Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus

[Foster Zygote]

Dejudge, why is it that people only 40 - 50 years after Jesus died would have seen the stories as absurd, yet people after about, let's say 100 years later (You've never actually given any timeline for your invention of Jesus) would have no trouble swallowing these absurd tales? Why would people in the 1st Century know Paul to me a "monstrous liar", yet people in the 2nd Century would start swallowing the same story as true when it was told by someone else?

 

[Belz...]

What?? You made claims for which you presented no data.

That's a lie.






Let me guess. You'll answer with "that's a lie" ?

 

[dejudge]

Are you suggesting that the Roman soldiers and bureaucrats actually involved in the arrest, sentencing and execution of Jesus must have worshipped him as a god for an historical Jesus to have existed? Can you explain how that works?

I am exposing a stupid argument. Brianache claimed "The Roman Soldiers who arrested and crucified Jesus were not in Paul's audience".

Do you know of any list of Roman soldiers or any written statement by Roman soldiers that they were not in Paul's audience?

I'll bet none of those involved in prosecuting Joseph Smith for fraud in New York converted to Mormonism. So what is your point?

Do you have a list of those involved in prosecuting Joseph Smith?

Perhaps some believed in the God of the Jews and his Only begotten son Jesus Christ, the Logos and God Creator.

Don't Mormons believe in God and his Son?

You don't have to be a Mormon to believe that Jesus was God.

What is your point?

 

[dejudge]

Dejudge, why is it that people only 40 - 50 years after Jesus died would have seen the stories as absurd, yet people after about, let's say 100 years later (You've never actually given any timeline for your invention of Jesus) would have no trouble swallowing these absurd tales? Why would people in the 1st Century know Paul to me a "monstrous liar", yet people in the 2nd Century would start swallowing the same story as true when it was told by someone else?

Marcion and his followers used to laugh at Justin so it seems as though that there were people who did not swallow the Jesus story in the 2nd century.

Many people swallowed Marcion's story.

Almost all of Samaria and other nations swallowed Simon Magus story that he was God since the time of Claudius c 41-54 CE

There were other so-called Heretical teachings based on writings attributed to Justin, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Origen, Optatus and others.

 

[Brainache]

Thigs are even worse for you. You have no data to support your improbability.

Indeed.

I am exposing a stupid argument. Brianache claimed "The Roman Soldiers who arrested and crucified Jesus were not in Paul's audience".

Do you know of any list of Roman soldiers or any written statement by Roman soldiers that they were not in Paul's audience?



Do you have a list of those involved in prosecuting Joseph Smith?

Perhaps some believed in the God of the Jews and his Only begotten son Jesus Christ, the Logos and God Creator.

Don't Mormons believe in God and his Son?

You don't have to be a Mormon to believe that Jesus was God.

What is your point?

You cannot be serious.

Are you really this confused by simple things?

Marcion and his followers used to laugh at Justin so it seems as though that there were people who did not swallow the Jesus story in the 2nd century.

Many people swallowed Marcion's story.

Almost all of Samaria and other nations swallowed Simon Magus story that he was God since the time of Claudius c 41-54 CE

There were other so-called Heretical teachings based on writings attributed to Justin, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Origen, Optatus and others.

Not getting any less stupid.

Sorry.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I am exposing a stupid argument. Brianache claimed "The Roman Soldiers who arrested and crucified Jesus were not in Paul's audience".

No. Brainache asked:

Do you think that if Jesus was real, he was God?

Is that the problem?

You then responded with another question:

Do you think that if Jesus was really a Crucified Criminal, caught red-handed, that he would be worshiped as a God by those who caught him in the act and Crucified him?

So I am asking you: Are you suggesting that the Roman soldiers and bureaucrats actually involved in the arrest, sentencing and execution of Jesus must have worshipped him as a god for an historical Jesus to have existed? Can you explain how that works?

Your exchange with Brainache as to whether the Roman soldiery were among Paul's intended audience came after, and is irrelevant to, my question regarding your above statement.

 

[Craig B]

So I am asking you: Are you suggesting that the Roman soldiers and bureaucrats actually involved in the arrest, sentencing and execution of Jesus must have worshipped him as a god for an historical Jesus to have existed? Can you explain how that works?

It doesn't work. It's completely crazy. I've never seen an argument like that! It is derived from dejudge's obsessive insistence that Jesus existed only as a god, if he existed at all. Therefore Roman soldiers couldn't have regarded him as a man when they executed him. It's really weird reasoning.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Marcion and his followers used to laugh at Justin so it seems as though that there were people who did not swallow the Jesus story in the 2nd century.

Marcion and his followers did swallow the Jesus story, they just didn't agree with Justin's version.

 

[dejudge]

Marcion and his followers did swallow the Jesus story, they just didn't agree with Justin's version.

So they did not swallow the Jesus story of Justin.

Marcion preached another Son of God--Not Jesus.

Marcion Son of God was not the son of the God of the Jews.

Justin's First Apology

And, as we said before, the devils put forward Marcion of Pontus, who is even now teaching men to deny that God is the maker of all things in heaven and on earth, and that the Christ predicted by the prophets is His Son, and preaches another god besides the Creator of all, and likewise another son.

And this man many have believed, as if he alone knew the truth, and laugh at us, though they have no proof of what they say...

Marcion did not swallow the Jesus story at all.

The Jesus story was a Big Joke for Marcion and his followers.

Since the 2nd century, the Jesus story of Justin was identified as stupid.

 

[Brainache]

So they did not swallow the Jesus story of Justin.

Marcion preached another Son of God--Not Jesus.

Marcion Son of God was not the son of the God of the Jews.

Justin's First Apology

Marcion did not swallow the Jesus story at all.

The Jesus story was a Big Joke for Marcion and his followers.

Since the 2nd century, the Jesus story of Justin was identified as stupid.

Is the concept of Theological differences between Christian sects a new one to you?

Bizarre.

Stupid and bizarre.

 

[Foster Zygote]

delete

 

[dejudge]

Is the concept of Theological differences between Christian sects a new one to you?

Bizarre.

Stupid and bizarre.

The stupid and bizarre remarks are really worthless--unproductive non-sense. Your single sentences are exposing your lack of understanding of writings of antiquity.

There are multiple writings of antiquity which explain the massive difference in beliefs of many so-called heretical Christians who did not swallow the Jesus story at all.

The Christians who followed Simon Magus the magician believed he was God and that he would never die.

The Christians who followed Marcion believed that the Son of God came down directly from heaven without birth on earth.

The Christian called Theophilus believed ONLY in God.

The Christian called Athenagors did not accept the Jesus story and believed in God.

There are multiple Christians cults that portrayed Jesus Christ as a myth character and far differently than Justin like the cults of Valentinus, the Sethians, Basilides, Justinius, the Docetae, Monoimus, the Naasenei, Cerdo, Apelles and others.

We have writings about the so-called Heretical Christian beliefs in "Against Heresies attributed to Irenaeus, Prescription Against the Heretics attributed to Tertullian and Refutation Against all Heretics attributed to Hippolytus.

 

[Foster Zygote]

So they did not swallow the Jesus story of Justin.

Marcion preached another Son of God--Not Jesus.

Marcion Son of God was not the son of the God of the Jews.

Justin's First Apology

Marcion did not swallow the Jesus story at all.

The Jesus story was a Big Joke for Marcion and his followers.

Since the 2nd century, the Jesus story of Justin was identified as stupid.

Dejudge, that's like pointing to Martin Luther and saying, "See? The Jesus story of Catholicism was identified as stupid!". Marcion and Justin both believed in Jesus, they just both felt that the other's interpretation of Jesus was wrong. There were lots of different versions of Christianity early on. You haven't even mentioned the Gnostics, Arianists, Docetists, or Ebionites.

It's like the scene in Monty Python's Life Of Brian, in which Brian evades the Roman soldiers by pretending to be a street preacher for a few minutes. The moment the soldiers are out of site, he hoofs it, leaving behind only a gourd and a lost sandal. A crowd of people who'd gathered around his improvised preacher performance immediately splits into two opposed factions, one venerating the sandal as a religious icon, the other venerating the gourd. That was a parody of what really was going on in the early days of Christianity. Christianity branched into many different groups with often very different doctrines. It took centuries for the doctrinal conflicts to finally be resolved with the group of fundamental beliefs that we know of today eventually winning out.

So, what does the fact that Marcion preached his own version of Christianity to the disgust of Justin have to do with the question of Jesus' historicity?

 

[Foster Zygote]

Since you earlier response didn't come anywhere near addressing the question:

Dejudge, why is it that people only 40 - 50 years after Jesus died would have seen the stories as absurd, yet people after about, let's say 100 years later (You've never actually given any timeline for your invention of Jesus) would have no trouble swallowing these absurd tales? Why would people in the 1st Century know Paul to me a "monstrous liar", yet people in the 2nd Century would start swallowing the same story as true when it was told by someone else?

I'm not asking you to name people who disagreed with each other, I'm asking you to tell me what changed from the 1st Century to the 2nd Century to change peoples' level of credulity so radically.

 

[dejudge]

Dejudge, that's like pointing to Martin Luther and saying, "See? The Jesus story of Catholicism was identified as stupid!". Marcion and Justin both believed in Jesus, they just both felt that the other's interpretation of Jesus was wrong. There were lots of different versions of Christianity early on. You haven't even mentioned the Gnostics, Arianists, Docetists, or Ebionites.

What is your point? You must have forgotten that Justin claimed Jesus was the Son of a Ghost and that Marcion claimed the Son of God had no birth.

 

[Craig B]

What is your point? You must have forgotten that Justin claimed Jesus was the Son of a Ghost and that Marcion claimed the Son of God had no birth.

Nobody except you looks in the pages of Justin or Marcion to find authentic data on the life of Jesus - if he did indeed exist.

 

[dejudge]

Nobody except you looks in the pages of Justin or Marcion to find authentic data on the life of Jesus - if he did indeed exist.

What is your point? Nobody has evidence for HJ the Nobody.

 

[Foster Zygote]

What is your point? You must have forgotten that Justin claimed Jesus was the Son of a Ghost and that Marcion claimed the Son of God had no birth.

My point is that your question regarding whether anyone who'd been involved in the arrest, prosecution or execution of Jesus would have worshiped him as divine is rather pointless. What does it have to do with Jesus' historicity?

Are you suggesting that the Roman soldiers and bureaucrats actually involved in the arrest, sentencing and execution of Jesus must have worshipped him as a god for an historical Jesus to have existed?

 

[dejudge]

My point is that your question regarding whether anyone who'd been involved in the arrest, prosecution or execution of Jesus would have worshiped him as divine is rather pointless. What does it have to do with Jesus' historicity?

Actually, that was your own question that you now consider pointless.

I was exposing a stupid argument by a poster who argued that Roman soldiers were not in Paul's audience when he had no evidence whatsoever of such a thing if Paul did exist and preach in Jerusalem.

In an Epistle to the Corinthians the Governor of Damascus attempted to capture Paul and had the gates guarded with a GARRISON [a group of Troops]

Paul escaped from Damascus and ended up in Jerusalem.

Incrediblly, Paul ended up in the same Jerusalem, where the supposed obscure HJ was crucified by Roman Soldiers, after escaping from Troops of Soldiers in Damascus.

2 Cor. 11

32 In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison , desirous to apprehend me: 33 And through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and escaped his hands.

Paul was a wanted man in the NT. Paul was wanted in Damascus.

How did a wanted man who boasted about and documented his own escape from Damascus manage to elude the Romans for over 17 years while publicly breaking the Laws of the Romans?

The HJ argument does not make sense.

The Pauline Corpus is not history ---it is stupidity.

Paul, A wanted man publicly documented his escape from Damascus and went to Jerusalem and Rome to preach that HJ was raised from the dead and was God's own Son.

The Pauline Corpus is idiocy--stupid fables and lies.

The Pauline Corpus cannot help the HJ argument.

 

[Craig B]

... Paul was a wanted man in the NT. Paul was wanted in Damascus.

How did a wanted man who boasted about and documented his own escape from Damascus manage to elude the Romans for over 17 years while publicly breaking the Laws of the Romans?

Damascus was not at that time in the Roman Empire. I think it was Gaius who ceded it to the Nabateans.