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 04-27-2012, 07:56 AM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default Very little dispute

Page 88 of Did Jesus Exist is amazing.


'There is very little dispute that some of the Gospel stories originated in Aramaic, and they therefore go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine.'

'Very little dispute'?

Carrier claims the book misinforms readers.


How many people will now be told that even Bart Ehrman says 'there is very litle dispute....' that some Gospel stories go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine ( because they originated in Aramaic, you see).

Just how many years has Ehrman set back the state of knowledge about the Bible with just one little book aimed 'at a general audience'?
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 04-27-2012, 08:18 AM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
Default

It must be the new consensus, even Thom Stark says so:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thom Stark
Paul was from Tarsus, but he was trained in Jerusalem. Mark, the earliest Gospel, was written in Palestine by a Palestinian Jewish Christian to Palestinian Jewish Christians, very many scholars argue, and it dates to a time very close to Paul's final letters.
dog-on is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 12:49 AM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
Page 88 of Did Jesus Exist is amazing.


'There is very little dispute that some of the Gospel stories originated in Aramaic, and they therefore go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine.'

'Very little dispute'?

Carrier claims the book misinforms readers.


How many people will now be told that even Bart Ehrman says 'there is very litle dispute....' that some Gospel stories go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine ( because they originated in Aramaic, you see).

Just how many years has Ehrman set back the state of knowledge about the Bible with just one little book aimed 'at a general audience'?
If the stories originated in Aramaic, then they very probably go back to Palestine before the fall of Jerusalem. This is a weaker claim than that they go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine but it may be strong enough for Ehrman's purposes.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 12:57 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
Page 88 of Did Jesus Exist ...

'There is very little dispute that some of the Gospel stories originated in Aramaic, and they therefore go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine.'
That some aspect(s) of the sum total of the many Gospel stories - the apocryphal & canonical stories - originated in Palestine (in Aramaic) is likely to be true.

Many of those fore-runner stories could have originated well before 1BC/BCE, too.
MrMacSon is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 01:12 AM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
Page 88 of Did Jesus Exist is amazing.

'There is very little dispute that some of the Gospel stories originated in Aramaic, and they therefore go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine.'
If the stories originated in Aramaic, then they very probably go back to Palestine before the fall of Jerusalem. This is a weaker claim than that they go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine but it may be strong enough for Ehrman's purposes.

Andrew Criddle
So If they probably go back to Palestine before 70AD this weaker claim may be strong enough for what purpose?
youngalexander is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 01:16 AM   #6
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMacSon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
Page 88 of Did Jesus Exist ...

'There is very little dispute that some of the Gospel stories originated in Aramaic, and they therefore go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine.'
That some aspect(s) of the sum total of the many Gospel stories - the apocryphal & canonical stories - originated in Palestine (in Aramaic) is likely to be true.

Many of those fore-runner stories could have originated well before 1BC/BCE, too.
And of course - the Toldot Yeshu story has no mention of Pilate. Hence an early story (whenever written ..)that should be raising a red flag for historical research into early christianity....If the Pilate story was up and running - why place a Yeshu/Jesus story prior to the time of Pilate? A pre-Pilate Yeshu/Jesus story; some Aramaic in the gospel JC story that could place that story prior to 70 c.e. - and methinks some ahistoricists/mythicists need to do some reconsidering....No, of course not, there is no historical gospel JC - but there is Jewish history that needs to be put on the table. The gospel JC story is not just midrash, mythology and supernatural/magic stuff - it is also a mythologizing of Jewish history. And, since history does not stand still, developments in that JC storyboard would be the order of the day...Which would indicate that the JC storyboard has been long in its development - and that the Pilate end of the story is just that - the ending not the beginning...
maryhelena is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 01:43 AM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by youngalexander View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post

If the stories originated in Aramaic, then they very probably go back to Palestine before the fall of Jerusalem. This is a weaker claim than that they go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine but it may be strong enough for Ehrman's purposes.

Andrew Criddle
So If they probably go back to Palestine before 70AD this weaker claim may be strong enough for what purpose?
If the stories go back to Palestine before 70 CE, then this would indicate that claims about a historical Jesus were being made in a time and place that allowed investigation into their truth and falsity.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 01:58 AM   #8
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Quote:
Mark, the earliest Gospel, was written in Palestine by a Palestinian Jewish Christian to Palestinian Jewish Christians, very many scholars argue, and it dates to a time very close to Paul's final letters.
You'd have to have smoked the last of your crack and then ingested opium, followed by inducing unconsciousness via ketamine, to believe something as ridiculous as this. It just makes me want to scream.
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 02:01 AM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngalexander View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post

If the stories originated in Aramaic, then they very probably go back to Palestine before the fall of Jerusalem. This is a weaker claim than that they go back to the earliest stages of the Christian movement in Palestine but it may be strong enough for Ehrman's purposes.

Andrew Criddle
So If they probably go back to Palestine before 70AD this weaker claim may be strong enough for what purpose?
If the stories go back to Palestine before 70 CE, then this would indicate that claims about a historical Jesus were being made in a time and place that allowed investigation into their truth and falsity.

Andrew Criddle
Not quite....

It would indicate that people living prior to 70 c.e., may have been able, depending on how close to the gospel dating they lived, be able to see a reflection of a historical figure within that composite gospel JC figure. A reflection not a corresponding equation, i.e. such and such a historical figure is synonymous with the gospel JC figure. And that, after all is said and done, is nothing more than is sometimes claimed for any literary creation, either by the author/creator or his readers. A created literary figure is able to reflect more than one flesh and blood figure. So, what people back then would have been able to say is, 'ah, I see so and so reflected in that gospel JC story'. Others, perhaps living further back, could say they remember the history of such and such a figure - and that that historical figure is also seen to be reflected within the gospel JC story.

That's why, in time, when history became distant and foggy, that the gospel JC story itself became viewed as history. History was 'lost' - and the gospel mythologizing of history became viewed as history. (of course, with a little bit of help from Josephus and his 'historical' reconstructions/interpretations....)
maryhelena is offline  
Old 04-28-2012, 02:36 AM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
If the stories go back to Palestine before 70 CE, then this would indicate that claims about a historical Jesus were being made in a time and place that allowed investigation into their truth and falsity.
Andrew Criddle
Thank you. I read that several times before I gained some glimmer. We progress!
youngalexander is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:24 PM.

Top

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