(July 25, 2015 at 11:21 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 11:10 am)Losty Wrote: Sorry, I didn't know that because Ehrman cited them that means they're credible sources. Lol

You did not know that hundreds...thousands...of professional NT scholars accept them?

That may explain why you are a member of this forum.

Ooooh New Testament scholars also accept them, and hundreds at that. Now that is impressive!

I became a member of this site because this really hot chick lured me into coming to play with her in a69. I stayed for the awesome people...and the cookies, and MC's delicious body

(July 25, 2015 at 11:36 am)Losty Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 11:21 am)Randy Carson Wrote: You did not know that hundreds...thousands...of professional NT scholars accept them?

That may explain why you are a member of this forum.

Ooooh New Testament scholars also accept them, and hundreds at that. Now that is impressive!

I became a member of this site because this really hot chick lured me into coming to play with her in a69. I stayed for the awesome people...and the cookies, and MC's delicious body

Being heretic rocks

(July 25, 2015 at 11:18 am)Randy Carson Wrote: How does that impact that accuracy of the material presented in those three books?

You must be joking.

(July 25, 2015 at 11:26 am)pocaracas Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 10:54 am)Randy Carson Wrote: That Jesus existed.


He has different views on the resurrection, obviously.

But at least he, Tim O'Neill and other honest atheists and skeptics can admit that Jesus really did exist in contradistinction with the intellectually lazy Jesus Mythicists who think that merely denying that fact is the easy way to a God-free life.

So... you agree that they accept that a guy named Jesus existed, but not the one in the story who got resurrected, right?

"A guy", poca? Do you think that Ehrman and the pope are talking about two different people?

(July 25, 2015 at 11:09 am)robvalue Wrote: Cato: Really, which one is that?

Robert Sungenis. Here's a decent introduction to this windbag:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/09...t-Sungenis

(July 25, 2015 at 11:26 am)pocaracas Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 10:54 am)Randy Carson Wrote: That Jesus existed.


He has different views on the resurrection, obviously.

But at least he, Tim O'Neill and other honest atheists and skeptics can admit that Jesus really did exist in contradistinction with the intellectually lazy Jesus Mythicists who think that merely denying that fact is the easy way to a God-free life.

So... you agree that they accept that a guy named Jesus existed, but not the one in the story who got resurrected, right?
So, what do they say about the Jesus they accept as real?

I thought his name was Joshua? I wish they could all hold a meeting and come to an agreement on the facts

(July 25, 2015 at 11:18 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 11:08 am)Cato Wrote: Do you not know that your advanced apologetics author is a holocaust denier and blames Israel for JFK's assassination?

He's also a geo-centrist.

How does that impact that accuracy of the material presented in those three books?

... you're serious?

(July 25, 2015 at 11:39 am)Cato Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 11:18 am)Randy Carson Wrote: How does that impact that accuracy of the material presented in those three books?

You must be joking.

Nope.

Your posts are classic ad hominem attacks. You think that by going after the man, you can undermine his arguments - but that's not how it works, is it?

Bobby Fischer was one of the greatest chess players of all time. He was also an anti-Semitic nut-job later in life.

I can study his games while ignoring his rants against the Jews.

You can study Sungenis' books on the Eucharist, sola scriptura and sola fide while ignoring his views on the holocaust.

(July 25, 2015 at 11:44 am)Stimbo Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 11:18 am)Randy Carson Wrote: He's also a geo-centrist.

How does that impact that accuracy of the material presented in those three books?

... you're serious?

Look at Steambum being all naive.

(July 25, 2015 at 11:41 am)Randy Carson Wrote: "A guy", poca? Do you think that Ehrman and the pope are talking about two different people?

I'm not in absolute denial that a wandering preacher named Jesus might have existed. But there's no evidence of yes or no. So it's might. Even your new found love Ehrman can't take that leap. He's talking about his belief that Jesus was historical. Based on his study of the books. That will never go undisputed and Ehrman knows that.

And yes, the pope and Ehrman speak about entirely different persons, since Ehrman does neither claim divinity nor supernatural capabilities for that Jesus person, whereas the pope just does that.

In any case, if Jesus existed doesn't answer even one of the claims you made in your OP. Even if, beyond any reasonable doubt, the historicity of a preacher named Jesus was proven, there's still not a shred of evidence for him performing miracles and rising from the dead. Outside of hearsay and legends that is. And that's all you're presenting.