FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-25-2007, 01:58 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: S.Carolina
Posts: 34
Default Non-Christian scholars who believe Jesus existed

Can somebody list some non-christian scholars who believe Jesus existed. I know a few like Gerd Ludeman, John Crossan, Bart Ehrman and James Tabor.
quoting is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 02:39 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Some Jewish scholars who wrote about Christ as a Jew:
No Robots is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 03:04 PM   #3
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoting View Post
Can somebody list some non-christian scholars who believe Jesus existed. I know a few like Gerd Ludeman, John Crossan, Bart Ehrman and James Tabor.
Crossan is non-Christian? The last I heard, he was a Catholic.

Luedemann was a Christian, now classifies himself as a "post-Christian."

However, note that the Jesus that a non-Christian thinks existed may be very different from the Jesus that a Christian thinks existed. Hart Ehrman thinks that Jesus was an apocalyptic nut job. Tabor thinks that Jesus was a member of a dynasty with royal aspirations. Other non-Christians think that Jesus was a wandering rabble rouser, or a Cynic sage, or a magician.
Toto is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 04:57 PM   #4
Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cylon Occupied Texas, but a Michigander @ heart
Posts: 10,326
Default

Moving this to BC&H
Gawen is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 07:47 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 24
Default

I am researching this subject at the moment and I believe Jesus was an over-enthusiastic member of the Essenes who got killed for acting out badly in the Temple one day. Call this my working hypothesis.
Sharkee is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 11:12 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 562
Default

William Arnal, an atheist.
James Crossley, non-religious.
Burton Mack, definitely not Christian, but I'm not sure of his religious affiliation, presumably non-religious.
Paula Fredriksen, Jewish
Julie Galambush, Jewish
Geza Vermes, Jewish
Jeffrey Gibson, agnostic (that's right, I said it!)
Bart Ehrman, agnostic

Do I really have to keep going? I might as well say "all living, credentialed NT scholars except RM Price who is agnostic on the issue of historicity." There are presumably a few hundred that I'm leaving out.

Whether or not one counts "atheist Christians" is another matter. I don't think there are any on the list above.
Zeichman is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 11:15 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 562
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoting View Post
Can somebody list some non-christian scholars who believe Jesus existed. I know a few like Gerd Ludeman, John Crossan, Bart Ehrman and James Tabor.
Crossan is non-Christian? The last I heard, he was a Catholic.

Luedemann was a Christian, now classifies himself as a "post-Christian."

However, note that the Jesus that a non-Christian thinks existed may be very different from the Jesus that a Christian thinks existed. Hart Ehrman thinks that Jesus was an apocalyptic nut job. Tabor thinks that Jesus was a member of a dynasty with royal aspirations. Other non-Christians think that Jesus was a wandering rabble rouser, or a Cynic sage, or a magician.
I would contest your classification of Ehrman's historical Jesus; not to be a jerk, but he doesn't define it in ethnocentric terms like that. Likewise, no one asserts that Jesus was a Cynic sage, only that he was LIKE a Cynic philosopher.

Crossan seems to be in that zone between liberal Christianity and post-Christianity, though I haven't read his autobiography.
Zeichman is offline  
Old 10-25-2007, 11:33 PM   #8
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Apocalyptic nut job was my interpretation of Ehrman's Jesus, not his term.

I wrote informally, but the point stands that the various historical Jesus' may have little in common.

Crossan on religious beliefs
Quote:
. . . we are hard-wired for religion. And by religion, I would mean some response, some required response to the mystery that surrounds us. I would not put it any more precise than that in terms of hard-wiring. In other words I take very seriously that human beings throughout human history have tried to—let me put it in the most general terms—name the holy. And whenever they’ve decided not to name the holy, they’ve named in any case usually as unholy. So I think the great experiment we’ve gone through in the last 200 years that the enlightenment has got rid of religion has simply brought in even more horrible types of it than we already knew. And most of the ones we knew were pretty horrible at their worst. . .

* * *

In my own work, as you know, I much prefer to concentrate on Christianity itself, not at all because I’ve any presumption that it is the only way to God or the holy or justice or anything else, as I really don’t, but because it’s my responsibility as a Christian and also as a biblical scholar.
Toto is offline  
Old 10-26-2007, 06:22 AM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pua, in northern Thailand
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharkee View Post
I am researching this subject at the moment and I believe Jesus was an over-enthusiastic member of the Essenes who got killed for acting out badly in the Temple one day. Call this my working hypothesis.
Brilliant! I believe others may someday come to share your view ...:notworthy:
Joan of Bark is offline  
Old 10-26-2007, 01:36 PM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoting View Post
Can somebody list some non-christian scholars who believe Jesus existed.
Nearly all scholars, Christian and non-Christian, believe that Jesus existed. A better question might be, "What scholars don't believe that Jesus existed?" Earl Doherty acknowledges that the mythicist position is the minority, though he attributes this to lack of investigation by historicists:

Quote:
...the mythicist position continues to be vilified, disdained, dismissed...There is almost a civil war going on within the ranks of Jesus study. Why not give the mythicist option some serious consideration?...Doing that would require one essential thing: taking it seriously, approaching the subject having an open mind that the theory might have some merit. Sadly, that is the most difficult step and the one which most critics have had the greatest difficulty taking. It is all in the mindset, whether of the Christian believer whose confessional interests are overriding, or of the professional scholar who could never consider that their life's work might be fatally compromised.
John Kesler is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:42 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.