Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus

[Craig B]

... There is nothing internally in the Pauline Corpus to date them and there are Christian writings which are internally dated to c 150 CE, the time of Antoninus, that contain nothing of the Pauline Corpus.

We've been over all this. Knowledge of "Pauline" writings IS displayed by some of these later authors; moreover, as discussed umpteen times in these threads, there are notices of early periods in the Pauline epistles and in Acts. These include references to events in the reign of King Aretas (died 50 AD) and to the temple in Jerusalem (destroyed 70 AD).

 

[Brainache]

I don't think you realize it, but whether or not you accept the propaganda about Kim Jong il he is a documented figure of history.

Surely you don't realize that Jesus was a documented figure of mythology. You must have forgotten that Jesus was born of a Ghost and God Creator in hundreds of manuscripts and apologetic writings whether or not you believe the modern propaganda for which there is no evidence that he was a Zealot, a Cynic, a rabbi, an itinerant preacher or messianic pretender.

You have already conceded defeat in this debate dejudge.

Why are you still arguing for this silly baseless nonsense?

 

[Belz...]

You have already conceded defeat in this debate dejudge.

Why are you still arguing for this silly baseless nonsense?

I think we would all just ignore Dejudge's further attempt to derail the discussion with this particular argument. It has been debunked and addressed dozens of time, by now, and shown to have no merit or substance.

 

[JaysonR]

What?? You are not really familiar with the abundance of writings in antiquity.


Don't you know that there were libraries with hundreds of papyri rolls in the 1st century?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herculaneum_papyri



Don't you know about the Dead Sea Scrolls?

Writing was probably the ONLY form of physically recording events in antiquity.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are heavily dated to 2nd c BCE through 1st c BCE, so are the coins found with them, and so is the linen used to wrap the pots which the scrolls were kept in.

Only a hand full of those texts, about five or so, are possibly within the 1st c CE era.

Furthermore, the Dead Sea Scrolls are an amazingly rare find.
The entire reason that these texts are so valuable is because until we had these, until these texts were found, the earliest surviving texts were tattered fragments and largely dates to the 2nd c CE onward.

There are lots of texts from the ancient periods, yes, but not from the Judaic culture.
For example, a 9th c CE prayer book now holds the record as the oldest complete text; previously the record for a complete text was the 12th and 13th c CE for a complete Torah scroll.

While some fragments exist older, almost no texts of any kind from Judea survived out of the 1st c CE.
We have text fragments before that century and after it, but almost everything from Judea within the 1st c CE was completely lost since the Romans purposefully destroyed the largest collections of texts and records in Judah when they destroyed the temple and seized the city.
It helped none, either, that before the Romans, there were invasions by "Edomites" who also destroyed large amounts of the city.

The only reason that the Dead Sea Scrolls survived in such volume was that they were hidden away inside of hard to reach caves for the very specific purpose of avoiding their destruction.

Claiming that we don't have records of Judaic events by Judaic hands from within Judea from the 1st c CE like we have records from Romans about Roman events from within the Roman empire is not evidence of anything about what Hebrew peoples didn't participate in, nor who in Judah did not exist in any respect.

It is not an equal comparison, and this is also why the only texts about this century which survive are texts found outside of Judea.
Anything within Judea was completely destroyed and nearly all Hebrew peoples left their land.

A similar event took place in the 13th c CE China when the Mongols conquered the land.
They wiped out entire massive royal and academic libraries and hospitals, and burned any Chinese books or literature which they found.
As a result, we have very few texts from the territories which the Mongols conquered during this time period.


So, no, it is not evidence of anything regarding this conversation that Judaic documents are absent on many matters, except for being evidence that the Romans did indeed wipe out nearly every piece of text and money they found in Judea when they set out to wipe out the "Jewish problem".

 

[Foster Zygote]

You claimed Josephus wrote about James the brother of Jesus when you knew in advance of posting that you had no 1st century writing about Jesus of Nazareth.

You reject the writings of Josephus but simultaneously use it to prove James had a brother called the Christ.

What are you talking about? Are you really, as it would appear, of the belief that just because the oldest available witness of a particular text dates from the Middle Ages, that this means that the text has to be of Medieval origin?

What?? You are not really familiar with the abundance of writings in antiquity.

Compared to what? And how many of those writings, famous writings among scholars in those days, are now lost to us, known only by passing mention in fragments of other texts. How many famous writers from two millennia ago are only known to us in part, because much of their work has been lost to time. And those were highly valued works, collected and copied by scholars who treasured them. If you think that it is to be expected that even a reference to a little known religious crank should come own to us from two thousand years ago, then you really need to actually study some history.

Don't you know that there were libraries with hundreds of papyri rolls in the 1st century?

There were millions in the library of Alexandria. How many survive today? How well does papyrus hold up over time? How many of the papyri from Herculaneum have even been restored to a legible state?

Don't you know about the Dead Sea Scrolls?

Writing was probably the ONLY form of physically recording events in antiquity.

Yeah, they probably weren't peeing their important records into the snow.

If your argument still relies on claiming that the lack of any record of Jesus' life from around 33 CE means that such records can be assumed not to exist, then there really is no educating you.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I merely exposed your double standard argument which is void of logic .

What double standard is that? Please describe it in detail. I suspect that you are just regurgitating objections that have been raised regarding your own post without really understanding what you are saying.

You know that it has been deduced by Scholars that the Pauline Corpus contains at least SIX Epistles that are forgeries or falsely attributed to Paul and know that in Acts that there is no corroboration and NO mention of the 13 Epistles yet persist in assuming that there were Pauline writings before c 62 CE.

And? This has been known for a long time.

In Antiquities of the Jews there is internal information to tentatively date it to C 93 CE but there is no internal information in the Pauline Corpus to date any letter before c 62 CE.

Paul writes about meeting James the brother of Jesus, someone whom Josephus mentions as having died by 62 CE. That is an internal indication that Paul must have met James before 62 CE.

There is nothing internally in the Pauline Corpus to date them and there are Christian writings which are internally dated to c 150 CE, the time of Antoninus, that contain nothing of the Pauline Corpus.

Which Christian writings are those? You do realize that Christianity wasn't one big happy family in the mid 2nd Century. Not everyone was in love with Paul.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I don't think you realize it, but whether or not you accept the propaganda about Kim Jong il he is a documented figure of history.

Surely you don't realize that Jesus was a documented figure of mythology. You must have forgotten that Jesus was born of a Ghost and God Creator in hundreds of manuscripts and apologetic writings whether or not you believe the modern propaganda for which there is no evidence that he was a Zealot, a Cynic, a rabbi, an itinerant preacher or messianic pretender.

I can't tell if you are being deliberately obtuse, or you're just so convinced that admitting an error is an admission of defeat, that you can't let on that you understand.

You can't say that Jesus was no more than myth simply because people told magical stories about him, and then admit that Kim Jong-il and Benny Hinn are real people about whom magical stories are told. We have the advantage of knowing of the existence of the latter two people only because of their temporal proximity and the immense advantages that we have in communications and record-keeping over the 1st century. But two thousand years from now, someone calling himself "dezortron" might attempt to make the same argument regarding Benny Hinn that you are using regarding an historical Jesus. "But the ancient fragmentary text claims that Pastor Hinn could work miracles of healing. So he can't possible have been a real person. He's as mythical as the lost city of Las Vegas."

 

[dejudge]

I can't tell if you are being deliberately obtuse, or you're just so convinced that admitting an error is an admission of defeat, that you can't let on that you understand.

You can't say that Jesus was no more than myth simply because people told magical stories about him, and then admit that Kim Jong-il and Benny Hinn are real people about whom magical stories are told. We have the advantage of knowing of the existence of the latter two people only because of their temporal proximity and the immense advantages that we have in communications and record-keeping over the 1st century. But two thousand years from now, someone calling himself "dezortron" might attempt to make the same argument regarding Benny Hinn that you are using regarding an historical Jesus. "But the ancient fragmentary text claims that Pastor Hinn could work miracles of healing. So he can't possible have been a real person. He's as mythical as the lost city of Las Vegas."

You are just repeating your same debunked arguments over and over. You are attempting to historicise your myth Jesus--the itinerant preacher--without a shred of evidence.

It is illogical to use the historical data for Kim Jong il and Benny Hinn for Jesus of Nazareth the Son of God born of a Ghost and God Creator.

Whether or not Kim Jong il or Benny Hinn lived or did miracles needs separate inquiries and the results cannot be transferred to the inquiry into the existence or non-existence of the Son a Ghost.

I repeat, Jesus of Nazareth perfectly matches mythology--all myth and no history.

Kim Jong il and Benny Hinn have documented history.

By the way, if your Jesus was an itinerant preacher, then Jesus called Christ in Josephus is NOT your HJ.

Your HJ is a myth--no documented history.

 

[Brainache]

The Dead Sea Scrolls are heavily dated to 2nd c BCE through 1st c BCE, so are the coins found with them, and so is the linen used to wrap the pots which the scrolls were kept in.

Only a hand full of those texts, about five or so, are possibly within the 1st c CE era.

...

I agree with everything in your post, except this bit. I don't think the dating issue is as cut-and-dried as you present it.

Mostly because of what this bloke says:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-eisenman/james-the-just-as-righteo_b_4133599.html

And here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-eisenman/internal-evidence-vs-exte_b_3722313.html

He is a lot more qualified than Richard Carrier or Bart Ehrman.

 

[Brainache]

You are just repeating your same debunked arguments over and over. You are attempting to historicise your myth Jesus--the itinerant preacher--without a shred of evidence.

It is illogical to use the historical data for Kim Jong il and Benny Hinn for Jesus of Nazareth the Son of God born of a Ghost and God Creator.

Whether or not Kim Jong il or Benny Hinn lived or did miracles needs separate inquiries and the results cannot be transferred to the inquiry into the existence or non-existence of the Son a Ghost.

I repeat, Jesus of Nazareth perfectly matches mythology--all myth and no history.

Kim Jong il and Benny Hinn have documented history.

By the way, if your Jesus was an itinerant preacher, then Jesus called Christ in Josephus is NOT your HJ.

Your HJ is a myth--no documented history.

Please stop repeating this embarrassing ludicrous nonsense.

I agree with Belz... on this issue. These arguments are going nowhere because you refuse to consider anything other than your own ignorant conclusion.

Good luck with that.

 

[JaysonR]

Brainache:

We understand our disagreement, and I stand still hesitant to move the dates considering all, not part, of the material and paleographic evidence.
The case to move the dates needs more work to be convincing.
At the moment, later dates are simply convenient for a particular hypothesis.

Even if the dates were in the 1st c CE, however, it still would stand as nearly the only surviving textual volume and hardly represtative of the normality of the quantity.

 

[Brainache]

Brainache:

We understand our disagreement, and I stand still hesitant to move the dates considering all, not part, of the material and paleographic evidence.
The case to move the dates needs more work to be convincing.
At the moment, later dates are simply convenient for a particular hypothesis.

Even if the dates were in the 1st c CE, however, it still would stand as nearly the only surviving textual volume and hardly represtative of the normality of the quantity.

OK. So we leave the dating to one side for the moment.

So, are you saying that because of the partisan nature of the DSS, they represent a very narrow slice of second Temple Judaism?

I certainly don't disagree with that.

 

[JaysonR]

While that is true as well, no.
I meant that they stand as one of the only examples of texts in such volume and quality preserved from ancient Judah.

Dejudge's citation of them was in support of his idea that there were plenty of preserved texts; he would be pressed to find further examples.

 

[Brainache]

While that is true as well, no.
I meant that they stand as one of the only examples of texts in such volume and quality preserved from ancient Judah.

Oh, OK. Just counter to dejudge's silly argument that we should be able to produce a birth certificate for Jesus proving he was born in Hawaii Nazareth to Joe and Mary Carpenter etc.

Yes, didn't the Zealots also set about destroying all official records, whenever they got the chance, according to Josephus?

 

[JaysonR]

If I recall correctly, yes.
That was not an uncommon practice either.
Their theocratic culture, much like Egypt, wrote over the top of each other and destroyed their texts periodically with the changes of political rule because "righteous" was understood differently over time and groups, but most tended to see "unrighteous" as needing to be entirely "cleansed" to save the people from their god's wrath (at the lest, this was a handy excuse).

 

[dejudge]

Paul writes about meeting James the brother of Jesus, someone whom Josephus mentions as having died by 62 CE. That is an internal indication that Paul must have met James before 62 CE.

Again, you use the same Josephus and you know there is no 1st century copy.

Again, you use the Pauline Corpus and you know there is no 1st century copy.

The same Josephus and the Bible for which I am ridiculed minute by minute you are openly using them for your HISTORY of an unknown ITINERANT preacher.

Josephus and the Bible mention the Christ not a backwater itinerant preacher.

Now, the author of Galatians specifically identified James as an apostle--not just a brother.

There is no apostle called James who was the brother of Jesus in the Gospels, Acts and Josephus.

1. In apologetic sources, the fragments of Papias, the mother of James the Apostle was NOT the mother of Jesus the son of God.

2. In apologetic sources, the fragments of Papias, the father of James the apostle was Not God but Alphaeus.

3. In Apologetic sources, the Recognitions, James the apostle was ALIVE c 67 CE or when Clement was about to be Bishop of Rome.

Galatians 1.19 is a disaster.

James the Apostle in Galatians 1.19 was NOT James in Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1.

Again, the Pauline Corpus is NOT corroborated.

The Entire Pauline Corpus is a massive forgery composed no earlier than c 180 CE.

 

[Brainache]

Again, you use the same Josephus and you know there is no 1st century copy.

Again, you use the Pauline Corpus and you know there is no 1st century copy.

The same Josephus and the Bible for which I am ridiculed minute by minute you are openly using them for your HISTORY of an unknown ITINERANT preacher.

Josephus and the Bible mention the Christ not a backwater itinerant preacher.

Now, the author of Galatians specifically identified James as an apostle--not just a brother.

There is no apostle called James who was the brother of Jesus in the Gospels, Acts and Josephus.

1. In apologetic sources, the fragments of Papias, the mother of James the Apostle was NOT the mother of Jesus the son of God.

2. In apologetic sources, the fragments of Papias, the father of James the apostle was Not God but Alphaeus.

3. In Apologetic sources, the Recognitions, James the apostle was ALIVE c 67 CE or when Clement was about to be Bishop of Rome.

Galatians 1.19 is a disaster.

James the Apostle in Galatians 1.19 was NOT James in Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1.

Again, the Pauline Corpus is NOT corroborated.

The Entire Pauline Corpus is a massive forgery composed no earlier than c 180 CE.

The problem is that you are reading the bible like a Fundamentalist who takes it all at face value. You are not applying critical reasoning to what you are reading. Your conclusions are therefore useless.

 

[dejudge]

We've been over all this. Knowledge of "Pauline" writings IS displayed by some of these later authors; moreover, as discussed umpteen times in these threads, there are notices of early periods in the Pauline epistles and in Acts. These include references to events in the reign of King Aretas (died 50 AD) and to the temple in Jerusalem (destroyed 70 AD).

You have not provided a single passage in any Pauline letter where the author indicated when he was writing because there is none.

There is nothing in the Pauline Corpus at all that shows Paul in the Jewish Temple at any Passover up to c 70 CE.


There are very few apologetic writings where there are indications of the date of authorship.

Aristides' Apology is addressed to Hadrian c 117-138 CE.

Justin Martyr's First Apology is addressed to Antoninus c 138-161 CE.

Theophilus of Antioch wrote "To Autolycus in the time of Aurelius up to c 179 CE.

Athenagoras' Plea for the Christians is addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus c 177-192 CE

 

[Brainache]

If I recall correctly, yes.
That was not an uncommon practice either.
Their theocratic culture, much like Egypt, wrote over the top of each other and destroyed their texts periodically with the changes of political rule because "righteous" was understood differently over time and groups, but most tended to see "unrighteous" as needing to be entirely "cleansed" to save the people from their god's wrath (at the lest, this was a handy excuse).

I have no doubt that what you say is true, although I was referring to Josephus' descriptions of the early stages of the revolt whenever the Zealots took control of a city, the first thing they did was torch all debt and court records.

He says it was mostly because it was a war of "Rich versus Poor". A classic class struggle really, maybe the first recorded example of its kind.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/history/flavius-josephus/war-of-the-jews/book-2/chapter-4.html

1. AT this time there were great disturbances in the country, and that in many places; and the opportunity that now offered itself induced a great many to set up for kings. And indeed in Idumea two thousand of Herod's veteran soldiers got together, and armed and fought against those of the king's party; against whom Achiabus, the king's first cousin, fought, and that out of some of the places that were the most strongly fortified; but so as to avoid a direct conflict with them in the plains. In Sepphoris also, a city of Galilee, there was one Judas (the son of that arch-robber Hezekias, who formerly overran the country, and had been subdued by king Herod); this man got no small multitude together, and brake open the place where the royal armor was laid up, and armed those about him, and attacked those that were so earnest to gain the dominion.

2. In Perea also, Simon, one of the servants to the king, relying upon the handsome appearance and tallness of his body, put a diadem upon his own head also; he also went about with a company of robbers that he had gotten together, and burnt down the royal palace that was at Jericho, and many other costly edifices besides, and procured himself very easily spoils by rapine, as snatching them out of the fire. And he had soon burnt down all the fine edifices, if Gratus, the captain of the foot of the king's party, had not taken the Trachonite archers, and the most warlike of Sebaste, and met the man. His footmen were slain in the battle in abundance; Gratus also cut to pieces Simon himself, as he was flying along a strait valley, when he gave him an oblique stroke upon his neck, as he ran away, and brake it. The royal palaces that were near Jordan at Betharamptha were also burnt down by some other of the seditious that came out of Perea.

3. At this time it was that a certain shepherd ventured to set himself up for a king; he was called Athrongeus. It was his strength of body that made him expect such a dignity, as well as his soul, which despised death; and besides these qualifications, he had four brethren like himself. He put a troop of armed men under each of these his brethren, and made use of them as his generals and commanders, when he made his incursions, while he did himself act like a king, and meddled only with the more important affairs; and at this time he put a diadem about his head, and continued after that to overrun the country for no little time with his brethren, and became their leader in killing both the Romans and those of the king's party; nor did any Jew escape him, if any gain could accrue to him thereby. He once ventured to encompass a whole troop of Romans at Emmaus, who were carrying corn and weapons to their legion; his men therefore shot their arrows and darts, and thereby slew their centurion Arius, and forty of the stoutest of his men, while the rest of them, who were in danger of the same fate, upon the coming of Gratus, with those of Sebaste, to their assistance, escaped. And when these men had thus served both their own countrymen and foreigners, and that through this whole war, three of them were, after some time, subdued; the eldest by Archelaus, the two next by falling into the hands of Gratus and Ptolemeus; but the fourth delivered himself up to Archelaus, upon his giving him his right hand for his security. However, this their end was not till afterward, while at present they filled all Judea with a piratic war...

These "Robbers" and "Bandits" were burning down Palaces and destroying Roman installations wherever and whenever they could, for years even before the official start of the Revolt.

 

[dejudge]

The problem is that you are reading the bible like a Fundamentalist who takes it all at face value. You are not applying critical reasoning to what you are reading. Your conclusions are therefore useless.

Your statement is completely without logic. HJers use Galatians 1.19 like Fundamentalist to prove Jesus existed.

HJers and Fundamentalist must take the Bible at face value.

In the Bible it states Jesus existed, was in Galilee, was baptized by John and crucified under Pilate and HJers with Fundamentalists take the Bible at face value.

They must have forgotten to take at face value that the same Jesus was the Son of a Ghost--pure mythology.

HJers and Fundamentalists take pure unadulterated mythology as history at face value.

I cannot take the Bible as history at face value when it is open and blatant myth propagated by the illiterate in antiquity.