Challenge to atheists: I find your lack of faith disturbing!

[Aractus]

I'm quite familiar with many of Ehrman's books, and I have no problem accepting that Jesus was a real historical person as he contends. That means (as others have already pointed out) that there was a peripatetic Rabbi Yeshua in that era, who was probably crucified by the Romans. So what?

I doubt that you would agree with many of Ehrman's other positions.

Correct, because you're quoting ONE person with far out there ideas.

He says that before the NT was written down, specifically the stories of Jesus, the stories were told and retold orally through many links in the transmission, and like the children's game of telephone what emerged at the end was very different from the beginning.

As I've already addressed this, numerous times, I get tired of repeating myself. But the facts remain that all of Paul's epistles can be reliably dated to prior 67 AD, the book of Acts dates to c. 60-61 AD, the synoptic gospels to before the book of Acts. Now, personally, I'm reasonably certain that James can be reliably dated to before any of Paul's epistles, and that Matthew and Mark were both written in the 40's AD. However, I scarcely bring this up since there's such a wide scholarly viewpoint on it, and it's much safer to talk about Luke's writings and Paul's writings since they are the ones we have the firmest reasons for dating. Acts can't have been written later than AD 62 because it ends in the present and doesn't talk about anything that happens after AD 62 - including the deaths of James and of Paul. It couldn't have been written earlier than AD 60 since it has events in it that take place then. There are two separate early accounts of Paul's death, placing it around 64-67 AD, so he obviously couldn't have written epistles after this time.

So what we have, is writings that can be traced as far back as AD 40, and that contain beliefs, ideas, and testaments that go right back to the crucifixion itself.

In the same vein he points out that for the written accounts what we have are copies of copies of copies through many stages and with each scribe, wittingly or unwittingly, introducing changes.

But that's all we have of any writings from that period. We actually have much earlier copies, and thousands more copies than for just about any other antiquity writings. Josephus' writings, for instance, only exist as later contemporary copies.

No, I don't agree with the second part. In the three synoptic gospels Jesus uses the title Son of Man (taken from the Book of Daniel) to refer to the apocalyptic figure who is supposed to bring in the end of history. He usually speaks of this Son of Man in the third person, so I am not even convinced that he identifies himself with the Son of Man.

Daniel 7:13 "I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him."

Jesus' use of the title is unique, although it occurs dozens of times in the gospels, no other person in greek antiquity uses the phrase to describe themselves.

I think you meant to say something like "the epistle to the Corinthians was written soon after Jesus' death [i.e., 2 or 3 decades] and that was too soon for a legend to have developed.

Even secular historians would agree that Paul personally knew the family of Jesus and some of his disciples.

[xpastor]

I doubt that you would agree with many of Ehrman's other positions.

Correct, because you're quoting ONE person with far out there ideas.

Thank you for clarifying that little mystery.

Ehrman is a respected authority when he agrees with you and a far out loony when he disagrees.

---

Do you believe these other miracle stories?

I am going to guess "no," X-P.

If this was a bet, you would lose. The fallback position of fundamentalists is to pretend that an embarrassing question never was asked.

[Thor]

That's an incorrect assesment. NT Biblical books cite each other before they became bound together and accepted as scripture. They are written by a number of different authors - at least 8, and as many as 11.

Thank you for confirming that no one knows who wrote the Babble.

Oh please. The life and death of Jesus is very well documented.

Really? Where? Please cite ONE historical document or record that was written DURING THE SUPPOSED LIFETIME OF JESUS that mentions the life and/or death of this man.

Compare this to Pontius Pilate - we found nothing at all written about him outside of the Bible, and yet he was supposed to be an important governor at the time of Jesus? The "Pilate Stone" was excavated in 1961 and was the first piece of evidence ever found, outside of the Biblical texts, that he was a real person.

So there is actual evidence that Pontius Pilate was a real person! Now, as for this "Jesus" guy.....?

Here's a short list of facts that virtually all historians who study this area agree on: 1. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist., 2. He had disciples, 3. He was crucified, 4. Some of his disciples were martyred. If you're seriously going to disagree with any one of those 4 basic points, then you are going to have to provide sources because you'd be well outside of the general consensus among scholars and historians.

Even if all this is true, how does it prove he was the embodiment of a deity?

[Minimalist]

The fallback position of fundamentalists is to pretend that an embarrassing question never was asked.

I don't know, X-P. Some of them are pretty stupid.

http://books.google.com/books?id=kfxkVGQ...al&f=false

Paragraph #2

I suppose it depends on the depth of the fundie?

[MindForgedManacle]

Aractus, from what I can tell you're parroting William Lane Craig's claim that those are the 4 indispute facts regarding Jesus. Couple of responses.

Firstly, I've heard Ehrman voice some disagreement with such. He has mentioned that he at best agrees with 1 and a half of those facts. Further (assuming I didn't misunderstand him), in his debate with William Lane Craig he said that even within the NT scholar/critic community, Craig has tried to hide the fact that he holds a minority position regarding his views on questions of Jesus' historicity.

[Aractus]

Thank you for clarifying that little mystery.

Ehrman is a respected authority when he agrees with you and a far out loony when he disagrees.

When he talks within his area of expertise, he's fine. When he starts talking about the early writings being forgeries, and the like, he's off in his own little world where he has barely any peers that would take him seriously. If you want to listen to a real Greek scholar, try Daniel B Wallace, here's one video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jdKFotjGd4

But there are many others, including him debating Ehrman directly.

[Minimalist]

When he talks within his area of expertise, he's fine. When he starts talking about the early writings being forgeries

Excuse me but that IS his area of expertise.

[Aractus]

Aractus, from what I can tell you're parroting William Lane Craig's claim that those are the 4 indispute facts regarding Jesus. Couple of responses.

Firstly, I've heard Ehrman voice some disagreement with such. He has mentioned that he at best agrees with 1 and a half of those facts. Further (assuming I didn't misunderstand him), in his debate with William Lane Craig he said that even within the NT scholar/critic community, Craig has tried to hide the fact that he holds a minority position regarding his views on questions of Jesus' historicity.

I'm not sure exactly who pointed these out, however they hold as true, including for people like Ehrman who are secular/non-believing NT/Greek historians/scholars.

You could think of it in terms of Holocaust denial. Some of the "facts" are open for discussion, such as the exact number of people who were killed - estimated to be 11 million - but I don't think anyone would be surprised if that figured turned out to be 11.5 million or 12 million. But some of the indisputable facts would be that Nazi's targeted Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, the disabled and people who resisted the Nazi regime. That they systematically and deliberately practised genocide, in addition to forced labour.

The same can be said for the life of Christ - there are some facts - in fact well more than the four that I've listed - that are well beyond disputed. Other facts would include that Paul wrote "at least" these 7 epistles: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon.

[Zen Badger]

And JK Rowling wrote "the goblet of fire", that doesn't prove that Harry Potter is real though.

[Ryantology]

I don't deny Jesus' existence, I simply refuse to assume he existed because evidence in support of this position is lacking.