Jesus myhter's view of history?

I've always known that Jesus mythers have no regard for real history. It just stands to reason becuase historical presumption means nothing to them, they clearly have no respect for historians or for the rigors of academic thinking. what's really missing from their take on history and from the general atheist view itself is scholarly caustion. But the mythers are worse because there's is essentially a conspiracy theory. one ofht "followers" of this blog (he should really be called a ''hounder") is Bill Walker. Now he lays down a statement about the nature of history that is very reminiscent of skin head views.

He says:

billwalker said...

Joe, Please take your nose out of that book of fairy tales & read some goddam HISTORY books. Study the life of Constantine ,esp. his convention at Nicaea in 326CE. HE created your Hesus Krishna, by combining the old druid Hesus with Krishna (Christ in Sanskrit). It was HE who conferred divinity on the two gods he combi8ned into one. His idea was to do away with all that stupid internecine warfare (with which we are STILL plagued 18 centuries later. Your calling me stupid doesn't change history. It only points up your childish petulance when someone disagrees with you. For Krishna sake, GROW UP. Get a life. It's the ONLY one you get.

5:07 PM

Of his assertion that he know anything about history is absurd becuase he hasn't the slightest regard for history written by historians since he despises historians and thinks he knows history so much better. Speaking of that, I was trained as real academic historian an dalmost got my Ph.D. in it, he was not so trained. His assertion that he knows hisotry books better than me is a laugh riot.

His assertion that Jesus was made by the council of Nicea is the kind of hilarious conspiracy theory I'm talking about when I say his view are like those of skin heads. The idea that Jesus was made up by a council in the 320's when a dozen historians in first and second century mentino him is idiotic and lame brained. Even if you subscribe ot the typical moronic sophomoric propaganda that most mythers spout about the Josephus, Tacitus, Celsus connection one thing is obvious even if you accept that none of those mentions amount to an argument for Jesus historicity, they all prove the idea of Jesus existed well before the council of Nicene. Not even likes of Doherty is stupid enough to try and get away with a claim that wild.

Then of course what would a conspiracy theorist's repertoire be without bogus language claims? They never study the languages make their wild claims about. Consider Doherty trying to claim that Paul's use of sarx doesn't imply Jesus had a flesh and blood life, as though he knows Greek when in fact he does not, I do and others who know it much better than I agree that Doherty's use of it is stupid. But then here is Bill trying to claim that Krisha is Sanskrit for Christ! he actually says it! Krishna (Christ in Sanskrit) total absolute unbridled ignorance!

Scholars are very certain Christ is from the Greek Christos meaning "hero" used by Jesus to refer to Messiah. Has absolute nothing to do with Sanskrit. I do know of an unqualified hack from the nineteenth century who wrote Jesus went to India and made lying claims to that effect, but he did not know Sanskrit either. There are just some people who have a driving need to be right and deeply require the image of self that they are more knowledgeable and have secret deep insight others don't have, but for one reason or another they are not willing to really go to school and get it for real. This is probably the origin of most of these Jesus myther type conspiracy theories that real historians laugh at.

I also don't' believe a guy named Hesus existed among the druids but I dont' take the trouble to look that up. Grow up he says! get a conspiracy theory like I have!