RE: Was Jesus of Nazareth a religious loon?
April 9, 2020 at 10:58 am
(This post was last modified: April 9, 2020 at 10:59 am by Jehanne.)
(April 9, 2020 at 7:52 am)Vicki Q Wrote:(April 8, 2020 at 5:58 pm)Jehanne Wrote: The reference from your Wikiipedia article is from 2004, but, fine, then I am happy to reject the "scholarly consensus"! The scholar whom I trust, Professor Bart Ehrman, is the author of the following (now in its 7th edition):
The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings 7th Edition
Can't recommend Professor Ehrman's writings enough!!
Yes- I've read that book and other writings by Ehrman, and I thoroughly agree with the recommendation.
Note that he did say:
Despite its wide-ranging differences from the Synoptics, the Gospel of John clearly belongs in the same Greco-Roman genre. It too would be perceived by an ancient reader as a biography of a religious leader: it is a prose narrative that portrays an individual’s life within a chronological framework, focusing on his inspired teachings and miraculous deeds and leading up to his death and divine vindication. (Ehrman, 2004, p. 155)
The Jesus Seminar coded the entire Gospel of John as being black, indicating that not a single phrase as recorded in that Gospel was spoken by the historical Jesus. Do you agree with their conclusions? If so, how can John be an "ancient biography" of Jesus if it did not record anything that he said??
P.S. I think that you are quote-mining from Professor Ehrman.
