Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
Merged Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth - (Part 2)
- Thread starter phelix
- Start date
- Status
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2009
- Messages
- 23,741
I think you're too generous, oh, Pharaoh. If it were designed from the start to be a horse, it would probably be more coherent.
What we have is more like that first some people made lots of disjointed parts, some hundreds if not thousands, at that, none of them even thinking his piece would end up in a horse. Or really, that they'd be anything but standalone. (Until Marcion in the middle of the 2nd century, it genuinely never occurred to anyone to have an authoritative bible.) Then a committee had the task to pick which of them, after a bit of extra chiselling and polishing, they could make a horse out of.
It's akin to trying to find 27 car models, out of the thousands so far, that one could bang together into something resembling a Voltron. I think nobody would be surprised if the result ain't pretty
Last edited:
Lucian
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2009
- Messages
- 3,257
Actually when the various eddic poets--composing at different times and places, some orally and some not--composed their works, they didn't have a clue it was going to end up in something called (inaccurately but conveniently) a Poetic Edda.
There are many inconsistencies among these poems, but I'd be more concerned if there weren't any consistencies, and I haven't seen any inconsistencies that couldn't be logically explained by a mad man. And thus, when I slay my enemies, I dedicate them to Odin.
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
I think you're right.
Can I just take this opportunity to mention how much I've enjoyed your posts in that/this thread?
Yet one more reason I disagree with those who think that the threads DOC starts are of no value.
Tide goes in, tide goes out. You can't explain that.[qimg]http://www.blogcdn.com/www.urlesque.com/media/2011/02/oreillycantexplain1.jpg[/qimg]
Had to
An apologist of the first order, it seems.
Well I see that this thread that was entitled
"Skeptic favorite Bart Ehrman's new book states: Yes, Jesus of Nazareth Did Exist."
just got moved to the History section.
For the record Ehrman is a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina.
"Skeptic favorite Bart Ehrman's new book states: Yes, Jesus of Nazareth Did Exist."
just got moved to the History section.
For the record Ehrman is a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina.
Rincewind
Philosopher
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
TimCallahan
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 6,293
It's one thing to say Jesus existed. It's quite another to say he walked on water.
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
For the record, this is a record:
ddt
Mafia Penguin
ddt
Mafia Penguin
Rightly so: the book you want to
And here's your first lesson Greek.
The inside book Jacket says in big bold oversized print:
YES, JESUS OF NAZARETH DID EXIST.
Here is what Ehrman says on pages 173 - 174 of his new book "Did Jesus Exist".
"Jesus certainly existed. My goal in this book, however is not simply to show the evidence for Jesus's existence that has proved compelling to almost every scholar who has ever thought about it, but also to show why those few authors who have thought otherwise are therefore wrong. To do that I need to move beyond the evidence of the historical Jesus to the claim made about his existence by various mythicists. I will not try to refute every single point made by every single author who has taken that stand. That would require an enormous book...
Instead I will consider the most important {mythicist} issues... In the chapter that follows I will then consider several of the best-known mythicist proposals for how Jesus came to be created and argue that they too are thoroughly inadequate to establish the mythicist view."
____
He does talk about the there was no Nazareth mythicist view but I haven't read that yet. That mythicist view doesn't appear to affect his belief that the historical person known as Jesus of Nazareth certainly existed.
Last edited:
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
DOC, why are you telling us about this book (which has relatively poor reviews in terms of its scholarship on Amazon.co.uk)?
I for one am not particularly impressed by what Bart Ehrman has to say on the historicity of Jesus given the quality of his arguments in this book. Given that he is definite in stating that Jesus the Christ did not exist, I really do not know why you are mentioning this book particularly since you do not appear to have read it.
I for one am not particularly impressed by what Bart Ehrman has to say on the historicity of Jesus given the quality of his arguments in this book. Given that he is definite in stating that Jesus the Christ did not exist, I really do not know why you are mentioning this book particularly since you do not appear to have read it.
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
What in the name of Hathor is a "Nazareth mythical view".
It certainly affects your unfounded claim that the New Testament writers were telling the truth though.
Perhaps you should have thought that through before you brought this book up for discussion DOC, because I don't think it's going to end very well for you.
Last edited:
- Status