Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Lógos Sokratikós · 08-15-2008, 11:44 AM

If Jesus existed, we should not find an empty tomb, but THOUSANDS of empty tombs. If the Bible is true, Holy Land archæology should find no bones of an antiquity prior to 30-40 CE.

aa5874 · 08-15-2008, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lógos Sokratikós

If Jesus existed, we should not find an empty tomb, but THOUSANDS of empty tombs. If the Bible is true, Holy Land archæology should find no bones of an antiquity prior to 30-40 CE.

Or, if Jesus of the NT was just human, why did the authors claim that he ROSE from the dead and that others that were already DEAD also rose with him?

The inclusion of the resurrection of multiple persons in the cannon indicate that the Jesus stories are fiction and written long after the supposed events.

Lógos Sokratikós · 08-15-2008, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lógos Sokratikós

I don't remember the video contending that "there wasn't a persona named Jesus upon which the Gospels were based" or anything similar.

I meant person, not persona. Typo.

thedistillers · 08-15-2008, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lógos Sokratikós

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedistillers

As far I as know, mainstream scholars are unanimous that the evidence is good enough to conclude a HJ existed.

Where they see difficulty is more to know who the historical Jesus really was. Which is what the Meier and Bruce quotes were about in the video. Trying to use Meier, Bruce, etc quotes to show mainstream scholars think there is no evidence for a historical Jesus is misleading. Like I said, Meier makes clear he thinks the existence of Jesus is certain, and he supports his claim with data, not faith.

I actually watched the video.
1) A.S. contends that the Bible is not inerrant.
2) A.S. contends that the Gospels are not firsthand accounts.
3) A.S. contends that parts of the narrative that should have provoked historical reports in fact did not (thus casting doubt about their veracity), such as the tearing at the temple and the dead people coming out of their tombs at the moment of Jesus' death.

I don't remember the video contending that "there wasn't a persona named Jesus upon which the Gospels were based" or anything similar.

I'm wondering if those three points are too radical for the audience here.

I was referring to the other video with Meier and Bruce quotes. Also, I was referring to what dave31 said (the misleading part), not "A.S.". I'm not sure why you're quoting me.

Amaleq13 · 08-15-2008, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Ex Catholic priest? Where ever did you get that bit of information?

Confused him with Crossan, perhaps? He's an ex-monk, IIRC.

Jeffrey Gibson · 08-15-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Ex Catholic priest? Where ever did you get that bit of information?

Confused him with Crossan, perhaps? He's an ex-monk, IIRC.

Which only goes to show that Dave was prevaricating through his teeth when he claimed here that he had indeed read "those books" that Meyer (sic) and Bruce and Crossan have written on the HJ.

And so much for the accuracy of the source he quotes, let alone his knowledge of how inaccurate it is. Speaking of "screwing it up" ...

Jeffrey

Dave31 · 08-15-2008, 06:56 PM

Good call Amaleq13 - it was J.D. Crossan!

As Crossan says:

Quote:

I was ex-Priest and an ex-Monk

Still, Jeffrey, before you get your knickers in a bunch the quote and citation are still accurate so chill out, man.

Plus, even better that Meier is still a Catholic priest ahh!

Quote:

"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy. In the end, the historian is left with the difficult task of sifting through the Four Gospels for historical tradition."

- John P. Meier, "A Marginal Jew," vol. II, 5.

:wave:

Jeffrey Gibson · 08-15-2008, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave31

Good call Amaleq13 - it was J.D. Crossan!

As Crossan says:

Quote:

I was ex-Priest and an ex-Monk

And where does the ex monsignor come from?

Quote:

Still, Jeffrey, before you get your knickers in a bunch the quote and citation are still accurate so chill out, man.

Quote:

"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy. In the end, the historian is left with the difficult task of sifting through the Four Gospels for historical tradition."

- John P. Meier, "A Marginal Jew," vol. II, 5.

:wave:

The quote does not demonstrate what you have claimed it demonstrates, namely, that Meier thinks that there is no good evidence for Jesus' existence or that Meier's acceptance of the existence of Jesus is ultimately or solely based on "faith". More importantly, your quoting what you originally quoted does not demonstrate that you have read all of Meier's Marginal Jew, Vol. 2, let alone Vols 1 & 3 (or Bruce's and Crossan's books on the HJ) as you have claimed you have. If anything, it shows that you haven't.

Jeffrey

Dave31 · 08-16-2008, 08:53 AM

Quote:

"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century. As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."

-- Merrill C. Tenney, "New Testament Survey," p. 203.

Who Was Jesus? page 85-86 (or via: amazon.co.uk)

* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Tenney was also one of the original translators of the NASB and NIV editions of the Bible.

The bible says that Jesus was famed far and wide in at least 20 passages - there must certainly be some evidence for that, RIGHT!?!?

Jeffrey Gibson · 08-16-2008, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave31

Quote:

"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century. As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."

-- Merrill C. Tenney, "New Testament Survey," p. 203.

Who Was Jesus? page 85-86 (or via: amazon.co.uk)

* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Tenney was also one of the original translators of the NASB and NIV editions of the Bible.

Whose works, I'll wager, you've also never read.

Quote:

The bible says that Jesus was famed far and wide in at least 20 passages - there must certainly be some evidence for that, RIGHT!?!?

Why?

As we know from Rabbinic sources, Simeon Bar Kosibah/Kochba was the instigator and leader of the Jewish Revolt of 132-135. He was even proclaimed to be Messiah by Rabbi Akiva and acknowledged as such by his followers. He too -- according to the Rabbis -- was famed far and wide. And yet the Roman historian Dio Cassius who narrates and documents, and is our main of our knowledge of, the causes, course, and outcome of that revolt never mentions him.

Rabbi Hillel, who founded the famous Pharisaic school of the Hillelites and who was well known and famous for his wisdom in his time (Gentiles came to him to learn about Judaism) according to Rabbinic sources, is never mentioned by Josephus, an avowed Pharisee. Does that mean Hillel didn't exist, let alone that he wasn't famous?

Jeffrey

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

08-15-2008, 11:44 AM	#61
Lógos Sokratikós Contributor Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Virtually right here where you are Posts: 11,138	If Jesus existed, we should not find an empty tomb, but THOUSANDS of empty tombs. If the Bible is true, Holy Land archæology should find no bones of an antiquity prior to 30-40 CE.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.