Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus

[dejudge]

It was Paul who changed the character of the movement. The gospels were written after Paul's epistles, and reflect these new non-Jewish ideas. Had it not been for Paul, the Jesus group would have remained a petty messianic sect, no doubt, and would have disappeared around 70 AD along with the others.

It is illogical that the Gospels were written after Paul's Epistles. Such a scenario makes no sense at all.

You forget that a Pauline writer admitted that over 500 persons, plus the 12, Cephas and James was seen of the resurrected Jesus BEFORE him.

You forget that a Pauline writer claimed that there were Churches in Christ BEFORE him.

Over 500 persons knew the story of the resurrected Jesus BEFORE Paul.

In fact, a Pauline writer claimed he was the LAST to be seen of resurrected Jesus.

Now, if Jesus did ACTUALLY LIVE then the actual story of Jesus MUST have been known before the Pauline Corpus.

If Jesus did ACTUALLY LIVE and did ACTUALLY PREACH then the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus.

If Jesus was ACTUALLY DEAD before Paul preached Christ crucified then the Jesus story was already known BEFORE the Pauline Corpus.

If Paul presecuted the followers of Jesus AFTER he was ACTUALLY DEAD then the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus.

Origen and Eusebius claimed Paul knew the Gospel according to gLuke.

The author of the Muratorian Canon claimed Paul wrote the Epistles AFTER Revelation by John was already composed.

The story of Jesus from Conception to Ascension was known by Paul.

 

[Brainache]

It is illogical that the Gospels were written after Paul's Epistles. Such a scenario makes no sense at all.

You forget that a Pauline writer admitted that over 500 persons, plus the 12, Cephas and James was seen of the resurrected Jesus BEFORE him.

You forget that a Pauline writer claimed that there were Churches in Christ BEFORE him.

Over 500 persons knew the story of the resurrected Jesus BEFORE Paul.

In fact, a Pauline writer claimed he was the LAST to be seen of resurrected Jesus.

Now, if Jesus did ACTUALLY LIVE then the actual story of Jesus MUST have been known before the Pauline Corpus.

If Jesus did ACTUALLY LIVE and did ACTUALLY PREACH then the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus.

If Jesus was ACTUALLY DEAD before Paul preached Christ crucified then the Jesus story was already known BEFORE the Pauline Corpus.

If Paul presecuted the followers of Jesus AFTER he was ACTUALLY DEAD then the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus.

Origen and Eusebius claimed Paul knew the Gospel according to gLuke.

The author of the Muratorian Canon claimed Paul wrote the Epistles AFTER Revelation by John was already composed.

The story of Jesus from Conception to Ascension was known by Paul.

This has to be one of the stupidest posts I've ever seen. Thanks dejudge, you're a legend.

 

[Craig B]

Yeah but who would care about these prophecies if not Jews ?

If non-Jews wanted to hijack the Messiah, they had to hijack and reinterpret the prophecies about the Messiah.

 

[dejudge]

This has to be one of the stupidest posts I've ever seen. Thanks dejudge, you're a legend.

You have exposed that you have very little or no understanding of logical deductions.

1. If Jesus did ACTUALLY exist and did Preach before Paul was a follower of the resurrected Jesus then the story of Jesus must have been known before the Pauline Corpus was composed.

2. If Jesus did actually exist, did preach, and was crucified and Paul actually persecuted those who had followed Jesus then the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus was composed.

3. If Paul actually persecuted the followers of Jesus and then himself later preached Christ Crucified and resurrected then the Jesus story was known BEFORE the Pauline Corpus was composed.

 

[Brainache]

You have exposed that you have very little or no understanding of logical deductions.

1. If Jesus did ACTUALLY exist and did Preach before Paul was a follower of the resurrected Jesus then the story of Jesus must have been known before the Pauline Corpus was composed.

2. If Jesus did actually exist, did preach, and was crucified and Paul actually persecuted those who had followed Jesus then the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus was composed.

3. If Paul actually persecuted the followers of Jesus and then himself later preached Christ Crucified and resurrected then the Jesus story was known BEFORE the Pauline Corpus was composed.

Which Jesus story?

There are lots of them.

Do you think there is just one Jesus story?

 

[dejudge]

Which Jesus story?

There are lots of them.

Do you think there is just one Jesus story?

Which Paul?

Do you think there was just one Paul?

There were lots of them.

Perhaps as much as SEVEN!!!

 

[Craig B]

You have exposed that you have very little or no understanding of logical deductions.
1. ... the story of Jesus must have been known before the Pauline Corpus was composed.
2. ... the Jesus story was known before the Pauline Corpus was composed.
3. ... the Jesus story was known BEFORE the Pauline Corpus was composed.

I agree with these deductions. Known, but not yet written down, at least in any of the writings known to us.

 

[Brainache]

Which Paul?

Do you think there was just one Paul?

There were lots of them.

Perhaps as much as SEVEN!!!

How do you know that?

Who worked out this piece of information about the Pauline epistles?

How did they do that?

Do you think these techniques might work for other things?

 

[mijopaalmc]

Has anyone created dejudge MadLibs yet?

 

[dejudge]

I agree with these deductions. Known, but not yet written down, at least in any of the writings known to us.

You agree with my deductions but is still claiming the Pauline Epistles were composed before the story of Jesus was already written.

Well, provide the evidence to support your argument.

You will not be able to do so.

 

[Brainache]

You agree with my deductions but is still claiming the Pauline Epistles were composed before the story of Jesus was already written.

Well, provide the evidence to support your argument.

You will not be able to do so.

I think it's all part of the same evidence that the Historians use to determine whether or not the letters are by Paul or someone else.

You would have to learn stuff, so I doubt it would be worth Craig B's time.

 

[dejudge]

How do you know that?

Who worked out this piece of information about the Pauline epistles?

How did they do that?

Do you think these techniques might work for other things?

How did you work out that there were many stories of Jesus?

It is very easy to logically deduce that that there may have been up to SEVEN different Pauline characters.

1. Saul/Paul wrote NO epistles up to CE 62 CE in Acts.

2. One Paul died under Nero.

3. Another Paul was ALIVE after gLuke was already composed

4. Another Paul wrote the Epistles after Revelation by John.

5. Another Paul may have may written Ephesians.

6. Another Paul may have written 2 Thessalonians.

7. Another Paul may have written Colossians.

8. Another Paul may have written 1 Timothy.

9. Another Paul may have written 2 Timothy.

10. Another Paul may have written Titus.

11. Another Paul may have written Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon.

There may have been more Pauls than stories of Jesus.
Which Paul knew which story of Jesus and when??

Justin did not acknowledge any of the Pauls.

It was 12 illiterates who spread the Jesus story by the power of God to all the world--not Paul.

Illiteracy is the basis for the Jesus story and it is openly evident.

 

[Brainache]

How did you work out that there were many stories of Jesus?

It is very easy to logically deduce that that there may have been up to SEVEN different Pauline characters.

1. Saul/Paul wrote NO epistles up to CE 62 CE in Acts.

2. One Paul died under Nero.

3. Another Paul was ALIVE after gLuke was already composed

4. Another Paul wrote the Epistles after Revelation by John.

5. Another Paul may have may written Ephesians.

6. Another Paul may have written 2 Thessalonians.

7. Another Paul may have written Colossians.

8. Another Paul may have written 1 Timothy.

9. Another Paul may have written 2 Timothy.

10. Another Paul may have written Titus.

11. Another Paul may have written Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon.

There may have been more Pauls than stories of Jesus.
Which Paul knew which story of Jesus and when??

Justin did not acknowledge any of the Pauls.

It was 12 illiterates who spread the Jesus story by the power of God to all the world--not Paul.

Illiteracy is the basis for the Jesus story and it is openly evident.

Why do experts scoff at this often repeated argument dejudge?

Is it because it is so effective that they have no response? No.

The reason experts dismiss this argument of yours is that it is stupid.

Experts are not stupid, they don't agree with stupid arguments like the one you are using.

Keep it up.

 

[Craig B]

You agree with my deductions but is still claiming the Pauline Epistles were composed before the story of Jesus was already written.

Or at least written in any text we have. I don't know. But Paul wrote before the gospels as we have them were composed. Anyway what is that to you, with your preposterous idea that the whole NT is lying fiction composed centuries later?

Well, provide the evidence to support your argument.

You first.

You will not be able to do so.

So show how bad I am by setting an example, and providing evidence of your fourth century fiction factory producing the whole NT. Or was it the late second century? But DON'T say, we don't have earlier manuscripts. The manuscripts even of Caesar and Josephus are ninth century, earliest.

 

[dejudge]

Or at least written in any text we have. I don't know. But Paul wrote before the gospels as we have them were composed. Anyway what is that to you, with your preposterous idea that the whole NT is lying fiction composed centuries later?

Just as I predicted. You will not be able to provide any evidence at all to show that any Pauline letter was composed before stories of Jesus were written.

You appear to be actively engaged in spreading known Chinese Whispers about the Pauline Corpus.

Why, Why??

 

[dejudge]

Why do experts scoff at this often repeated argument dejudge?

Is it because it is so effective that they have no response? No.

The reason experts dismiss this argument of yours is that it is stupid.

Experts are not stupid, they don't agree with stupid arguments like the one you are using.

Keep it up.

What?? It is a stupid argument by Scholars that the Pauline writings have multiple authors??

You have exposed that you are not familiar with what experts have deduced about the Pauline writings.

It is the experts themselves who have deduced that there were multiple Pauline writers posing as Paul.

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

There is wide consensus, in modern New Testament scholarship, on a core group of authentic Pauline epistles whose authorship is rarely contested: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. Several additional letters bearing Paul's name lack academic consensus: Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus. Scholarly opinion is sharply divided on whether the former two epistles are the letters of Paul; however, the latter four - 2 Thessalonians, as well as the three known as the "Pastoral Epistles" - have been labeled pseudepigraphical works by most critical scholars.

 

[Brainache]

What?? It is a stupid argument by Scholars that the Pauline writings have multiple authors??

You have exposed that you are not familiar with what experts have deduced about the Pauline writings.

It is the experts themselves who have deduced that there were multiple Pauline writers posing as Paul.

There is wide consensus, in modern New Testament scholarship, on a core group of authentic Pauline epistles whose authorship is rarely contested: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon...

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

So, how do they arrive at this conclusion:

There is wide consensus, in modern New Testament scholarship, on a core group of authentic Pauline epistles whose authorship is rarely contested: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon.

If it was all faked later?

Why do you believe this, but not anything else they tell you?

 

[dejudge]

Why do you believe this, but not anything else they tell you?

I have merely exposed the stupid argument of yours.

Why are experts stupid to argue the Pauline Corpus is a compilation by multiple authors?

The reason experts dismiss this argument of yours is that it is stupid.

Experts are not stupid, they don't agree with stupid arguments like the one you are using

 

[Brainache]

I have merely exposed the stupid argument of yours.

Why are experts stupid to argue the Pauline Corpus is a compilation by multiple authors?

They argue that there are seven authentic Pauline Epistles.

Do you dispute that?

Why?

 

[Belz...]

Belz


That's where Paul comes in. The prophecy is that righteous Gentiles rise at the end of days along with Jews. When is the end of days? When the dead rise.

Paul sees a ghost => the dead are rising => the end of days is now.

The first dead guy to rise must be the Messiah => the ghost Paul saw was the Messiah.

A Gentile aligns him(her)self with the Messiah => that Gentile is righteous.

Put it all together: Tell the Gentiles to align with the ghost Paul saw, and if they do, they will never die, because they are righteous and now is the end of days.

Include flight lessons at no extra charge.

Profit.

Yeah but they are Jewish prophecies. Excuse me for being slow, but I don't get it.