Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus
- Thread starter Nick227
- Start date
- Status
The one in the OP from 6 years ago...
SIX *********** YEARS!!!
I am out of here.
Good luck.
Your statement is highly illogical, absurd and has no value as evidence.
It is already known that BILLIONS of people believe Jesus existed without a shred of evidence.'
Bart Ehrman, the Pope, Christians, and HJers believe their Jesus existed but without evidence.
I need evidence for HJ not the quantity of believers.
By the way, no HJ has ever been found after hundreds of years of searching.
This is now the 3rd quest for HJ--nothing has changed. The assumed HJ is lost.
Only Myth Jesus-the Jesus of Faith has been found.
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,132
The irony is deafening.
Ehrman says this on pages 173 - 174 of his latest 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."
________
On page 73 of the above book he says:
"To dismiss the gospels from the historical record is neither fair or scholarly."
________
On page 328 of his book he says:
"There are solid reasons for thinking that Jesus really was betrayed by one of his own followers, Judas Iscariot."
Here’s some evidence:
The fact that there are about 40 written sources for the life of Christ (31 Christian + 9 non-Christian) compared to 10 written sources (9 non-Christian + 1 Christian) for the life of Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor during the life of Christ.
There are over 5000 New Testament manuscripts in existence compared to 7 manuscripts for Plato and 20 for famous Roman Historian Tacitus.
Respected archaeologist Sir William Mitchell Ramsay called gospel writer Luke a great historian with regard to facts that can be proven by historical and archaeological evidence.
Christianity had spread all the way to Rome by peaceful means and Nero blamed the Christians in Rome for the Roman fire in 64 ad.-- 31 years after the death of Christ.
Jews have been converted to Christianity because of Isaiah Chapter 53 and at least one writer has claimed there are 25 fulfilled prophesies in that one chapter.
Most archaeologists {who study the biblical era} believe Jesus' 1st century tomb is most probably directly under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
Oxford professor Thomas Arnold's statement regarding the evidence of Christ's life and the Resurrection and how he considered those topics to have more historical evidence than any other fact in history up to that point.
The Moral Argument
The Cosmological Argument
The Teleological Argument
11 apostles suffered a martyrs death in spite of the fact it was recorded they acted cowardly and uncertain before the resurrection.
Simon Greenleaf, a founder of Harvard Law School, said the 4 Gospel accounts could be admitted in a court as evidence, and that divergent accounts are normal for eyewitnesses.
A Rabbi stated that the Oral Torah {and thus oral tradition evidence} is "more important" than the Written Torah. This statement is important because oral tradition evidence was also important in early Christianity (in that era of no paper and little public literacy).
http://www.aish.com/jl/48943186.html
PhD. in astrophysics Dr. Hugh Ross claims there are about 2000 fulfilled prophecies in the Bible.
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-pro...iability-bible
Here is some more evidence:
The following is from Norman Geisler's and Frank Turek’s book “I Don’t have Enough Faith to be an Atheist” (pg. 223). All of the following facts were derived collectively from "Non-Christian" sources. These sources include such people as Josephus, Tacitus, Celsus etc.
_______
1) Jesus lived during time of Tiberius Caesar.
2) He lived a virtuous life.
3) He was a wonder worker.
4) He had a brother {some say cousin} named James.
5) He was acclaimed to be the Messiah.
6) He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.
7) He was crucified on the eve of the Jewish Passover.
8) Darkness and an earthquake occurred when he died.
9) His disciples believe he rose from the dead.
10) His disciples were willing to die for their belief.
11) Christianity spread as far as Rome.
12) His disciples denied the Roman gods and worshiped Jesus as God.
---------------
Remember the above are all facts that can be found in "Non-Christian" independent sources.
Actually I haven't been able to verify #8 yet. Phlegon talked about darkness and there was some talk of an eclipse but Origen disagreed with him that it was a solar eclipse. So fact #8 is a little confusing and the time line of the eclipse is not clear.
______
If you want more evidence (Historical, scientific, logical, and philosophical). Geisler's and Turek's book is probably the best I've read. Chapter 10 is one of the best chapters. Here is a link where you can get the book and ebook. There are also some free sample pages on this link:
http://books.google.com/books?id=FP...New+Testament+writers+told+<br+/>the+truth&q=
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Dismissing the Gospels from the historical record IS fair and scholarly.
1) We don't when before 180 CE they were written
2) The four Canonal Gospels were the ones one particular sect that had the ear of a 4th century emperor believed were "true". The other 30
eek were lost and in many cases all we have regarding them is what their detractors said.3) On those points where we can cross check the Gospels against known history they spectacularly blow up. We get events no one else mentions (Herod's slaughter of Children) or are total odds with what is known (the way Jews and Roman conducted trials, Pontius Pilate's behavior, the handling of body after death, the reaction of Romans regarding a person what somehow survived execution being sighted all over the place, etc)
9 non-Christian? Name them, because as Rationalwiki's Evidence for the historical existence of Jesus Christ shows many of these (like Thallus and Suetonius) to be desperate straw grabs.
As Rationalwiki's Evidence for the historical existence of Jesus Christ explains this is another half-truth: "This number comes from counting each individual handwritten document (from full codices down to mere scraps) with New Testament text on it, including multiple copies of the same texts. The actual number is 5500 ancient fragments (dating from before the printing press) of any writings from the New Testament" (Robert Stewart, The Reliability of the New Testament: Bart Ehrman and Daniel Wallace in Dialogue)
(...)
"That aside, apologists commonly make the argument that fewer than 650 Greek manuscripts of Homer's Iliad survive. However the New Testament on the other hand, we have discovered the following
* Greek manuscripts – 5,664 (the "over 5,000 pieces of evidence" often noted by apologists)
* Latin Vulgate – 8,000 to 10,000
* Ethiopic, Slavic and Armenian – 8,000
This is impressive...24,000 manuscript copies!
But note this is talking about New Testament manuscripts which could refer to any of the 27 books; for the purposes of any meaningful check regarding a Historical Jesus only the Gospels really concern us.
More over as Earl Doherty noted in Challenging the Verdict all 24,000 manuscript copies are hundreds of years younger then our oldest complete Bibles, the Codex Siniaticus and Codex Vaticanus. For example, the 2,865 Greek minuscule text manuscripts all date from the 9th century or later. This inflated count of manuscripts is in essence a cheap trick apologists play on the flock to confuse textual and historical reliability. The printing press from 1436 on allowed the production of perfect copies but this textual reliability doesn't alter the originals historical reliability.
Finally, one must remember that Christians were the ones were doing the copying and in many orders copying the New Testament in general and the Life of Jesus (Gospels) and history of the Church (Acts) in particular was regarded as an act of veneration even worship and so tended to be the most copied works. One extreme example of this view is the Codex Gigas (nicknamef Devil's Bible) completed 1229 which is the world's largest medieval manuscript. As documented in National Geographic: Devil's Bible the work looks to be that of one man over 20 years and addition to the entire Latin Bible the work contains many historical documents."
This guy lived 1851-1939 when Boasian archaeology was all the rage. For those who don't know Boasian archaeology was long on recording and short (if it did any) on interpretation. Howard Carter's work on King Tut case in point.
Here is something a little more up to date:
"There is not a shred of evidence that a historical character Jesus lived, to give an example, and Christianity is based on narrative fiction of high literary and cathartic quality. On the other hand Christianity is concerned with the narration of things that actually take place in human life." (abstract)
"It is not possible to compare the above with what we have, namely, that there is not a shred of evidence that a historical character Jesus lived." (body text) (Fischer, Roland (1994) "On The Story-Telling Imperative That We Have In Mind" Anthropology of Consciousness. Dec 1994, Vol. 5, No. 4: 16)
We don't know that as people who as adults were actually in Rome during Nero's reign do not mention Christians at all. These include Josephus and Pliny the Elder. Our first reference to Christians is some 70 to 80 years later...more then enough time for a rumor mill to fabricate a story.
David Kusche's comment regarding the Bermuda Triangle applies here:
"Say I claim that a parrot has been kidnapped to teach aliens human language and I challenge you to prove that is not true. You can even use Einstein's Theory of Relativity if you like. There is simply no way to prove such a claim untrue. The burden of proof should be on the people who make these statements, to show where they got their information from, to see if their conclusions and interpretations are valid, and if they have left anything out."
This guy lived 1795 – 1842. Remsburg is more recent then this guy!
BZZZ WRONG.
"More astonishing still is the widespread Jewish and Jewish-Christian tradition, attested in Epiphanius, the Talmud, and the Toledoth Jeschu (dependent on second-century Jewish-Christian gospel), that Jesus was born in approximately 100 BCE and was crucified under Alexander Jannaeus!" (Price, Robert (2003) Incredible Shrinking Son of Man pg 40)
Whole bunch of UNPROVEN nonsense dependent on the Gospels which at best were written no later then 140 CE and we aren't even sure of that. No Churchman quotes from any of our Gospels until c130 and they are one sentence snippets that could have easily been woven into a later work. We have to wait until c180 for the quote fest and that author says in his works Jesus was 50+ years old and crucified 42-44 CE!
Last edited:
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 12,331
I am so happy, so delighted, that that you mentioned that Luke was a great historian.
Let us see what the GREAT Historian wrote about how Jesus was conceived. Remember the Great historian also claimed he had witnesses.
The GFreat historian correctly pointed out that Jesus was the product of a Holy Ghost.
The Great historian Luke correctly admitted Jesus was the Son of God.
Luke the Great historian effectively demonstrated the Jesus was a figure of mythology--Jesus was a figure of Faith--an eschatological concept.
Luke 1
dejudge said:
Some say it was Luke the Great historian wrote Acts of the Apostles.
Let us see what the Great Historian wrote about the start of the preaching of the Gospel.
It was the Holy Ghost that came down on the day of Pentecost that gave the disciple the Power to preach.
If it was NOT for the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost there would be NO Jesus cult of Christians.
Acts 2
Luke was a Great historian indeed. He had witnesses. The disciples were witnesses that Jesus was the product of a Ghost and that it was a Ghost which gave the disciples the power to start the Jesus cult.
You cannot alter the Great historian's story of Jesus.
1. Jesus was conceived by a Ghost and a Virgin--Luke 1
2. Jesus Transfigured--Luke 9
3. Jesus Resurrected--Luke 24
4. Jesus Ate fish after his resurrection--Luke 24
5. Jesus commissioned his disciples after his resurrection--Luke 24.
You used the evidence of a Ghost/God for a man.
The Great Historian demonstrated that Jesus was really a myth--a Ghost--a figure of Belief--a Son of a God.
The Jesus in gLuke is similar to the myth Romulus in Plutarch's Romulus.
Last edited:
DOC
Your source Frank Turek has ideas on other matters than the historicity of the gospels
Your source Frank Turek has ideas on other matters than the historicity of the gospels
http://crossexamined.org/who-are-the-real-gay-bigots-and-bullies/
DOC
I'm afraid the evangelist Luke isn't as great a historian as Christian apologists claim. He reports in Acts 5, a speech by Gamaliel at the Sanhedrin, soon after Jesus' death, including these words.
I'm afraid the evangelist Luke isn't as great a historian as Christian apologists claim. He reports in Acts 5, a speech by Gamaliel at the Sanhedrin, soon after Jesus' death, including these words.
This is nonsensical. Judas led a rebellion in 6 AD, while Gamaliel is supposed to be speaking around 33 AD, and Theudas was killed in 45 or 46 AD. So Luke's chronology is all wrong. Gamaliel said no such thing: he could not possibly have done.
DOC
Your source Frank Turek has strong opinions on the Obama administration too.
DOC, Do you think it's accurate to say the President is making war on his own country? I think that Turek is not concerned for accuracy, but simply puts down whatever suits his reactionary religious-political agenda, whether he's talking about gay people or Jesus or Obama.
If I were you I wouldn't use him as an authority on the historicity of the gospels.
Your source Frank Turek has strong opinions on the Obama administration too.
http://townhall.com/columnists/frankturek/2012/06/05/the_great_destroyer
DOC, Do you think it's accurate to say the President is making war on his own country? I think that Turek is not concerned for accuracy, but simply puts down whatever suits his reactionary religious-political agenda, whether he's talking about gay people or Jesus or Obama.
If I were you I wouldn't use him as an authority on the historicity of the gospels.
Last edited:
Belz...
Fiend God
How many of them are copies of each other ?
Called it.
Irrelevant to Jesus' physical existence.
Also called it.
I already provided a reference to this in an early post: Robert Stewart, The Reliability of the New Testament: Bart Ehrman and Daniel Wallace in Dialogue p17 as well as why this argument is rubbish:
"But note this is talking about New Testament manuscripts which could refer to any of the 27 books; for the purposes of any meaningful check regarding a Historical Jesus only the Gospels really concern us.
More over as Earl Doherty noted in Challenging the Verdict all 24,000 manuscript copies are hundreds of years younger then our oldest complete Bibles, the Codex Siniaticus and Codex Vaticanus. For example, the 2,865 Greek minuscule text manuscripts all date from the 9th century or later. This inflated count of manuscripts is in essence a cheap trick apologists play on the flock to confuse textual and historical reliability. The printing press from 1436 on allowed the production of perfect copies but this textual reliability doesn't alter the originals historical reliability.
Finally, one must remember that Christians were the ones were doing the copying and in many orders copying the New Testament in general and the Life of Jesus (Gospels) and history of the Church (Acts) in particular was regarded as an act of veneration even worship and so tended to be the most copied works. One extreme example of this view is the Codex Gigas (nicknames Devil's Bible) completed 1229 which is the world's largest medieval manuscript. As documented in National Geographic: Devil's Bible the work looks to that of one man over 20 years and addition to the entire Latin Bible the work contains many historical documents. "
“Therefore, the fantastic claims found in the missionary and apologetical literature are dealt a heavy blow when we understand that slightly over 6% of the more than 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts hail from before the 9th century! With no shortage of claims ascribing 'ancientness' to the manuscripts, given that around 94% of the Greek manuscripts (Greek being the "original" language of the New Testament) can be dated in excess of 800 years or so after the birth of Jesus, shows the sheer desperation of the missionaries. It is well known amongst the textual critics that the great majority of the primary witnesses to the text of the New Testament, (i.e., Greek manuscripts) are overwhelmingly from the medieval and late medieval periods.” ("Textual Reliability / Accuracy Of The New Testament" Islamic Awareness)
In fact, according to that piece only 48 manuscripts supposedly predate our oldest intact Bible. I say supposedly because these are nearly all dated via paleographic dating which is regarded as a last resort dating technique that under the best of conditions has a 50 year range. (Nongbr, Brent (2005) "The Use and Abuse of P52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel." Harvard Theological Review 98:24.)
- Status