Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Religion
Reply to "If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from? "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Let's recap. The following classical, independent scholars agree Jesus definitely existed. Quotes and links were provided a few pages ago. - Paul Meier - Michael Grant The following scholars are potentially biased [i]against[/i] finding Jesus walked the earth, yet they are certain he did: - Bart Ehrman, an atheist who also describes himself as a historian - Amy Jill Levine, Jewish - Paula Fredickson, a Jewish historian And, of course these cites on Wikipedia think Jesus definitely existed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus So do the many theologians quoted at 17:44, which atheist pp's call "theologists" and complain must be biased. Because, apparently, some people spend their lives doing things they know are false, or something. These scholars, typified by the quotes used here from Ehrman, relied on up to 30 Christian and non-Christian sources as well as linguistic evidence. For example, Ehrman writes (link was given a few pages ago): "Paul, as I will point out, actually knew, personally, Jesus’ own brother James and his closest disciples Peter and John. That’s [by itself] more or less a death knell for the Mythicist position, as some of them admit." *** Posters who claim the evidence of Jesus' existence isn't certain have brought to the table: - A few weeks ago on DCUM, posters with zero scholarly credentials or evidence agreed there's no 100% certainty. - ??? [/quote] Bumping this because some of you still think you know better than thousands of scholars (historians, classicists and theologians) who agree Jesus definitely existed.[/quote] Again… If you dedicate decades of your life to studying something you’re more likely to believe it’s true. Meier, Ehrman, Levine, Fredickson - all theologists/NT academics Grant - used gospels as source Ehrman is using a Christian source to verify Jesus? Anyway, he most likely existed, but we don’t have definitive proof. [/quote] Again, Ehrman uses external and linguistic sources as well. How many times do we need to repeat this? Again, Ehrman is an atheist and Levine and Fredricksen are Jewish. All three are, if anything, biased [b]against[/b] finding Jesus existed. What are your scholarly credentials?[/quote] This idea that you can’t use the gospels as evidence is based on a basic, total misunderstanding of how scholars use the gospels as evidence. No, scholars like Bart certainly don’t rely on faith in the gospels to support their certainty that Jesus existed. If you’ve read anything else by Bart about the gospels, you know that’s ridiculous, he never takes anything in the gospels as fact. Let’s let Bart, who self-promotes more than other scholars and so has more quotes on the web, explain: “If there had been one source of Christian antiquity that mentioned a historical Jesus (e.g., Mark) and everyone else was based on what that source had to say, then possibly you could argue that this person made Jesus up and everyone else simply took the ball and ran with it. But … But how can you make a convincing case if we’re talking about thirty or so independent sources that know there was a man Jesus? These sources are not all living in the same village someplace so they are egging each other on. They didn’t compare notes. They are independent of one another and are scattered throughout the Mediterranean. They each have heard about the man Jesus from their own sources of information, which heard about him from their own sources of information. That must mean that there were hundreds of people at the least who were talking about the man Jesus. …” https://ehrmanblog.org/gospel-evidence-that-jesus-existed/ [/quote] Bumping because pp at 11:05 obviously didn't read it.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics