Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 01-19-2012, 03:57 PM

Now scheduled as a hardback:

Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth [Hardcover] (or via: amazon.co.uk)

What started out as an e-book for $6 is now a hardback for $26.99.

The ebook is still available here

aa5874 · 01-19-2012, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Now scheduled as a hardback:

Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth [Hardcover] (or via: amazon.co.uk)

What started out as an e-book for $6 is now a hardback for $26.99.

The ebook is still available here

Is Bart Ehrman an Agnostic?

PhilosopherJay · 01-19-2012, 05:51 PM

Hi Toto,

I love the hyperbolic description:

Quote:

For years Bart Ehrman has been routinely bombarded with one question: Did Jesus Exist? As a leading Bible expert, fans and critics alike have sent letters, emails, posted blogs, and questioned Ehrman during interviews wanting his opinion about this nagging question that has become a conspiracy theorist cottage industry the world over. The idea that the character of Jesus was an invention of the early church—and later a tool of control employed by the Roman Catholic Church—is a widely held belief and Ehrman has decided it’s time to put the issue to rest. Yes, the historical Jesus of Nazareth did exist.

Well, that certainly settles the issue for me. Ehrman has spoken. Ipse dixit.
I'm convinced. I hereby renounce the conspiracy theorist cottage industry of Jesus Mythicism from now and forever.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Now scheduled as a hardback:

Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth [Hardcover] (or via: amazon.co.uk)

What started out as an e-book for $6 is now a hardback for $26.99.

The ebook is still available here

Sheshbazzar · 01-19-2012, 06:11 PM

Steak.

aa5874 · 01-19-2012, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Steak.

I don't eat garbage.

The historical Jesus is the product of forgeries, fraud and fiction.

Jesus of Nazareth is without corroboration and is found in historically unreliable sources.

Duvduv · 01-19-2012, 07:42 PM

And too many academics make their living repackaging the old claims.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Steak.

I don't eat garbage.

The historical Jesus is the product of forgeries, fraud and fiction.

Jesus of Nazareth is without corroboration and is found in historically unreliable sources.

Zenaphobe · 01-19-2012, 07:55 PM

It's interesting, at the link to the e-book, there is a link to Ehrman's book Forged, which has this in the synopsis -

Quote:

Ehrman investigates ancient sources to:

Reveal which New Testament books were outright forgeries.

Explain how widely forgery was practiced by early Christian writers—and how strongly it was condemned in the ancient world as fraudulent and illicit.

Expose the deception in the history of the Christian religion.

Ehrman’s fascinating story of fraud and deceit is essential reading for anyone interested in the truth about the Bible and the dubious origins of Christianity’s sacred texts.

So, this new book is going to show that a collection of unscrupulously forged documents are still usable to prove there was a historical person behind it all?

Is there always a grain of historical truth behind religious writings? Should we begin the search for the historical Moroni too?

No one doubts that one guy, claiming to have a meeting with an angel and launching a new religion could happen without a historical angel, do they? :constern01:

aa5874 · 01-19-2012, 10:08 PM

I really cannot understand why Bart Ehrman wants people to trust sources that MUST be unreliable if Jesus was just a man with a human father.

It is like asking jurors in a court trial to accept known perjury as credible evidence.

The NT Canon is a non-heretical document and do not contain the Heresy that Jesus was a man with a human father.

There are two fundamental scenarios with respect to Jesus in the NT.

1. The Jesus of the NT did NOT exist as described

2. The Jesus of the NT did exist but the NT is Fiction.

If Jesus of the NT did exist and the NT is Fiction then the Historical Jesus is forever lost since there is no credible source.

Why is Bart Ehrman wasting people time when it is ALREADY known that there are NO credible sources to support the HJ argument.

It is ALREADY known that Philo, Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus and Pliny the younger do NOT have any credible information about Jesus of Nazareth.

NOT one non-apologetic source of antiquity mentioned a character called Jesus of Nazareth.

I think Bart may just be trying to make some money because there is just NOTHING at all for Jesus of Nazareth from non-apologetic sources.---Nothing--ZERO.

Sheshbazzar · 01-19-2012, 10:41 PM

But there are always suckers ready to buy another book that will confirm their wishes and scratch their itching ears.
Ehrman is a writer seeking a writers fame and fortune, and has simply decided to grab a bigger hunk of the available market.
Nothing new under the sun. This was also done long ago, in a land far away....

la70119 · 01-20-2012, 03:09 AM

Quote:

The idea that the character of Jesus was an invention of the early church—and later a tool of control employed by the Roman Catholic Church—is a widely held belief and Ehrman has decided it’s time to put the issue to rest. Yes, the historical Jesus of Nazareth did exist.

I call BS on this hyperbolic description.

It is a well-known FACT that the Roman Catholic Church employed the character of Jesus as a tool of control. For CENTURIES. This started with the heresiologists in the late second, early third century.

And what about the character of Jesus being an invention? It seems that Justin Martyr knew a different Jesus story than that portrayed in the Gospels.

Take a look at Justin Martyr's First Apology. In the 35th chapter, he claimed that the Jews themselves physically crucified an HISTORICAL Jesus while Pilate was nowhere to be seen, but what they did WAS recorded in The Acts of Pilate.

Quote:

There are the following predictions: — “Unto us a child is born, and unto us a young man is given, and the government shall be upon His shoulders;” which is significant of the power of the cross, for to it, when He was crucified, He applied His shoulders, as shall be more clearly made out in the ensuing discourse. And again the same prophet Isaiah, being inspired by the prophetic Spirit, said, “I have spread out my hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people, to those who walk in a way that is not good. They now ask of me judgment, and dare to draw near to God.” And again in other words, through another prophet, He says, “They pierced My hands and My feet, and for My vesture they cast lots.” And indeed David, the king and prophet, who uttered these things, suffered none of them; but Jesus Christ stretched forth His hands, being crucified by the Jews speaking against Him, and denying that He was the Christ. And as the prophet spoke, they tormented Him, and set Him on the judgment-seat, and said, Judge us. And the expression, “They pierced my hands and my feet,” was used in reference to the nails of the cross which were fixed in His hands and feet. And after He was crucified they cast lots upon His vesture, and they that crucified Him parted it among them. And that these things did happen, you can ascertain from the Acts of Pontius Pilate.

Yet in the 60th chapter, he cites Plato to describe a MYTHICAL crucifixion of a MYTHICAL Jesus.

Quote:

And the physiological discussion concerning the Son of God in the Timæus of Plato, where he says, “He placed him crosswise in the universe,” he borrowed in like manner from Moses; for in the writings of Moses it is related how at that time, when the Israelites went out of Egypt and were in the wilderness, they fell in with poisonous beasts, both vipers and asps, and every kind of serpent, which slew the people; and that Moses, by the inspiration and influence of God, took brass, and made it into the figure of a cross, and set it in the holy tabernacle, and said to the people, “If you look to this figure, and believe, you shall be saved thereby.” And when this was done, it is recorded that the serpents died, and it is handed down that the people thus escaped death. Which things Plato reading, and not accurately understanding, and not apprehending that it was the figure of the cross, but taking it to be a placing crosswise, he said that the power next to the first God was placed crosswise in the universe. And as to his speaking of a third, he did this because he read, as we said above, that which was spoken by Moses, “that the Spirit of God moved over the waters.” For he gives the second place to the Logos which is with God, who he said was placed crosswise in the universe; and the third place to the Spirit who was said to be borne upon the water, saying, “And the third around the third.”

Despite getting Plato wrong and coming up with that stupid snake on a stick story (we now know there is evidence of ABSENCE for Moses), he does manage to get it right in saying Christians and Platonists before them declared the Logos was "crucified," that is, placed cross-wise in the universe. But not on Earth. In the HEAVENS.

We have ALREADY SHOWN in the Stauros vs. Xylon thread that, before the Jesus character was historicized and portrayed as physically crucified on a Roman cross, he was portrayed as CELESTIALLY crucified on a Chresimon. It turns out, the declension of the Earth at the solstices, and the north-south axis at the equinoxes, form that very Chresimon.

01-19-2012, 03:57 PM	#1
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Bart Ehrman : Did Jesus Exist? Now scheduled as a hardback: Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth [Hardcover] (or via: amazon.co.uk) What started out as an e-book for $6 is now a hardback for $26.99. The ebook is still available here

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

01-19-2012, 06:11 PM	#4
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Steak.

01-19-2012, 10:08 PM	#8
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	I really cannot understand why Bart Ehrman wants people to trust sources that MUST be unreliable if Jesus was just a man with a human father. It is like asking jurors in a court trial to accept known perjury as credible evidence. The NT Canon is a non-heretical document and do not contain the Heresy that Jesus was a man with a human father. There are two fundamental scenarios with respect to Jesus in the NT. 1. The Jesus of the NT did NOT exist as described 2. The Jesus of the NT did exist but the NT is Fiction. If Jesus of the NT did exist and the NT is Fiction then the Historical Jesus is forever lost since there is no credible source. Why is Bart Ehrman wasting people time when it is ALREADY known that there are NO credible sources to support the HJ argument. It is ALREADY known that Philo, Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus and Pliny the younger do NOT have any credible information about Jesus of Nazareth. NOT one non-apologetic source of antiquity mentioned a character called Jesus of Nazareth. I think Bart may just be trying to make some money because there is just NOTHING at all for Jesus of Nazareth from non-apologetic sources.---Nothing--ZERO.

01-19-2012, 10:41 PM	#9
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	But there are always suckers ready to buy another book that will confirm their wishes and scratch their itching ears. Ehrman is a writer seeking a writers fame and fortune, and has simply decided to grab a bigger hunk of the available market. Nothing new under the sun. This was also done long ago, in a land far away....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.