René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Kapyong
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:51 pm
Contact:

René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Kapyong »

Gday all,
Just a heads-up for readers who may be interested -

René Salm has just joined the AFA forum to discuss the Nazareth of Jesus.

The Atheist Foundation of Australia is open to all - you don't have to be an Aussie or an atheist.

I haven't seen a post from René yet, but the thread we have been discussing Nazareth in is here :
Why Christopher Hitchens believed in The Historical Jesus

Also - René's recent work NazarethGate is available on Kindle Unlimited which has a 30-day special, so you can read for free for 30 days.

I wouldn't claim AFA has the same level of scholarly discussion as this place, but there are some smart / reasonable posters there, and Neil Godfrey just joined too.

Kapyong
User avatar
Kapyong
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Kapyong »

For anyone who is interested -

Sadly, it did not go well at AFA :(
Here is what Neil Godfrey had to say about it :

Discovering Why “Even Atheists” Deplore Jesus Mythicism. (Or, Thoughts on “Cult Atheism”)

Kapyong
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Jax »

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Secret Alias »

really? so with global warming, the earth being round, science over faith. the list goes on and on. siding with a minority position should make you think twice.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Secret Alias »

From my perspective. There might have been a Nazareth. Why not? The idea that I should side with the non-existence of Nazareth merely because it takes us one step closer to a non-existent Jesus seems to be an abuse of scholarship, dishonest.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Ulan »

The Nazareth discussion suffers from the issue of "absence of evidence is no proof of absence", and isn't the "absence of evidence" disputed by the Israel Antiquities Authority? This matters especially in archeological questions if an area has lots of existing buildings which don't allow for an extensive search.

While the question itself is surely interesting, this avenue of investigation is just a side show. I think we have enough other reasons to assume that the association of Jesus with Nazareth is probably secondary.

Regarding "atheist" forums, they usually attract a certain subset of people, at least as far as the regulars are concerned. I think it's quite understandable if people who just start out to come to terms with losing their faith seek out places like that, as a kind of way station. It's the psychological equivalent of a hug I guess. After a short while, they will move on. Personally, I have never felt the urge to go to those places, but I'm living in a corner of the world where not believing in God is quite a common stance and not a social stigma. This makes matters generally quite relaxed.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by neilgodfrey »

Ulan wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:10 am The Nazareth discussion suffers from the issue of "absence of evidence is no proof of absence",
On the other hand it is more usually harder to claim X if we have no evidence for X.
Ulan wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:10 amand isn't the "absence of evidence" disputed by the Israel Antiquities Authority?
What does the IAA say is the evidence for Nazareth in the early first century CE? An interested party would want to know what Salm says about the IAA publications as well as the IAA's claims. One would also be interested in the tourist value of Nazareth.
Ulan wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:10 amThis matters especially in archeological questions if an area has lots of existing buildings which don't allow for an extensive search.
That objection can theoretically be applied to many sites but it does not refute the evidence that does or does not exist.

Ulan wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:10 amWhile the question itself is surely interesting, this avenue of investigation is just a side show.
One would think so. But then one has to find some way to explain the extreme heat and outright vitriol that the critics of Salm engage in. Why such intensity of personal attacks? Surely there is more than a simple academic interest involved.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Secret Alias »

But for me at least it's innocent until proven guilty. We have been handed down a set of beliefs, claims and suggestions. Everyone must be disproved with ancient attestation or reasonable doubt. I don't think there is reasonable doubt in the question of Nazareth. The idea that the gospel writers - no matter how late they might have been - simply invented a town that had no prior existence is possible but in my mind unlikely. I don't think Jesus was originally from Nazareth. I think the later gospel writer(s) just picked something or somewhere to explain the problematic title 'Nazarene' that they thought at least existed at the time of Jesus (or whenever they thought the gospel was set). That might allow for a mistake on their part (i.e. that a conflict existed between the time the gospel was set and the time Nazareth was first founded). But that seems as of yet an unproven argument. The fact that Salm is a mythicist who 'just happens to have taken' an interest in the origin of Nazareth is not a good start for me. Doesn't mean he can't be objective but in my experience and many others - an 'interested' party at the very least. I'd rather have had a real archaeologist or some person who comes at the problem from a neutral perspective. Sort of like a priest or prisoner telling me that someone is 'hot' or a starving man telling me my dinner was amazing or a poor person telling me I am a great guy after I promised to give him twenty bucks - not exactly neutral sources.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Secret Alias »

And this is the question which dogs 'mythicist' research - why should anyone bother to hear or sort through what an obviously interested party has to say about anything? Maybe the world might be at a loss for ignoring Rene Salm but then again I doubt it. No one will miss any of us dead. That's a sad fact of life and there is only so much time to read things. Best leave reading the books of those who deserve it or have a known track record.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: René Salm on AFA to discuss Nazareth

Post by Secret Alias »

I think the reason most mythicists care about what Salm says or any of these other 'niche amateur scholars' say is that they agree with his conclusions and find them useful. I guess if there is a real scholar moping around somewhere looking for a reason to doubt the existence of Nazareth he might consult with Salm's work. But surely you aren't suggesting that every amateur scholar deserves to be heard. I think that you are saying that every amateur scholar WHO WORKS OR WHOSE WORK ADVANCES THINGS YOU AGREE WITH OR WANT ADVANCED should be heard and taken seriously. But there are dozens if not hundreds of other special interest groups that have dozens if not hundreds of 'amateur researchers' working to further that niche group's agenda. Who has time to invite the flat earth society, those who think that are really are seven heavens, people who think heaven really is an iron dome (like in the Bible) and the like to every conference to every journal to publish papers? Surely you must acknowledge that there are limits to anyone's generosity.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Post Reply