RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
July 1, 2015 at 6:40 pm
The concept of a consensus belief does not survive close scrutiny.
bede.org
Since this was written you can throw in Aslam's "revolutionary preacher" and Ehrman's "apocalyptic preacher" and pretty soon you should be able to come to the conclusion that they are all just pulling stuff out of their asses.
The one thing they do agree on is that this guy was no miracle-working godboy. That silly shit is left to the fundie morons.
Quote:Who was Jesus? Crossan claims he was a revolutionary peasant, to Burton Mack he was a “cynic-like sage” [NOTE], to Tom Wright he is a Jewish prophet and to Marcus Borg a charismatic preacher (and definitely not an eschatological prophet). As Luke Timothy Johnson says, all this variety could mean that “virtually any hypothesis can sustain itself” and even Crossan admits that the “stunning diversity is an academic embarrassment.”
bede.org
Since this was written you can throw in Aslam's "revolutionary preacher" and Ehrman's "apocalyptic preacher" and pretty soon you should be able to come to the conclusion that they are all just pulling stuff out of their asses.
The one thing they do agree on is that this guy was no miracle-working godboy. That silly shit is left to the fundie morons.
