Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus

Status
Not open for further replies.
David Mo said:
I feel sad that this kind of intolerance could be practised by some persons who consider themselves rationalists.
Click to expand...


It is not intolerance. And neither I nor any other sceptic here even has to bother claiming that anyone declares themselves a "rationalist".

The facts of the matter here are simple and unavoidable -

- the vital question is - "what is claimed to be reliable and credible evidence of anyone ever meeting a living Jesus?"

That’s it. That is the entire issue. Plain and Simple.

And despite all these many hundreds of pages, not a single person here has ever been able to post any genuine reliable or credible evidence of anyone ever meeting Jesus. And nor has anyone here even been able to cite any such evidence from any of the countless books published by NT-bible scholars. Nothing at all. Zero.

That is the problem - no credible evidence of Jesus at all.

Against that, there is of course a mountain of completely unarguable evidence to show why those NT-biblical sources are massively unreliable and completely non-credible in what they said about their ancient religious beliefs in miraculous gods.

If you think that request for “evidence” - reliable and credible in what it says - is somehow not an objective or rational position, then there is something very seriously wrong with either your logic, or your understanding of what is being requested here.

So where is that evidence?
 
Last edited:
IanS said:
It is not intolerance. And neither I nor any other sceptic here even has to bother claiming that anyone declares themselves a "rationalist".

The facts of the matter here are simple and unavoidable -

- the vital question is - "what is claimed to be reliable and credible evidence of anyone ever meeting a living Jesus?"

That’s it. That is the entire issue. Plain and Simple.

And despite all these many hundreds of pages, not a single person here has ever been able to post any genuine reliable or credible evidence of anyone ever meeting Jesus. And nor has anyone here even been able to cite any such evidence from any of the countless books published by NT-bible scholars. Nothing at all. Zero.

That is the problem - no credible evidence of Jesus at all.

Against that, there is of course a mountain of completely unarguable evidence to show why those NT-biblical sources are massively unreliable and completely non-credible in what they said about their ancient religious beliefs in miraculous gods.

If you think that request for “evidence” - reliable and credible in what it says - is somehow not an objective or rational position, then there is something very seriously wrong with either your logic, or your understanding of what is being requested here.

So where is that evidence?
Click to expand...

See Ian, here it is:

This is a Historical question.

You haven't studied History.

Everybody who has studied the History on this question is satisfied that a HJ existed.

You are not satisfied. Oh well.

Whose side should I pick? Every Ancient History Professor in the world, or some bloke named IanS?

Who would you chose?
 
Last edited:
Craig B said:
Please try to calm yourself.
Click to expand...


Please try to provide a genuine answer.

Where is the answer?

If as you say people in Jerusalem claimed visions of Jesus and said he had been raised from the dead, then where do you claim they got that "information"?


You have been asked that at least half a dozen times now and just prevaricated every time without any answer. It was your claim, so what is the answer please?
 
IanS said:
Please try to provide a genuine answer.

Where is the answer?

If as you say people in Jerusalem claimed visions of Jesus and said he had been raised from the dead, then where do you claim they got that "information"?


You have been asked that at least half a dozen times now and just prevaricated every time without any answer. It was your claim, so what is the answer please?
Click to expand...

Why is it difficult for you to understand that HJ did not rise from the dead?

If James was Jesus' Brother, there is no need for "visions".

What reliable authentic genuine documented evidence do you have that James was not who everyone in Antiquity claimed he was?
 
IanS said:
You have been asked that at least half a dozen times now and just prevaricated every time without any answer. It was your claim, so what is the answer please?
Click to expand...
i have some observations on this, but I will make no further comments to you, at present, as you peremptorily demand evidence from me, yet you refuse to consider anything I produce, eg from analyses of the NT; and you instruct me to cut the "crap", and so forth.
 
Craig B said:
i have some observations on this, but I will make no further comments to you, at present, as you peremptorily demand evidence from me, yet you refuse to consider anything I produce, eg from analyses of the NT; and you instruct me to cut the "crap", and so forth.
Click to expand...



Just produce whatever it is you think is a proper answer to that question. Where do you think those Jerusalem people obtained the idea that they experienced visions and had knowledge of Jesus rising from he dead?

It's not a difficult question. Just give your honest answer as to how you think they came to believe those things.
 
Brainache said:
See Ian, here it is:

This is a Historical question.
Click to expand...

Actually it is an Historic Anthropological question and Carrier so far is the only one even remotely doing work in that field.

Brainache said:
You haven't studied History.
Click to expand...

I haven't studied rocket theory but I have a reasonable idea that tying a multitude of rockets to a chair and lighting them as a Chinese philosopher once did is not going to get one to the moon (though it is likely to get one to another world...in little bitty pieces :D)

The HJ theory is in such trouble the only way that it can be saved is the let's dial back Jesus actual achievements down to the point where he effectively might as well not have existed idea being used today.

Brainache said:
Everybody who has studied the History on this question is satisfied that a HJ existed.
Click to expand...

WRONG. Constantin-François Volney was a historian and many trace the modern Christ Myth theory back to him. Bruno Bauer was a historian who also supported the Christ Myth theory as does the historian Carrier.
 
IanS said:
Just produce whatever it is you think is a proper answer to that question. Where do you think those Jerusalem people obtained the idea that they experienced visions and had knowledge of Jesus rising from he dead?

It's not a difficult question. Just give your honest answer as to how you think they came to believe those things.
Click to expand...
You cite my last post, but evidently you have not understood it. That is regrettable.
 
Craig B said:
I think you're right. This from 1 Thess 4 looks as if it's about physical bodies being resurrected, and meeting up with those still alive, who don't appear to be dispensing with their bodies as they ascend to meet The Lord. I think he means all this quite literally.
Click to expand...

I suppose there are some issues with some of Paul's comments about 'spiritual bodies', the 'imperishable' and so on. But the text at 1 Cor. 15 onwards, seems to involve a group of Greeks who may accept a spiritual resurrection, but not a physical one.

So Paul is equating the physical resurrection of Christ with the physical resurrection of all - 'if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised'. This seems to rule out any idea of Paul's that Christ is somehow a celestial figure; of course, there is also the general principle, 'what has not been assumed, cannot be redeemed'. It's because Christ is human, that humanity can be healed. A purely celestial figure would be inadequate.

But naturally, this does not automatically imply that Jesus was human, but seems to imply that Paul thought he was.
 
IanS said:
Craig B said:
Just produce whatever it is you think is a proper answer to that question. Where do you think those Jerusalem people obtained the idea that they experienced visions and had knowledge of Jesus rising from he dead?

It's not a difficult question. Just give your honest answer as to how you think they came to believe those things.
Click to expand...


You cite my last post, but evidently you have not understood it. That is regrettable.
Click to expand...



OK, so you cannot support your claim in any way at all.

Every post of yours is just a total evasion.

You have no evidence of Jesus. And you make claims about people in Jerusalem that you are incapable of explaining or supporting in any way at all.

If you did try to support your claim by explaining why you thought those people in Jerusalem had believed in visions of the messiah and believed that he rose from the dead, then it would of course immediately expose your earlier claim that Paul must have got his belief from those Jerusalem people as completely invalid and absurd. So I am not really surprised that you refuse to support your claims.
 
Brainache said:
...We can't assume that what we have now, is all that was written. We know "Heresies" were sought out and destroyed, so we have to assume that we don't have everything.
Click to expand...

You can't assume that you have evidence pre 70 CE for Jesus, the disciples and Paul.

Your argument for an HJ is an admitted argument of the dead--an argument from silence.

You have illogically assumed your supposed missing evidence ONLY supports an HJ when the actual recovered and dated 2nd century or later manuscripts and Codices show that Jesus was the Son of God born of a Ghost, the Logos, God Creator, who walked on the sea, transfigured with TWO resurrected Ghosts, Moses and Elijah, was himself raised from the dead, ate food after the resurrection, commissioned his disciples and then ascended in a cloud.


It is already established that the HJ argument is void of logic and void of evidence pre 70 CE. Nothing has changed.
 
Last edited:
zugzwang said:
But naturally, this does not automatically imply that Jesus was human, but seems to imply that Paul thought he was.
Click to expand...

The Pauline writers SPECIFICALLY stated their Jesus was NOT a man.

It is well established that the HJ argument is void of logic and void of facts.

Galatians 1:1 KJV
Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead)
Click to expand...

Paul was the Apostle of a Resurrected Ghost--the Last Adam.

1 Corinthians 15:45 KJV
And so it is written , The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
Click to expand...
 
Dejudge is also in the fortunate position of knowing that everybody else knows nothing.
 
Belz... said:
That's a bit unfair, since we're discussing that question right now, and pretty much not a single person in this thread has claimed certainty about this tipic, except Dejudge, who knows everything.
Click to expand...

You have confirmed you are void of the facts.

In a recent poll in this forum when asked " Did Jesus Exist?" some posters including Zugzwang, Craig B, and Foster Zygote voted --"Yes, Jesus was an itinerant Jewish Rabbi whose tale grew in the telling".
 
Last edited:
There we are, we are all void of the facts; but thankfully dejudge has all the facts. Just think, if he didn't, how ignorant we would be, but fortunately he has rescued us from this. Hurrah!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom