Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Vorkosigan · 03-20-2012, 05:24 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d...b_1349544.html

""With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are is pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. Moreover, we have relatively extensive writings from one first-century author, Paul, who acquired his information within a couple of years of Jesus' life and who actually knew, first hand, Jesus' closest disciple Peter and his own brother James. If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it."""

maryhelena · 03-20-2012, 06:10 AM

It seems to me that Ehrman has missed the Zeitgesit - the spirit of the times or age. It's very sad to read his words. Ehrman has missed an opportunity to engage with the ahisticist/mythicist position and chose instead to attack. The historical JC assumption has run its course - and there is nothing that Ehrman can do to prevent the further exposure of that assumption. Ideas have no immortality. They come, they go. Time moves on.

Quote:

Ehrman: Why then is the mythicist movement growing, with advocates so confident of their views and vocal -- even articulate -- in their denunciation of the radical idea that Jesus actually existed? It is, in no small part, because these deniers of Jesus are at the same time denouncers of religion -- a breed of human now very much in vogue.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d...b_1349544.html

aa5874 · 03-20-2012, 06:18 AM

There is something radically wrong with Bart Ehrman. This so-called Scholar has actually provided statements to cast doubt on the historical reliability and independence of the sources for the Jesus story but now he seems to have REVERSED himself and is making ABSURD contradictions in order to sell his book.

Please examine Bart Ehrman statements in his debate with William Craig.

See http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p96.htm

Quote:

You have the same problems for all of the sources and all of our Gospels.

These are not historically reliable accounts.

The authors were not eyewitnesses; they're Greek-speaking Christians living 35 to 65 years after the events they narrate.

The accounts that they narrate are based on oral traditions that have been in circulation for decades.

Year after year Christians trying to convert others told them stories to convince them that Jesus was raised from the dead.

These writers are telling stories, then, that Christians have been telling all these years.

Many stories were invented, and most of the stories were changed.

For that reason, these accounts are not as useful as we would like them to be for historical purposes.

They're not contemporary, they're not disinterested, and they're not consistent.

Bart Ehrman is NOT credible. He promotes DOUBLE STANDARDS.

tanya · 03-20-2012, 06:20 AM

Thanks for the link.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bart Ehrman

...there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts that anyone holding them is as likely to get a teaching job in an established department of religion as a six-day creationist is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology.

The single most important discovery in the history of Physics was made by a clerk working in a government office, not a guy teaching at a respectable university. Why was Einstein not employed at the university???? Could politics have something to do with that exclusion????

As regards the simile, in my opinion, Bart has it wrong.

I am not skillful in writing, English or anything else, so some forum member should feel comfortable correcting me. In my opinion, his comparison to teaching creationism in a biology department is completely wrong.

Why?

We have DATA to support the theory of evolution. We have no DATA to support the theory of creationism.

In the case of historical Jesus, we have NO DATA, apart from the tainted gospels/Paul's epistles.

Bart mentions the lack of ROMAN eyewitnesses:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bart Ehrman

It is true that Jesus is not mentioned in any Roman sources of his day. That should hardly count against his existence, however, since these same sources mention scarcely anyone from his time and place. Not even the famous Jewish historian, Josephus, or even more notably, the most powerful and important figure of his day, Pontius Pilate.

In my opinion, this is a fake argument. Josephus (manuscript evidence is suspect!!) did not write at the time when Jesus supposedly did, but half a century later.

Bart needs to explain why Philo of Alexandria did not comment on Jesus, John the Baptist, or James, supposed "brother" of Jesus. Philo did write, while Jesus was supposed to have been alive, performing miracles, and receiving accolades from masses of Jews everwhere. Unlike other commentators, (according to Bart) who did not comment on persons of little distinction, Philo did comment about minor figures. Is it really conceivable, that a Jewish rabbi could restore vision and hearing, cure epilepsy, bring people back to life, and walk on sea water, while concurrently escaping the attention of the foremost Jewish historian living in the second most important city of the Roman empire, Alexandria?.

Steven Carr · 03-20-2012, 06:48 AM

Bart has written peer-reviewed articles questioning the identification of Cephas and Peter.

It now seems he is hiding the existence of these scholarly articles he wrote from his readers.

Vorkosigan · 03-20-2012, 06:51 AM

Hahahahaha. We should set up a massive, line by line refutation of this book.

Vorkosigan

aa5874 · 03-20-2012, 07:19 AM

Bart Ehrman is a disaster. He claimed he knows the Jesus stories were started by HEARSAY but now is giving the Impression that the Gospels and the Pauline writings are somehow INDEPENDENT sources in order to sell his book.

Examine Bart Ehrman "Scholarly" opinion on how the Jesus stories were started and circulated.

See http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p96.htm

Quote:

.....The way it works is this:

I'm a businessman in Ephesus, and somebody comes to town and tells me stories about Jesus, and on the basis of these stories I hear, I convert.

I tell my wife these stories. She converts.

She tells the next-door neighbor the stories. She converts.

She tells her husband the stories. He converts.

He goes on a business trip to Rome, and he tells people there the stories. They convert.

Those people who've heard the stories in Rome, where did they hear them from?

They heard them from the guy who lived next door to me.

Well, was he there to see these things happen? No.

Where'd he hear them from? He heard them from his wife.

Where did his wife hear them from? Was she there? No. She heard them from my wife.

Where did my wife hear them from? She heard them from me.

Well, where did I hear them from? I wasn't there either....

Bart Ehrman is NOT credible. He shows that the Jesus story may have been all made up yet now tries to use those very stories for the history of his Jesus.

maryhelena · 03-20-2012, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Dr E, as a mythicist, I just want to thank you. One of the best ways to destroy an idea is to make a bad argument for it. That's what you've done above, and in your book; anyone who comes to it and then explores people like Doherty, Price, and similar, will realize how shallow your approach is.

This work of yours will do more for mythicism than anything written previously. Many thanks.

Michael Turton

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d...b_1349544.html

:thumbs:

aa5874 · 03-20-2012, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

...In the case of historical Jesus, we have NO DATA, apart from the tainted gospels/Paul's epistles...

The TAINTED Pauline Epistles do NOT contain any historical records of Jesus called Christ.

In Galatians 1.19, the Pauline writer is claiming to be a WITNESS of the APOSTLE PETER and the APOSTLE JAMES.

The PAULINE writer did NOT ever claim he was a WITNESS to an historical Jesus anywhere in the Pauline writings whether or NOT the writings are tainted.

And further, the claim by the Paul writer in Galatians 1.19 that the APOSTLE James was the Lord's brother was DENIED by ALL APOLOGETIC sources that mentioned the status of the relationship between the Apostle James and Jesus Christ.

Apologetic sources that were TOTALLY aware of Galatians 1.19 made sure to state that James the Apostle had NO human brother called Jesus.

Apologetic sources that were TOTAL aware of Galatians 1.19 also claimed Jesus was FATHERED by a Ghost.

ORIGEN mentioned Galatians 1.19 and claimed Jesus was FATHERED by a Ghost.

JEROME mentioned Galatians 1.19 and claimed James the Apostle had NO human brother called Jesus Christ.

We have ZERO historical records of an human Jesus who was NOT FATHERED by a Ghost.

ApostateAbe · 03-20-2012, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Bart has written peer-reviewed articles questioning the identification of Cephas and Peter.

It now seems he is hiding the existence of these scholarly articles he wrote from his readers.

Ehrman wrote one such scholarly article, and it was in 1990. Christ, that would be 22 years ago.

03-20-2012, 05:24 AM	#1
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Ehrman now online promoting his book at Huffpost http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d...b_1349544.html ""With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are is pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. Moreover, we have relatively extensive writings from one first-century author, Paul, who acquired his information within a couple of years of Jesus' life and who actually knew, first hand, Jesus' closest disciple Peter and his own brother James. If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it."""

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-20-2012, 06:48 AM	#5
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	Bart has written peer-reviewed articles questioning the identification of Cephas and Peter. It now seems he is hiding the existence of these scholarly articles he wrote from his readers.

03-20-2012, 06:51 AM	#6
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Hahahahaha. We should set up a massive, line by line refutation of this book. Vorkosigan

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.