[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 103 KB, 1251x694, 1432107735111.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6821300 No.6821300[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>Jesus never existed

>> No.6821304

He didn't.

>> No.6821310

Does his existence or nonexistence matter at all?

Jesus is man made into concept

>> No.6821320

>literature board never existed

>> No.6821325

>>6821310
The Jesus of history is not the same as the Christ of faith.

>> No.6821326
File: 616 KB, 1139x877, 1436764593223.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6821326

Jesus is concept made into man :^)

>> No.6821332

>>6821326
nice reddit comic, mind if I save it

>> No.6821344

>>6821325

How come? Einstein is as human as he is icon. Tao-Lin as human as he is meme. Homer as human as he is myth.

These dimensions are not split, they are add-ons

>> No.6821350

plen here, how does quoting the Bible work in a work of fiction? As in, are there any arcane copyrights against direct quotations?

>> No.6821583

>>6821350
Depends if the translation you use is copyrighted.
But even if it is, you have to quote quite a length for it to not be considered "fair use".

>> No.6821735

>>6821300
If he existed so much, why can't they find his burial place?

>> No.6821747

>>6821583
how many words of direct, unedited translation is needed to generally be considered plagarism?

>> No.6821749

>>6821735
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Holy_Sepulchre

>> No.6821758

>>6821747
As long as it is attributed, it can't be consider plagiarism. Copyright infringement is possible, but that would have to be quite a lot of words.

>> No.6821787

>>6821749
>and also contains the place where Jesus is said to have been buried and resurrected

>said to be

>> No.6821819

>>6821787
What's wrong with that?

>> No.6821823

>>6821735
He wouldn't have received a proper burial if he was executed as a traitor to Rome.

Of course it's hard to be certain exactly why he was crucified, because the accounts contain implausibilities like the release of a prisoner based on crowd approval, and a completely inaccurate depiction of a Sanhedrin trial.

>> No.6821849

>>6821819
Because hearsay isn't usually considered to be evidence.

>> No.6821863

Doesn't matter whether Jesus existed or not.

The lack of continuity between testaments, muddy criteria for Christ's prophetic fulfillment, the issues with the existence of any sort of God as a tenable position (citing scarcity of evidence), insistence on faith-based confirmation criteria, directly opposed to logical argument, and over-specific conclusions about the nature of a hypothetical God, drawn from fairly broad arguments like those of Aquinas, which rather peculiarly are logic-based, and the internal inconsistencies in the way the churches and their representatives have historically behaved with regards to the tenets of their faith, and the remnant effects of "mystery-cult thinking" wherein only those inducted into the faith are considered to have a true perception of the God in question, all adds up to a great big pile of conspiracy and lies, cynically constructed to resist the pressure of an encroaching age of irrelevance.

It is grand and tragic, and I am so very bored of it by now.

>> No.6822298

>>6821849
That's as good of evidence as you can possibly expect, it being thought to be his burial from at least the second century. Any earlier than that, and you can hardly expect there to be some preservable record, because a place like Christ's burial would be known to all Christians due to the people heading the Church having been there, it would just be common knowledge, it's just a location, no one is going to think, "We better make an exact map for future scholars" when the vast majority of Christians were probably illiterate.

>> No.6822350

>>6821344
Isn't there evidence to support Homer never having existed?

>> No.6822358

>>6821300
Milbank is exactly as ansolutelydisgusting.jpg as Harris.

>> No.6822367

>>6822350
No, since both of his epics had planned plots, in fact they were considered perfect use of plot, especially the second. If they were just written going along, the beginning would have been pushed back, and the ending forward. Plus each one was of far better quality than all the other epics, most of which are lost. And they have unified style.

>> No.6822372

>>6822367
Alright, you've convinced me.

>> No.6822398

>>6822358
Milbank actually writes scholarly works of philosophy.

>> No.6822435

>>6822350
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeric_Question#Homer_as_the_manifestation_of_an_oral_tradition

>> No.6822459
File: 400 KB, 640x480, 1385998145188.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6822459

>>6822398
>le secualrism is bad nao guys rely
pass.

>> No.6822485

>>6822459
But his argument is academic

Maybe try downloading Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=334F1325BC8A6B398F07628ABE00F1C0

Just take a cursory look at it. Equating Milbank with Sam Harris is ridiculous. Peter Hitchens is a more apt comparison.

>> No.6822518

>>6822485
I would like you here
>>6822454