GaryP

I've been reading the reactions to Ehrman from all of you learned folks,,,thought you might have comments on his interview on All Things Considered from this evening:

http://www.npr.org/2012/04/01/149462...makes-his-case

Duvduv

How do you "prove" an empirical fact by an "if.....then" argument??

In Did Jesus Exist?, Ehrman builds a technical argument and shows that one of the reasons for knowing that Jesus existed is that if someone invented Jesus, they would not have created a messiah who was so easily overcome.

"The Messiah was supposed to overthrow the enemies – and so if you're going to make up a messiah, you'd make up a powerful messiah," he says. "You wouldn't make up somebody who was humiliated, tortured and the killed by the enemies." WHY NOT? A humiliated savior is just as good as any other kind of savior. I don't follow this logic.

HOW does he know that Paul knew the brother? By assuming that Paul existed, and if he existed, that he existed as described in a letter, and assuming that the reference is factually true and not just an interpolation. That's quite a stack of IF...THENs......

Paul knew Jesus' brother, James, and he knew his closest disciple, Peter, and he tells us that he did," Ehrman says. "If Jesus didn't exist, you would think his brother would know about it, so I think Paul is probably pretty good evidence that Jesus at least existed," he says.

ApostateAbe

No objections. Ehrman plays down his condescension against mythicists in this interview, and he speaks about his agreement with mythicists as much as his disagreement.

Duvduv

Who pays NPR and Guy Raz to build him up so much as THE expert on Jesus??

ApostateAbe

Of course Ehrman would not be the only appropriate expert, but he is the most appropriate author who has published a book on the subject for a lay audience, and I think NPR is doing it right. A lot of religious scholars write books for a popular audience and go on the talk show circuit, but Bart Ehrman seems to be the only such author who manages to do it while representing the views of mainstream secular scholars, not just a few scholars of religion who belong to niche ideological camps. He is about the only such author who can publish and sell books. Bart Ehrman has been a guest on NPR for every book he has published since Misquoting Jesus.

MrMacSon

It would be appropriate for Erhman to discuss whether Paul ever existed, and also discuss the disputations about the writings attributed to Paul.

Otherwise he is being intellectually lazy and intellectually cowardly.

ApostateAbe

If he did that, then mythicists would object that he is setting up a strawman of mythicism and that he is placing special focus on the most loony mythicist positions.

Duvduv

The way he explains reasons for accepting a historical NT Jesus makes no sense. No empirical data of any kind, merely an argument like saying, "If someone wanted to create a messiah, why would they create one with green eyes and brown hair? Surely they would have invented one with blue eyes and black hair."

Does he ever get challenged with such arguments?

youngalexander

Ahem? One thing that does stand out about this 'messiah' is that he most certainly did not overthrow the enemies.
Thus you could not invent a very powerful one, now could you?

MrMacSon

You? you mean they?

"a very powerful one"??