Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus

[dafydd]

"And so it is written , The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. "

What is that tosh supposed to mean?

 

[Craig B]

Please immediately present corroborative evidence pre 70 CE for your James gang. Please, without delay, show the actual pre 70 CE source that mentioned what your imagined James gang knew about your OBSCURE criminal called HJ.

At least you're saying "please".

You appear to be spouting propaganda.

I must admit I'm at a loss to find a word to describe what you're spouting.

 

[dejudge]

I am not a “HJ believer”. I am inclined to believe that Jesus lived in Galilee in the beginning of the First Century and was crucified by the Romans. Don’t you catch the difference?

Your statement only confirms that your HJ position is an article of Belief--Not derived from any actual pre 70 CE evidence.

Your inclination to believe there was an HJ is really worthless when it is already known that you will not be able to present any actual pre 70 CE evidence.

My argument is done. I am tired to repeat it again and again. But I am going to schematize it for politeness:

1. Paul affirms that his gospel comes from the Bible and revelation .
2. Paul gives some details of the appearances of Jesus (when and who).
3. He explicitly excludes the Bible as the source of these details.
4. It is very unlikely these details come from revelation (ecstatic?).
5. It is very likely that the appearances come from another source.
6. The appearances subject was a weapon of power in the Early Christianity.
7. Paul had an important reason to highlight the direct sources of his gospel and dismissed the actual human sources. That is to say, he pretended the rank of "apostle".
8. First conclusion: Paul had more natural sources that those he would like to admit.
9. The appearances and the crucifixion matters were connected by force.
10. Second conclusion: Paul got some accounts about the crucifixion from human telling.

You conveniently forgot to mention that the Pauline writers ADMITTED they got information about Jesus from SCRIPTURES. See 1 Corinthians 15

You conveniently forgot to mention that Apologetic writers ADMITTED the Pauline writers knew of gLuke.
See Church History 6.25 and Origen's Commentary on Matthew.
You seem to forget that people today read gLuke to get information about the Jesus story.

Your argument is void of logic when you have no pre 70 CE evidence for your HJ, have no evidence that anyone pre 70 CE knew of your HJ and when the Pauline Jesus was NOT your HJ.

The Pauline Jesus was a resurrected Ghost.

The Pauline writers were WITNESSES of their resurrected Jesus.

1 Corinthians 15:15 KJV

Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up , if so be that the dead rise not.

Your HJ is unknown in the Pauline Corpus.

Your inclined Belief for HJ is worthless.

 

[dejudge]

It is certainly illogical for you to assume without any actual pre 70 CE evidence that your imagined James gang really knew about the Life of Jesus.

May I remind you that the character called James mentioned Nothing about the Life of Jesus in the Pauline Corpus.

Your position is horribly illogical especially when the Pauline writers ADMITTED they got information about Jesus from Scriptures, did NOT get their Gospel from any man and immediately conferred with NON-historical character when they were called to preach about God's Son.

May I remind you that there is NO existing evidence pre 70 CE for the Pauline writers and your imagined James gang.

Please immediately present corroborative evidence pre 70 CE for your James gang. Please, without delay, show the actual pre 70 CE source that mentioned what your imagined James gang knew about your OBSCURE criminal called HJ.

You appear to be spouting propaganda.

Your obscure HJ is NOT in the Pauline Corpus.

The Pauline Jesus was a 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.

I must admit I'm at a loss to find a word to describe what you're spouting.

You are spouting propaganda. You have NO actual pre 70 CE evidence of your James gang, you have no actual pre 70 CE evidence of what they knew of the Life of Jesus if they [Jesus and the James gang] did exist.

Your argument is really worthless. It is based on imagination.

 

[dafydd]

I have evidence of a modern James Gang.

http://www.allmusic.com/artist/james-gang-mn0000085776

 

[Belz...]

You are spouting propaganda.

Perhaps you should look up that word, as well.

 

[Craig B]

You are spouting propaganda. You have NO actual pre 70 CE evidence of your James gang, you have no actual pre 70 CE evidence of what they knew of the Life of Jesus if they [Jesus and the James gang] did exist.

I have evidence. You really mean I have no pre-70 manuscripts. But the second century (and later) apologists, whose drivel you receive as holy writ, are represented by mediaeval manuscripts for the most part. So they didn't exist either, thank Heaven!

 

[dejudge]

It is most hilarious that Craig B talks about a James gang when there is an Epistle attributed to James in the NT.

The author called James wrote virtually NOTHING about the Life of Jesus.

In fact, the author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel--Salvation Only by Faith.

This is the Pauline Gospel.

Galatians 2:16 KJV

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified .

The writer called James would expose the STUPIDITY of the Pauline Gospel.


James 2:17 KJV

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone .

James 2:20 KJV

But wilt thou know , O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

James 2:24 KJV

Ye see then how that by works a man is justified , and not by faith only.

James 2:26 KJV

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

The author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel.

It is documented in the James Epistle.

All NT manuscripts of James and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

 

[dejudge]

I have evidence. You really mean I have no pre-70 manuscripts.

I really mean you have NO evidence from pre 70 CE. You must know what NO evidence means

But the second century (and later) apologists, whose drivel you receive as holy writ, are represented by mediaeval manuscripts for the most part. So they didn't exist either, thank Heaven!

I expose the Drivel but you cherry-pick special parts that you like.

This discussion is actually about the DRIVEL found in 2nd century or later writings about a character called Jesus the Son of God, born of a Ghost, the Logos, God Creator, the Only Begotten Son of God, the Last Adam--a Ghost that walked on the sea, transfigured in the presence of TWO ghosts, resurrected, ate food, conferred with his disciples and then ascended in a cloud.

You are arguing that Jesus in the NT was really real and believe Specific parts of the story without any corroborative evidence.

You conveniently regard some writings as Drivel and simultaneously accept special parts as history.

You cannot and is incapable of presenting any actual pre 70 CE evidence for YOUR James gang and Paul.

All we have are 2nd century later writings where a writer called James exposed the STUPIDITY of the Pauline Corpus.

It is documented--the Pauline Gospel was known to be constipated since the 2nd century or later.

 

[Craig B]

The author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel. It is documented in the James Epistle.

My bum might equally well be documented in the James epistle as it is most improbable that it was written by the brother of The Lord. And if it exposed the "constipation" of the Pauline gospel, did it supply a laxative?

 

[Brainache]

"Constipation"? That can't be right, according to Eisenman's Theory, Paul is "The Enema"...

Or something...

Coffee time.

 

[eight bits]

dejudge

This is the Pauline Gospel.

Galatians 2:16 KJV

Holy moley. You and I are in agreement.

 

[Brainache]

It is most hilarious that Craig B talks about a James gang when there is an Epistle attributed to James in the NT.

The author called James wrote virtually NOTHING about the Life of Jesus.

In fact, the author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel--Salvation Only by Faith.

This is the Pauline Gospel.

Galatians 2:16 KJV

The writer called James would expose the STUPIDITY of the Pauline Gospel.


James 2:17 KJV


James 2:20 KJV

James 2:24 KJV


James 2:26 KJV

The author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel.

It is documented in the James Epistle.

All NT manuscripts of James and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

OK.

So what you are showing here is a conflict between "James" (whoever he is) and "Paul" (whoever he is).

They appear to have different interpretations of what it means to be "Christian".

This is what it looks like to most Scholars.

But then, bizarrely, you take this as some kind of evidence for 2nd century Authorship.

How does that work?

 

[Craig B]

All we have are 2nd century later writings where a writer called James exposed the STUPIDITY of the Pauline Corpus.

Were Paul and James fabricated by different forgers?

 

[Brainache]

Were Paul and James fabricated by different forgers?

They must've been, because they represent the Fake Theologies of two different Fake factions in the Fake Early Church.

They must have had a factory churning out this stuff. I wonder why no one noticed?...

 

[dejudge]

My bum might equally well be documented in the James epistle as it is most improbable that it was written by the brother of The Lord. And if it exposed the "constipation" of the Pauline gospel, did it supply a laxative?

You are exposing that the NT authors are Fakes.

How many Fake Pauls are there in the NT?

 

[Brainache]

You are exposing that the NT authors are Fakes.

How many Fake Pauls are there in the NT?

Were the Authors of The Dead Sea Scrolls "Fake" too?

http://www.preteristarchive.com/BibleStudies/DeadSeaScrolls/1QpHab_pesher_habakkuk.html

"If it tarries, wait for it, for it shall surely come and shall not be late" [Hab 2.3b].

Interpreted, this concerns the men of truth who keep the Law, whose hands shall not slacken in the service of truth when the final age is prolonged. For all the ages of God reach their appointed end as he determines for them in the mysteries of His wisdom.

["But the righteous shall live by his faith"] [[Hab 2.4b]].

Interpreted, this concerns all those who observe the Law in the House of Judah, whom God will deliver from the House of Judgement because of their suffering and because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousness.

Faith and Works.

Is that a 2nd Century Fake, dejudge?

 

[dejudge]

It is most hilarious that Craig B talks about a James gang when there is an Epistle attributed to James in the NT.

The author called James wrote virtually NOTHING about the Life of Jesus.

In fact, the author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel--Salvation Only by Faith.

This is the Pauline Gospel.

Galatians 2:16 KJV

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified .

The writer called James would expose the STUPIDITY of the Pauline Gospel.


James 2:17 KJV

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone .

James 2:20 KJV

But wilt thou know , O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

James 2:24 KJV

Ye see then how that by works a man is justified , and not by faith only.

James 2:26 KJV

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

The author called James exposed the constipation of the Pauline Gospel.

It is documented in the James Epistle.

All NT manuscripts of James and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

OK.

So what you are showing here is a conflict between "James" (whoever he is) and "Paul" (whoever he is).

They appear to have different interpretations of what it means to be "Christian".

This is what it looks like to most Scholars.

But then, bizarrely, you take this as some kind of evidence for 2nd century Authorship.

How does that work?

It was illogical to assume that Paul and James, if they did exist, talked about an historical Jesus, an obscure criminal, when they could have talked about Paul's stupid Gospel that he got from nobody with flesh and blood.

Up to the 2nd century or later, Apologetic writers mentioned NOTHING of Paul's ridiculous Gospel that he certified that he got from a resurrected Ghost.

1. You have no actual evidence pre 70 CE for your obscure criminal, James and Paul.

2. The HJ argument is an established dead argument with multiple irreconcilable versions of an assumed HJ.

3. Multiple irreconcilable versions of an assumed HJ is PROOF that there was never any known established evidence for an actual HJ.

Effectively, HJ is a hoax--neither god, man or myth--un-evidenced.

 

[Brainache]

...

It was illogical to assume that Paul and James, if they did exist, talked about an historical Jesus, an obscure criminal, when they could have talked about Paul's stupid Gospel that he got from nobody with flesh and blood.

Up to the 2nd century or later, Apologetic writers mentioned NOTHING of Paul's ridiculous Gospel that he certified that he got from a resurrected Ghost.

1. You have no actual evidence pre 70 CE for your obscure criminal, James and Paul.

2. The HJ argument is an established dead argument with multiple irreconcilable versions of an assumed HJ.

3. Multiple irreconcilable versions of an assumed HJ is PROOF that there was never any known established evidence for an actual HJ.

Effectively, HJ is a hoax--neither god, man or myth--un-evidenced.

This argument makes no sense.

I am unable to understand a form of thinking that can lead you from your premises to your conclusion. It just doesn't follow.

You might as well be saying: All trees are plants, therefore Monkeys are potatoes... It makes just as much sense.

 

[dejudge]

You are exposing that the NT authors are Fakes.

How many Fake Pauls are there in the NT?

Were the Authors of The Dead Sea Scrolls "Fake" too?

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Bibl..._habakkuk.html

"If it tarries, wait for it, for it shall surely come and shall not be late" [Hab 2.3b].

Interpreted, this concerns the men of truth who keep the Law, whose hands shall not slacken in the service of truth when the final age is prolonged. For all the ages of God reach their appointed end as he determines for them in the mysteries of His wisdom.

["But the righteous shall live by his faith"] [[Hab 2.4b]].

Interpreted, this concerns all those who observe the Law in the House of Judah, whom God will deliver from the House of Judgement because of their suffering and because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousness.

You should first read your sources because they CONTRADICT you.

I am extremely delighted that you show that the teaching in the James Epistle is compatible with Hebrew Scripture [Habakkuk] but NOT the Gospel of Paul.


If Paul and James did exist, then James could have been exposing the Stupidity of the Pauline Gospel and could have been showing Paul that his revealed Gospel from Nobody with Flesh and blood was CONTRARY to the teachings found in Habakkuk.

I have already pointed out that Hebrew Scripture does NOT support the Pauline Gospel--Justification without works and Remission of Sins by the resurrection.

By the way, the Pauline writers admitted their Jesus was a NOT a man but a Ghost who was raised from the dead.

Pauline writers admittedly used NT Scriptures--Not Habakkuk.