted as fact. It'a also typically arrogant in that he thinks that we are superior because we have greater knowledge than the guys who wrote it.

It's so baised as to be useless for any discussion.

The following view is striking: There is nothing more negative than the result of the critical study of the life of Jesus. The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly as the Messiah, who preached the ethic of the kingdom of God, who founded the kingdom of heaven upon earth, and died to give his work its final consecration, never had any existence. This image has not been destroyed from without, it has fallen to pieces, cleft and disintegrated by the concrete historical problems which came to the surface one after another. END OF QUOTE
It's particularly striking that this comment was made by a highly motivated Christian, the physician, musician and scholar Albert Schweitzer (1875–1965, who wrote a detailed study of the Quest for the Historical Jesus.
So it's not all an atheist plot.

Whether a bloke called Jesus, who claimed to be the son of God, lived or died over 2000 years ago or not, is of no consequence when there is absolutely no proof there is any actual God anyway.

A good essay which sums up the situation in a succinct way.

Dashton is obviously completely unavailable for any kind of serious in depth consideration about the fabricated "evidence" re the life and teaching of Saint Jesus of Galilee.

These two well reasoned references also affirm the findings of the modern scholarship that began with the work/challenge of Albert Schweitzer. They are however based on a completely different perspective than the usual secular critiques of now archaic old-time religiosity
http://www.dabase.org/up-5-1.htm
http://www.aboutadidam.org/articles/secret_identity/beyond_hidden.html
The author used to humorously point out that unless you have solid on the spot photographic evidence for the existence of these (now) essentially fictional story-book characters, then you are essentially believing in and promoting mystifying mumbo-jumbo.

What a pathetic attempt to misrepresent/ deny ones Creator. Of course 20% or more of the cloth deny the resurrection of Jesus. It was men of the 'cloth' who had Him crucified. It is men of the 'cloth' like Dawkins and churchman who fail considerably in their personal lives that then have to replace morality with their own form of failure. The only 'new' evidence confirms how right Jesus was when describing the corrupt state of men's hearts.

The reality is that men like Brian and all the deniers of the Son of God are haters of God because their own corrupted morality is exposed by Jesus. He shows his true agenda by

'The evidence is overwhelming. With high levels of education, social advancement, and dramatic discoveries in science, the Western world is finally coming to recognise the Jesus myth is exactly that'

Yes higher levels of education have made many dumber, secular social advancements led to great drug usage, porn addiction, more rape, teenagers topping themselves, fatherless families, mothers choosing lesbian, perversion promoted. Congratualtions Brian you must be so proud.

The attacks on Christ are nothing new, have little to no substance and say more about the attackers who always seem to believe the totally idiotic belief that we came from nothing and that all the order that stares every person in the face came from chaos. I know who the fanciful ones are and they are not the believers in the only One who can save their soul but those dumb enough to deny that they will face their Maker one day.

Faith built on fiction, and probably underscored by mounting archaeological evidence, which literally destroys the Moses fable, along with (his alleged) commandments carved in stone, (by unfathomable celestial intelligence) for a largely illiterate race!
That said, emerging evidential revelations are not grounds for rejecting or dumping common human morality!
Or accepting (elder abuse) extermination, dressed up as (would do as much for a dog) fashionable euthanasia?
Even as cures for most conditions are being progressed along with palliative remedies, now up to a thousand more times more efficacious than morphine?
I mean, and let's face it head on!
How can people (possibly even your mum or dad) who have largely lost their marbles, give informed consent to their early extermination/termination of inconvenient longevity!?
Watching an inherently hostile elder live out the balance of their days in dribbling dementia, may not be pretty, particularly for younger (unrecognized/who the hell are you) relatives!
But if they're are relatively comfortable, and not being nursed 24/7 at home, by emotional fretting/irrational sleep deprived relatives; are not in any real physical or unmanageable pain.
Why can't they be allowed to live out their natural term?
We all of us will be old one day, and might not be too pleased, if our inherent right to live, could be simply terminated by a relative/partner eager to acquire our sometimes, megre possessions!?
Never ever give enduring powers of attorney to those who might eventually inherit, but rather, and only if actually necessary, the public trustee's office!
At the very least, we can expect impartial and fair outcomes, and according to actual instructions!
Rhrosty.

Rhosty, how about keeping to the matter under discussion, instead of branching off into all manner of things not even hinted at in the article. Your comments are completely off the track.

David

Oh dear, this article is about a hundred years too late!

Sells, is it possible that you actually agree with it?
David

So should we stop striving to love another
and doimg unto others as we like to be treated?

This is a rather odd article. Morris tells us that Carrier proves the Gospels are “pious fraud” and the independent evidence of Jesus’ existence is “imaginary”. But he doesn’t describe the basis on which Carrier reaches those conclusions, leaving readers unable to judge for themselves whether Carrier actually does prove those things. Morris concludes that “the evidence is overwhelming” that Jesus is purely fictional, but we must take Morris’s word for it. And the fact the that great majority of historians – not just Christian ones – believe that a historical figure called Jesus underpins Christianity surely means that Carrier’s claims deserve scrutiny.

Morris also sets up a false dichotomy between the New Testament being pure history or pure myth. Most bible scholars and most Christians contend it contains both, and other genres as well. That the Gospels were produced by anonymous writers over a number of years is hardly news. Nor is the fact that Paul didn’t write all of the Pauline epistles.

asho

'So should we stop striving to love another
and doimg unto others as we like to be treated?'

in case you have not noticed holding the progressive/feminist view makes this impossible. Self righteousness and self centredness is the clear fruit of the regressives. That is why they need to display such moral outrage over things like coal and the gw fantasy.

There is always room for you to do your own evaluation, Rhian.

>>But he doesn’t describe the basis on which Carrier reaches those conclusions, leaving readers unable to judge for themselves whether Carrier actually does prove those things.<<

Here's quite a good place to start, if you can't bring yourself to buy the book:

http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/2014/08/car388028.shtml

It is all about "weight of evidence", as with all things scientific, so the question of whether this proves anything is largely irrelevant. Carrier's book contains a great deal of myth-debunking, and in the process dismantles many of the previous commonly accepted arguments - often taken at face value - that concern the existence of Jesus.

But it is only to be expected that believers aren't going to re-examine their faith on the basis of one, or even a dozen books that expose the multitude of fallacies surrounding their particular religion. It will be more like smoking - gradually, the stupidity of polluting ones lungs with carcinogens seeps into the collective consciousness, and over time it goes from being culturally acceptable and ubiquitous, to a minority activity. Eventually, it will disappear completely, for all the right, logical and intellectual reasons. As will religion.

The basic decency of the evolving human race is gradually ensuring that the Revolt Against Reason is losing the battle to undo the gains of the Enlightenment.

Dear Pericles,

If logic were the driving force of human activity religion would have disappeared long ago. Before Christianity most Europeans believed in Roman, Greek, Norse or other pantheons of gods. In Europe this was mainly replaced by Christianity. Religion will not disappear, but Christianity probably will. It will be replaced by something equally illogical. Religious beliefs disappears but are replaced by other religious beliefs. Manichaeism lasted from the third to the eighteenth century. It extended from Spain to China. It has disappeared. Religions come and go. They have a longer shelf life than ideology. Christianity will eventually disappear, but it will be replaced by another equally irrational belief.

Pericles,

I will do my own evaluation, and I am not dismissing Carrier out of hand. My comments addressed Morris’s article.

I agree it’s about the weight of evidence. Most – not all – scholars believe the weight of evidence points to the existence of a historical person called Jesus. That is quite a different thing from asserting that the Gospels are historically accurate records of his life and teaching, still less that this proves their theological assertions

Runner, if you are worried that the end of Christianity will cause the end of the golden rule (Do unto others etc), don't be. The golden rule predates the time Jesus walked the Earth, or is thought by some to have walked the Earth, by hundreds of years, or was it thousands. Rational people will certainly continue to value the golden rule long after religions cease to exist because its arise as a guiding principle owes nothing to religion; except that Jesus thought it was a such a good idea when he heard about it that he sponsored it quite enthusiastically. As any other switched on preacher would have done.

And when you write, "Self righteousness and self centredness is (sic) the clear fruit of the regressives", you seem to be categorising yourself as a regressive. Possibly you are also outing yourself as a feminist but your syntax leaves some doubt about that interpretation.

I suspect there's a lot of cultural bias in the belief that an historical Jesus existed. Most people - both theist and atheist - will happily believe that an historical Jesus existed, despite there being no reliable evidence for this; yet we'll all dismiss, out of hand, the idea that an historical Horus existed - or any other messiah that the Jesus character was likely plagiarised from.

Dear david f,

I'm inclined to agree with Pericles, regarding the eventual disappearance of religion - throughout the Western world, at least. At no point in history have we had so many educated people, and nor have we had such brilliant means of communications by which to spread information. Furthermore, neither of these factors seem to be showing any signs of slowing anytime soon.

I am sure, however, that a return to the “Dark Ages”, through some apocalyptic event, would breathe new life into religion as humans became superstitious and fearful again.

Many good posts there, except for Runner and his equally dumb mate Asho but then there are always some who are too dense to see the evidence that stares them in the face.

David

'Runner, if you are worried that the end of Christianity will cause the end of the golden rule '

GlenC you really are naive to think their will be an end of Christ and His followers. Next you will be telling me that Israel will be wiped off the map. I choose to believe in the One who never lied rather than your hopeless narrative.

So what happened to all those people before the birth of Jesus 2014 years ago, they all disappeared into lala land the same as we all will disappear into lala land, that is not going anywhere after death, how on earth can people like Runner believe in such rubbish, dead, that's it, the same as the ancient Egyptians, nothing else, they were alive the same as we are but they didn't get a guernsey into your heaven Runner because they were born before the fictitious virgin birth and believed in other crap, they deserved the same as what you are expecting after you go, not a fair situation by your God is it, the befores don't count like the afters, unfortunately you will be the same as the Egyptians and others, death being final and just lucky to have lived in your speck in time.

Dear A J Philips,

Educated people have the tools at their command to rationalise the irrational. They have the insight to see religion as an effective tool to control others. Read Charles Freeman's "The Closing of the Western Mind." It tells how the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire destroyed the spirit of inquiry current in the classical world. The adoption of Christianity ushered in the Dark Ages. It can happen again.

My personal view is that there is no supernatural entity of any kind, and I think of myself as intelligent. I read the "Confessions" of St. Augustine, and his intelligence seemed greater than mine. His reflections on time and space were sublime. However, he seemed to sincerely believe in the nonsense of Christianity. He had an unreasonable sense of guilt, and the Christian mumbojumbo alleviated it. People of great intelligence supported the totalitarianism of Marxism and fascism. If intelligence and education correlated with common sense, compassion and reason religion would disappear. However, I don't think there is such a correlation. There appears to be a need, even in the educated and intelligent, for the irrational found in religion.

Credo quia absurdum is a Latin phrase that means "I believe because it is absurd." It is a paraphrase of a statement in Tertullian's work De Carne Christi, "prorsus credibile est, quia ineptum est", which can be translated: "it is by all means to be believed, because it is absurd".[1] The context is a defence of the tenets of orthodox Christianity against docetism. Tertullian was a highly intelligent person who relied on the absurdity of Christianity as a justification of his belief.

We had a saying when I was a Nasho and it still applies on matters of religion.
"BS baffles brains."

David

I have so much to say about this topic, but for shortage of time I'll only say this for now:

1. One can live without dogmas, but one cannot live without religion.
2. The author is proposing to "unite" Australia under presumably "shared" secular and humanitarian values. As myself and others do not share those values, I wonder what the author has in store for us: non-voluntary euthanasia perhaps?
3. Thank you for your contribution, Asho, much appreciated!
4. Thank you for you courage, Runner: though I do not agree with every word you wrote, I appreciate the way you came forward.

Dear david f,

I largely acknowledge much of what you have said. However, there is also the increased communications that we have today that Augustine didn’t have in his time. Perhaps I’m too optimistic, but at the rate that we see religions lose their numbers in the Western world (200 per week in Australia, last I was aware), it is not hard for me to imagine a time where it (at least) reaches a point of “ecological extinction” (so to speak).

I absolutely can understand what you say regarding “an unreasonable sense of guilt”. An immediate family member of mine is currently religious due to the ultimate forgiveness that modern Christianity provides them for a horrible act that they committed.

That being said, I think there will always be a level of superstition in society; I just think that it’s unlikely to be religion at some point in the future, and that - whatever it is - it probably won’t contain ideas as absurd as comforting and tyrannical celestial father figures.

Yuyitsu, "...one cannot live without religion."

Is that right?
You may not be able to live without religion, but many others can and do, very successfully.

I imagine our human race would not have survived in it's early stages if you were correct in your assertions,, because religion wasn't thought up by humans until long after man started walking the earth.

All those other superstitions like witches, fairies, goblins etc were thought up before any actual gods or religions.

Dear Suse,

The only purpose we have in life is to re-unite with God. We are all on this road, whether we are aware of it or not.

Every rock, every elementary particle, even black holes and dark matter, all exist for this sole purpose, thus religion is everywhere.

However, you may be correct that only humans tread this path consciously and that it was a while until humans came upon the idea of pursuing religion consciously.

Those who wish for the end of religion are trying to cut the branch they're sitting on. Fortunately, it is impossible.

Today is a sad day and my heart aches for my Christian brothers and sisters, dark clouds hovering over them. If indeed it is proven that Jesus did not exist, then they will be deeply wounded. This Richard Carrier must be a cruel heartless person for publishing such a book rather than keeping this callous information to himself.

Myself, I am not a Christian and would not be personally affected by such findings. In fact, my own faith does not depend on anyone's or anything's existence, but those Christians would suffer. Some would commit suicide, others would turn to crime and wantonness, some may even end up as Jihadi terrorists, "thanks" to this man, Richard Carrier and the author who so gleefully advertises this book.

Nobody can stop religion: in the end, Truth, Religion and Righteousness always win, but yes, bad people can temporarily make the life of the religious much harder.

To those beloved Christian brothers and sisters, I send this song, translated (from German):

"Christians must be
true disciples of Christ on earth.
They wait for Him at all times,
until they happily undergo
martyrdom, exile, and bitter pain."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NsWscJiiNE

AJ Phillips,

".....I think there will always be a level of superstition in society; I just think that it’s unlikely to be religion at some point in the future, and that - whatever it is - it probably won’t contain ideas as absurd as comforting and tyrannical celestial father figures"

Alive and well in 'The Stars' columns/sections of newspapers and magazines!!

Suse,

If we take a broad definition of religion as 'a way of life' then it is indeed ancient and there is evidence that the Neanderthal had religious practices and that they buried their dead with ceremony.

Under the above definition, Communism is a non-theistic religion.

Is Mise, I don't think the bible believes in Neanderthals and evolution.
Adam and Eve were the first humans apparently.

Yuyutsu, I agree there would be mass hysteria if it was proved there was no Jesus.
However, I very much doubt that many Christians would ever believe in that 'proof' anyway, given that they don't appear to need any proof that gods exist either!

I don't see any harm in believing there is an invisible father-figure up in the sky looking after them, as long as these beliefs don't interfere with politics or anyone else's life.

Dear Suse,

<<I don't see any harm in believing there is an invisible father-figure up in the sky looking after them, as long as these beliefs don't interfere with politics or anyone else's life.>>

Yes, betraying God for the sake of becoming entangled in politics, by those bodies that were supposed to lead people to God, should be called what it really is - adultery, and is probably the worst thing that ever happened to religion.

Suseonline my thoughts exactly, unfortunately I have had so many religious people trying to convert me to their way of thinking, why do they do it? I do not force my Atheist viewpoint on them, "God is watching you" what proof, show me he is watching, "We all have souls" please show me a soul, do not talk to me this way, I do not like it, if you believe in them good luck to you, but do not even mention them when in my company, I am not the slightest bit interested in superstition.

"Morris tells us that Carrier proves the Gospels are “pious fraud” and the independent evidence of Jesus’ existence is “imaginary”. But he doesn’t describe the basis on which Carrier reaches those conclusions, leaving readers unable to judge for themselves whether Carrier actually does prove those things. Morris concludes that “the evidence is overwhelming” that Jesus is purely fictional, but we must take Morris’s word for it."
Posted by Rhian, Thursday, 30 October 2014 4:22:34 PM

Best to read Carrier's book; or other books such as Father Thomas Brodie’s "Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus".
.

"Morris also sets up a false dichotomy between the New Testament being pure history or pure myth. Most bible scholars and most Christians contend it contains both, and other genres as well."

What is history is hard to determine: dates, etc. are hard to fathom given the various dating systems of the times.

Also, it is likely the Bible narratives were elaborated over many generations/centuries before the Canon was finalised. Some 19th C Biblical scholars such as AD Loman believe the Pauline texts developed in a separate and adversarial community to the community/ies that developed the Canonical Gospels, and the texts were finally aligned though compromise and redaction.