judge

Well of course galatians 1 throws a monkey wrench into mythicism. Otherwise why would my mythicists have to spend so much time with so many strained arguments to try and counter it?

Thats what you do when a wrench is thrown in, you try to explain it away.

But the arguments againt Galatians 1 convince amatuers on internet forums, they dont get much traction anywhere else.

judge

People round here love to "whine". I'm no fan of Bart Ehrman despite having bought his books. But no one else has the stature to bring these questions to a large audience and stimulate debate.
Earl Doherty has no chance of doing it. Bart Ehrmans books sell and they appear widely.
Othetr ise the whole question of jesus mythicism remains the provenance of kooks with no ability to penetrate a wider maket.

Sheshbazzar

Truly. I don't give a flying fork about the 'wider market'. If the ignorant want to stock up on a big supply of Jeebus horse-shit, and someone is bursting to sell it to that wider market, let them go at it.
We sure as hell can't stop it when they have already made up their minds what don't want to know or buy.
I'd much rather die as an unknown kook than to be well known, and found supporting any HJ horse-shit in pursuit of a buck.

judge

More whining.
Someone comes along who will bring these questions into the public eye, and what happens? People whine.

You seem to treat the general public, the wider audience with contempt, as if they aren't capable of discerning whether Ehrman's arguments are sensible. Yet we are supposed to believe kooks who live in internet forums are somehow more capable.

Sheshbazzar

Whatever gave you a clue Sherlock?

aa5874

So who are those people who are on their THIRD QUEST for the historical Jesus??

It is most remarkable that people here think the historical Jesus has been found when no such thing has ever happened for over 1800 years.

The only Jesus known to mankind from since antiquity is the Jesus of Faith, Myth Jesus born of a Ghost and God the Creator that walked on sea water.

This is Justin Martyr, since the mid 2nd century.

First Apology This is Tertullian in "On the Flesh of Christ"

This is Origen in "Against Celsus" 1 Origen expected people to INVENT Falsehood and claim Jesus was NOT born of a Holy Ghost.

It appears Origen was right. His expectations has come true.

Remarkably that may be the only prediction about Jesus that has come to pass.

Who are those people that are still looking for an HJ when there is NO evidence for the Last 1800 years or more ???

Steven Carr

So you are claiming that Ehrman's book is a work of scholarship which actually addresses Doherty's Top 20 silences?

It appears, and I could be wrong, that Ehrman can't even think of ad hoc explanations for why Paul claims Jews had not heard of Jesus and that the Romans hold no terror for the innocent after they had whipped, stripped, beaten and crucified the Son of God.

Steven Carr

Of course, Galatians 1 is prima facie evidence for a historical Jesus, just as descriptions of Ned Ludd are prima facie evidence for a historical Ned Ludd.

Assuming, of course, that you claim that 'Son of God' is obvious Christian metaphor while 'brother of the Lord' can never be taken metaphorically.

It does appear though that Bart's book doesn't even try to explain away the monkey wrenches thrown into historicism. They are just gathered up and swept under the carpet.

No elephants in this room, but there is a suspicious bulge in the carpet...

It appears that Bart hides from his readers the existence of even his own peer-reviewed articles where he questioned some of the 'key data' he produces in his book.

Steven Carr

From an admiring review http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/03/...exist-the.html

' That claim doesn’t hold up for a number of reasons, chief among them: The historical Jesus and his early followers never claimed Jesus was a god.'

'It was not until after the movement lost its leader on the cross, Ehrman argues, that Jesus gradually assumed a divine nature. But that doesn’t become fully evident until the Gospel of John, written more than a half-century after Jesus died.'


Really?


Has Bart read 1 Corinthians 8:5-6, where Jesus is explicitly compared favourably to the false Lords that other people regard as divine?


'5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.'


Paul has a Jesus through whom all things were created, and through whom everybody lives.


Just how divine would Bart like his gods to be? According to Paul, Jesus helped create the universe.


And has Bart read Philippians 2?


' 5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;


I imagine that Bart does not bother addressing anything which slows his rhetoric, no matter how quickly gaping holes will be found in his arguments.


This book will be taken to pieces on the Internet....

I just can't believe how bad it is promising to be.

ApostateAbe

There will be thousands of mythicist arguments that mythicists find important and will be left out of Ehrman's relatively short book. It would take an encyclopedia to cover them all.

Philippians 2:6 is a convincing argument in favor of the point that Paul thought of Jesus as being God. The biggest problem is that the NIV translation (which you quoted) uses the word "nature" which in other verses in the New Testament is more accurately translated "image" or "form," such as the verse directly following, Philippians 2:7, and Mark 16:12.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6, in contrast, is not a convincing point, since there is a clear distinction between the words "lord" and "god," the passage itself delineates that distinction, and Jesus is placed under the title, "lord," not "god."

The main counterpoint of course would be the synoptic gospels very much tend to portray Jesus as below God, such as Mark 10:18.

Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.

It is a plausible model of early Christology, since it would be theologically out of the question for Jews to believe that a human can be god. For Greeks, on the other hand, it is a Christology that fits their vantage beautifully.