What does the Trojan War Have to Do with the Resurrection of Christ??
Kevin R. Henke
October 2, 2022
In Lundahl (2022j), Mr. Lundahl asks me the following question:
“But where exactly is Henke going to adress [sic spelling] what C. S. Lewis had to say about the Miracles of Christ in the Gospels, which were his go to for historic miracles?”
I gave the following response in Henke (2022as), which deals with Christ’s supposedly greatest miracle, the Resurrection:
“Nevertheless, I had not planned on dealing with the supposed Resurrection of Jesus Christ until Mr. Lundahl provided acceptable evidence for the Talking Snake of Genesis 3. That’s why the Resurrection is not mentioned in Henke (2022a) and Henke (2022b). Yet, in his impatience, Lundahl (2022j) wants to deal with the “historic miracle” of the Resurrection even though, as I stated before in Henke (2022b), miracles have to be demonstrated under current and strict laboratory conditions. Meanwhile, Price (2007), Carrier (2014), Loftus (2010), Loftus (2011) and other works argue that the Resurrection of Christ is a myth. We could discuss these references once Mr. Lundahl gives me suitable evidence for the existence of the Talking Snake in Genesis 3. As I’ve argued before in Henke (2022b) and my other essays, Mr. Lundahl’s arguments about “first known audiences” and “cultural memories” are not acceptable evidence. People are gullible and tend to believe all kinds of lies and misinterpretations.” [my emphasis]
Lundahl (2022r) then replies to my bolded statement with a non-sequitur fallacy involving the Trojan War (Copi and Cohen 1994, pp. 132, 155-156):
“But Henke has so far declined a discussion of the Trojan War - one of the stories often claimed as "myth" - and he has also considered my "showing off" Classical myth as irrelevant to the discussion. He is contradicting himself or doing another quod licet Iovi non licet bovi : when Carrier and Loftus use the word "myth" they can do it, because they are important or it is relevant to the discussion because it supports Henke's point. When I use the word "myth" or rather deal with examples usually so labelled, I can't because I am unimportant or it is irrelevant to the discussion because I do not support Henke's or their point.”
What?? What does the Trojan War have to do with Resurrection of Jesus Christ? As I stated in my February 2022 posts in the comment section of one of Erika’s Gutsick Gibbon videos (see Appendix A below), I admitted that there may have been a Trojan War:
“Now the answers to your questions: a) Archeologists have found Troy. There could have been a Trojan War; however, that does not mean that the Cyclops and Sirens existed. Where is the evidence for a Talking Snake and magic fruit trees?”
“As I said before, just because Troy existed and that the Trojan War and migrations may have occurred that's no justification for believing other claims in the Iliad or the Odyssey.”
Unlike the Resurrection of Jesus Christ and Genesis 3, there is some evidence that the Trojan War may have happened (Flores 2017 and references). Although others may classify the Trojan War as a myth, I DO NOT. Mr. Lundahl should not assume that I think that the Trojan War is a myth. I simply have no interest in discussing the Trojan War. Mr. Lundahl can find someone else to debate who actually believes that that war is a myth. In contrast, I do not think that the Resurrection of Christ happened and Mr. Lundahl actually needs to read Price (2007), Carrier (2014), Loftus (2010), and Loftus (2011) to see why they have good reasons to call it a myth.
Lundahl (2022r) continues:
“Meanwhile, Henke's chosen authorities are not an appeal to anything like impartial expertise, these guys aren't the general academia any more than John Calvin or John Knox was Desiderius Erasmus.”
Now, Lundahl (2022j) has stated that I should not comment on Lewis (1960) because supposedly I did not read it:
“His freedom ... but if he didn't read it, he might have been wiser to not comment on it so much.”
Of course, I have read Lewis (1960). I simply disagree with Lewis (1960) and conclude that it’s poor written and argued. Mr. Lundahl simply cannot accept my conclusions (see Henke 2022gm). Now, I recognize that Lundahl (2022r) has read some webessays by Loftus et al. and watched some now mostly taken-down videos and read some webessays by Carrier largely on topics that have nothing to do with the Resurrection or the reliability of the New Testament Gospels (see Henke 2022gn). However, he should not be judging the works of these authors, including Price, if he has not studied what these books specifically say about the Resurrection and the Gospels. Carrier (2014) is an especially detailed academic work that is probably far better referenced and argued than any videos and webarticles that Mr. Lundahl has reviewed. Also, there’s no indication that Mr. Lundahl has ever read any of Robert M. Price’s works. How can he dare denounce Price’s academic quality if he has never read any of Price’s books or articles, especially Price (2007)? Would Mr. Lundahl approve of someone identifying C.S. Lewis’ views of the Resurrection in Lewis (1960) as an individual that isn’t in “general academia any more than John Calvin or John Knox” if they had only read The Screwtape Letters or perhaps The Problem of Pain?
References:
Carrier, R. 2014. On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, Sheffield Phoenix Press: Sheffield, UK, 696pp.
Copi, I.M. and Cohen, C. 1994. Introduction to Logic, 9th ed., MacMillan Publishing Company: New York, USA, 729 pp.
Flores, J.C. 2017. “Trojan War Displayed as a Full Annihilation-Diffusion-Reaction Model”, Physica A, v. 467, pp. 432-435.
Lewis, C.S. 1960. Miracles, 2nd ed., printed 1974: Harper One: HarperCollinsPublishers, 294pp.
Loftus, J.W. (ed.). 2010. The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, Prometheus Books: Amherst, NY, USA, 422pp.
Loftus, J.W. (ed.). 2011. The End of Christianity, Prometheus Books: Amherst, NY, USA, 435pp.
Price, R.M. 2007. Jesus is Dead, American Atheist Press: Cranford, NJ, USA, 279pp.