RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 25, 2015 at 12:28 pm
(This post was last modified: July 25, 2015 at 12:30 pm by Randy Carson.)
(July 25, 2015 at 12:25 pm)abaris Wrote:(July 25, 2015 at 12:01 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Prove it. Cite a passage from one of Ehrman's books in which he claims that Jesus only "might have existed." Cause I'm reading his definitive treatment of the subject right now, and he is not waffling or sitting on the fence at all.
I don't need to. If he really claims with absolute certainty, the Jesus of Nazareth existed, he's more of a hack than I believed. He doesn't do that in his lectures. In any case, as your link has proven, he is in fact a theologian and not a historian. He only claims to be one, which already shines a peculiar light on him. So I give you Richard Carrier, a real historian, in reply to Ehrman. Only because he quotes the obvious and lists quite a lot of sources for further study.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1026
And if you can't make a distinction between supernatural claims and the possibility of a person named Jesus having existed, it's really your problem. That's a very distinct line between even Ehrman's Jesus and the pope's understanding.
Been there done that. Ehrman destroys Carrier here: http://ehrmanblog.org/fuller-reply-to-richard-carrier/
Yes, I can and do make the distinction between the claims for Jesus' historical existence and his divinity. Really, I do.
But you can see from the posts in this very forum that BEFORE I can even have an intelligent conversation about Jesus' divinity, I have to lay some foundation for the fact that there EVER WAS A JESUS WHO CLAIMED TO BE DIVINE.
