argumentum ad populem

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Failed theories are or should be part of science teaching ......or do you want that distorted as well?

In some instances it's beneficial to teach theories which were shown to be untrue - Newton's law of gravitation, for instance. ID, though, is not a failed theory, it was never a scientifically formulated theory in the first place.

I think there are also some horrors in the public understanding of science......unsurprising if you've got people charged with the job using their watch to guff on about antitheism instead.

I'm sure you have a raft of evidence to back up that idea of why the state of science education is so parlous, right...

O.

Well there are a high proportion of non specialists teaching science for one thing.
There was the MMR affair in recent memory.
The Obesity crisis.

[Outrider]

Failed theories are or should be part of science teaching ......or do you want that distorted as well?

In some instances it's beneficial to teach theories which were shown to be untrue - Newton's law of gravitation, for instance. ID, though, is not a failed theory, it was never a scientifically formulated theory in the first place.

I think there are also some horrors in the public understanding of science......unsurprising if you've got people charged with the job using their watch to guff on about antitheism instead.

I'm sure you have a raft of evidence to back up that idea of why the state of science education is so parlous, right...

O.

Well there are a high proportion of non specialists teaching science for one thing.
There was the MMR affair in recent memory.
The Obesity crisis.

Those are evidence that the state of science education is parlous, which I didn't dispute, or alternative reasons why it might be. I was disputing your contention that the reason science education was in such a poor state was the idea that people were teaching 'anti-theism' instead of science.

O.

[Enki]

Yes, I saw that. It simply emphasises to me the problems that Christianity faces, and what a confusing state of flux Christianity seems to be in, at least in this country.

Why is this a problem for Christianity yet not a problem of history education?

The poll suggests that 40% of people didn't realise that Jesus was a real person(assuming, of course, that he was) so the Christian message doesn't really seem to be very successful, does it?

Unsurprising in a secular society but it shows that History Education is not getting this across.

This belies the bleating of the NSS and BHS about undue Christian influence in schools.
This is evidence of the success of the control and indoctrination by Secular Humanists.

That people end up ignorant as a result of it is probably celebrated by many here as it shows that their brutal and bastard intellectual fascist programme has succeeded.

Unsurprising in a secular society but it shows that History Education is not getting this across.

Perhaps it is simply that it is unsurprising because the tenets of Christianity have less importance in an increasingly secular society.

This belies the bleating of the NSS and BHS about undue Christian influence in schools.

That's your take on it. I happen to think that specifically Christian assemblies, for instance, have become outmoded and out of touch.

This is evidence of the success of the control and indoctrination by Secular Humanists.

I think that freedom of thought and reduction in Christian discrimination in schools is no bad thing at all. I certainly wouldn't want any form of indoctrination in schools, whether I agreed with the views put forward or not.

That people end up ignorant as a result of it is probably celebrated by many here as it shows that their brutal and bastard intellectual fascist programme has succeeded.

Well, I certainly don't wish for people to be ignorant, but to be as well informed as possible. As far as the historicity of Jesus is concerned, it seems to me that many people, and probably including particularly young people, are apathetic towards the whole Christian take on this, and where apathy reigns, ignorance often follows. This is what I meant by the problems, as I see it, that Christianity seems to have no answer to. To blame (many)others here by characterising their differing views of Christianity as brutal and intellectually fascist seems to me to distort and nullify any constructive attempt you may have to change the situation, as you see it. It might well help to ease your own frustrations, but where do you go after that?  Fine if you want to continue to give vent to your frustrations. Carry on in the same vein. But if you want to actually deal with a situation which you obviously do not like, why not try to produce ideas, arguments and sentiments which actually reach people who are not of your ilk.

[Hope]

Yes, I saw that. It simply emphasises to me the problems that Christianity faces, and what a confusing state of flux Christianity seems to be in, at least in this country.

Not sure where the article 'emphasises the problems that Christianity faces, and what a confusing state of flux Christianity seems to be in, at least in this country', enki.  Perhaps you could elucidate?

[Hope]

Vlad,

Why is this a problem for Christianity yet not a problem of history education?

Because it's faith, not history.

Yet the findings of the survey seem to contradict history, bhs, suggesting that the problem is linked to history, not faith.

[Hope]

Also, although 57% classified themselves as Christian, fewer than 10% actually go to church. So, I assume from the article, that the CofE at least isn't being particularly successful in holding on to its adherents very well. I see this as a problem for Christianity in this country, unless you think that they are happy with this situation, of course.

enki, Christianity in England encompasses many other denominations than the CofE.   Furthermore there are CofE churches that are growing, as well as shrinking.

Regarding the holding of adherents, how many churchgoers are Christians, how many are people seeking spiritual answers, how many are there because it has been the tradition of their family, regardless of belief, etc.

[Hope]

I think it most likely that Jesus was a real person and see nothing in the Jesus myth theory myself but it is not correct to state that he was in the way they did.

And you have evidence to support this belief, Maeght?  Or is it simply an opinion?

[Enki]

Yes, I saw that. It simply emphasises to me the problems that Christianity faces, and what a confusing state of flux Christianity seems to be in, at least in this country.

Not sure where the article 'emphasises the problems that Christianity faces, and what a confusing state of flux Christianity seems to be in, at least in this country', enki.  Perhaps you could elucidate?

Well, I would suggest that Christianity as a whole in this country(and the CofE, especially) is in a state of decline based upon the numbers of its adherents. Obviously I could be wrong,  but parts of this poll seem to suggest that that is what is happening. I would also suggest that Christians would like to increase their numbers rather than seeing them falling.  It seems reasonable to suggest therefore that Christianity has problems in combatting this decrease and then actually increasing their numbers.

The results of the poll also seem to suggest that there seem to be conflicting views in the country as to whether Jesus actually existed, with many young people of the opinion that he was mythical or fictional. Even many of those with a belief in the resurrection, it is suggested, don't necessarily think it happened as described in the Bible. Hence there seems to be a range of views even amongst Christians as to what Christianity actually says. I simply describe this situation as a state of flux, rather than a settled and agreed understanding. Perhaps it was ever that Christianity was in a state of flux, but, to me, it does seem highlighted by this article.

[jeremyp]

Vlad,

Why is this a problem for Christianity yet not a problem of history education?

Because it's faith, not history.

Yet the findings of the survey seem to contradict history

In what way do the findings of the survey contradict history?

[Enki]

Also, although 57% classified themselves as Christian, fewer than 10% actually go to church. So, I assume from the article, that the CofE at least isn't being particularly successful in holding on to its adherents very well. I see this as a problem for Christianity in this country, unless you think that they are happy with this situation, of course.

enki, Christianity in England encompasses many other denominations than the CofE.   Furthermore there are CofE churches that are growing, as well as shrinking.

Regarding the holding of adherents, how many churchgoers are Christians, how many are people seeking spiritual answers, how many are there because it has been the tradition of their family, regardless of belief, etc.

Well, as this poll seems to have been commissioned by the CofE I make no excuse for mentioning the CofE in particular. Of course individual churches may have rising congregations, but do you disagree that, taken as a whole, congregations are shrinking, which was my point?

I don't see the relevance of the second paragraph. Of course people attend a church for a variety of reasons, but the evidence seems to show that church attendance(including Catholicism, Methodism, CofE) is generally falling in this country.

[Maeght]

I think it most likely that Jesus was a real person and see nothing in the Jesus myth theory myself but it is not correct to state that he was in the way they did.

And you have evidence to support this belief, Maeght?  Or is it simply an opinion?

Not sure what belief you are talking about Hope. It is not a proven fact that Jesus existed, although 'Many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man' hence it is incorrect to say 'Jesus was a real person'. Like I say, it seems likely he was a real person but it is not a fact that he was. What would you disagree about in my suggested rewrite of  'did not realise that many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man'?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Why is this a problem for Christianity yet not a problem of history education?

Because it's faith, not history.

Yet the findings of the survey seem to contradict history

In what way do the findings of the survey contradict history?

I take it you mean authorities now in general believe Jesus did not exist.

That isn't the case.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think it most likely that Jesus was a real person and see nothing in the Jesus myth theory myself but it is not correct to state that he was in the way they did.

And you have evidence to support this belief, Maeght?  Or is it simply an opinion?

Not sure what belief you are talking about Hope. It is not a proven fact that Jesus existed, although 'Many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man' hence it is incorrect to say 'Jesus was a real person'. Like I say, it seems likely he was a real person but it is not a fact that he was. What would you disagree about in my suggested rewrite of  'did not realise that many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man'?

I think it's most scholars agree. Many scholars leaves room for the retort that many scholars do not agree. That is not the case.

Which ever way you cut it Many people believe Jesus is fictional and your correction merely looks like something to salvage grounds for that belief.

The methodologies used must apply to any other ancient historical figures.

With a fictional Christ history would have been very different and running the Jesus myth counterfactual would not I move give us the same history.

[Maeght]

I'm not suggesting that many scholars agree with the Jesus Myth theory what I am suggesting is that it is not a proven fact that Jesus was a real person so the phraseology was inaccurate. Nothing more, nothing less. This lack of certainty is being used more and more for historical figures from what I have seen, with caveats of if he/she actually existed now being given to a number of ancient figures in TV programs and the like.

I don't really see how a fictional Jesus would mean that history would be different though since its all about the belief in Jesus surely - how would it be different?

[jeremyp]

Vlad,

Why is this a problem for Christianity yet not a problem of history education?

Because it's faith, not history.

Yet the findings of the survey seem to contradict history

In what way do the findings of the survey contradict history?

I take it you mean authorities now in general believe Jesus did not exist.

That isn't the case.

I don't mean anything. I asked a question which I'd like you to answer.

[jeremyp]

With a fictional Christ history would have been very different and running the Jesus myth counterfactual would not I move give us the same history.

I don't think that is the case. How would history be different?

[Outrider]

Vlad,

Why is this a problem for Christianity yet not a problem of history education?

Because it's faith, not history.

Yet the findings of the survey seem to contradict history, bhs, suggesting that the problem is linked to history, not faith.

In historical terms, whether Jesus actually existed isn't that important - for the majority of history society in the West has operated on the presumption that he did, hence it's not that much more than a curio in historic terms.

It's important in religious terms, of course, but not historical.

O.

[Outrider]

I think it most likely that Jesus was a real person and see nothing in the Jesus myth theory myself but it is not correct to state that he was in the way they did.

And you have evidence to support this belief, Maeght?  Or is it simply an opinion?

Not sure what belief you are talking about Hope. It is not a proven fact that Jesus existed, although 'Many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man' hence it is incorrect to say 'Jesus was a real person'. Like I say, it seems likely he was a real person but it is not a fact that he was. What would you disagree about in my suggested rewrite of  'did not realise that many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man'?

I think it's most scholars agree. Many scholars leaves room for the retort that many scholars do not agree. That is not the case.

Which ever way you cut it Many people believe Jesus is fictional and your correction merely looks like something to salvage grounds for that belief.

The methodologies used must apply to any other ancient historical figures.

With a fictional Christ history would have been very different and running the Jesus myth counterfactual would not I move give us the same history.

No, whether Christ is entirely or only mainly fictional makes no difference to how Christianity progressed, given that it worked on the assumption that the stories were true. Whether, at the core of those stories, was a real teacher or not, Christianity has become what it has become.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think it most likely that Jesus was a real person and see nothing in the Jesus myth theory myself but it is not correct to state that he was in the way they did.

And you have evidence to support this belief, Maeght?  Or is it simply an opinion?

Not sure what belief you are talking about Hope. It is not a proven fact that Jesus existed, although 'Many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man' hence it is incorrect to say 'Jesus was a real person'. Like I say, it seems likely he was a real person but it is not a fact that he was. What would you disagree about in my suggested rewrite of  'did not realise that many scholars agree that Jesus was a real man'?

I think it's most scholars agree. Many scholars leaves room for the retort that many scholars do not agree. That is not the case.

Which ever way you cut it Many people believe Jesus is fictional and your correction merely looks like something to salvage grounds for that belief.

The methodologies used must apply to any other ancient historical figures.

With a fictional Christ history would have been very different and running the Jesus myth counterfactual would not I move give us the same history.

No, whether Christ is entirely or only mainly fictional makes no difference to how Christianity progressed, given that it worked on the assumption that the stories were true. Whether, at the core of those stories, was a real teacher or not, Christianity has become what it has become.

O.

Yes but the evidence is that obvious mythologies do not survive geography,syncreticism or history.

The trouble for Jesus Myth idea is that communities local to Jesus Palestine which believed he was real existed and were established within a couple of decades of the event. The community which does not believe he was real started less than about two centuries ago.
Note that that ''jesus myth community'' community was not rabbinical Judaism or the neronic roman empire, nor the spread of Islam nor any powerful bodies far nearer to the time who might have had a vested interest in a fictional Christ.

[Outrider]

Yes but the evidence is that obvious mythologies do not survive geography,syncreticism or history.

Not really. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Mormonism, Scientology - all are thriving, all appear to be growing in certain areas at least, if not globally. Obvious mythologies continue to survive - I suspect, though, we have differing ideas of what 'obvious' means in this context.

The trouble for Jesus Myth idea is that communities local to Jesus Palestine which believed he was real existed and were established within a couple of decades of the event. The community which does not believe he was real started less than about two centuries ago.

And the community that thought man could fly, or build cars, or understood germ theory has similarly developed late in history. Of course, the political climate is such that the people that believe Jesus was a myth have been free to make that claim in more recent times.

The real problem, though, is the polarising idea that either 'Jesus is real' or 'Jesus is myth', when the balance of probablities is that there is an origin to the story, but most of the claims put forward are unsustainable frippery hung on that small peg.

Note that that ''jesus myth community'' community was not rabbinical Judaism or the neronic roman empire, nor the spread of Islam nor any powerful bodies far nearer to the time who might have had a vested interest in a fictional Christ.

You mean people with a vested interest in maintaining both the notion of religion and/or the confrontation between religions...

O.

[jeremyp]

The trouble for Jesus Myth idea is that communities local to Jesus Palestine which believed he was real existed and were established within a couple of decades of the event.

Can you name some of these communities? What evidence is there that they believed Jesus was a real person?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The trouble for Jesus Myth idea is that communities local to Jesus Palestine which believed he was real existed and were established within a couple of decades of the event.

Can you name some of these communities? What evidence is there that they believed Jesus was a real person?

They are outlined in the New testament epistles.

[jeremyp]

The trouble for Jesus Myth idea is that communities local to Jesus Palestine which believed he was real existed and were established within a couple of decades of the event.

Can you name some of these communities? What evidence is there that they believed Jesus was a real person?

They are outlined in the New testament epistles.

So you don't know what they are called then.

By the way, one of your conditions was that they are local to "Jesus Palestine" [sic]. By the standards of the day, the only one named in the New Testament that I can think of that would fit that criterion would be the one in Jerusalem.  We know virtually nothing about that community and what it believed.

[Outrider]

The trouble for Jesus Myth idea is that communities local to Jesus Palestine which believed he was real existed and were established within a couple of decades of the event.

Can you name some of these communities? What evidence is there that they believed Jesus was a real person?

They are outlined in the New testament epistles.

That New Testament - that's the myth. It might (might!) in part be based on actual events, but it equally might not. Any, shall we say, academic references to these communities?

O.