Posted on 08/31/2014 8:18:05 PM PDT by Mean Daddy
Most antiquities scholars think that the New Testament gospels are “mythologized history.” In other words, they think that around the start of the first century a controversial Jewish rabbi named Yeshua ben Yosef gathered a following and his life and teachings provided the seed that grew into Christianity.
At the same time, these scholars acknowledge that many Bible stories like the virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, and women at the tomb borrow and rework mythic themes that were common in the Ancient Near East, much the way that screenwriters base new movies on old familiar tropes or plot elements. In this view, a “historical Jesus” became mythologized.
(Excerpt) Read more at jobrny.com ...
“Mommy! Mommy! Make it go away!”
Your logic is flawed. The question is does this person exist, not is the description of this person believable to me.
Would I believe the newspaper boy just on his say so, probably not. That’s why people require more evidience and in the case of historical persons, more witnesses.
Amen!
I talked several times with Bruce Metzger. I never had the opportunity to ask what he thought about Ehrman.
It would be interesting to find out what these “scholars” think of extraterrestrial aliens.
Jesus is so inconvenient. If He actually existed and exists, “scholars” might actually have to change the way they live, work, think, and believe. How annoying for them. Much easier to explain it all away as superstition.
Atheist beliefs (and anti-God, anti-Christ views) are as welcome on the Religion Forum as liberal beliefs are on the News/Activism Forum.
You are mixing “known: fraud and “unknown” fraud. The Heaven’s Gate and Jim Jones crowd died for something they thought was true. The Disciples would have been killed for something they KNEW was not true if Jesus was not who He said He was.
Huge difference to die for what you believe is true rather than what you know to be false.
When meaningless terms like “most scholars” are used I know the asserters are neither in the majority nor are they scholars in the subject they choose to malign.
Just imagine all the details which had to be made up, time frames coordinated, locations matched up for his childhood and the three years they travelled around.
Easier to believe the stories are true than that this sophisticated complex life was a conspiracy and never happened.
The Romans and Jewish leaders never tried to debunk the stories.
This is a shot across the bow as Christmas draws near. This is actually typically when the anti-Christ people begin and begins to get heated through Christmas and dies off until before Easter. Most publishers start taking books on Jesus and Christmas tales also around this time or maybe starting in July. Its cyclical. This is no surprise article as we will start seeing more and more of these things as we draw closer to December.
After the massacre at Jonestown just how many people willingly went to their deaths for Jim Jones?
But the article does not state that “most scholars” don’t believe in the miracles of Jesus but that they don’t believe the person Jesus existed. In that sense the standards we use to determine if any historical person truly existed must be applied to Jesus as well. They have not done that but are demanding far more proof.
Ehrman is so passionate about proving he’s right to where nothing seems well thought out anymore. He threw out his best arguments early and they were beaten down. He’s still trying to undermine the Gospel but his latest arguments are proving weaker and weaker.
this is just another form of group-think validation required to support a peculiar faith called atheism, or for moderates, agnosticism.
it’s the same historical consensus methodology masquerading as “science” for the purposes of validating macro evolution.
generally, it’s all about creating layers of professional academic associations to provide “peers” to validate the tapping of public money for publication of ever more such junk. once you have a group in place, you can then develop the group’s authority through consensus. the more you publish, the more secure you are in the group and the more tax-payer money you get. the key is to create the false front and legitimize it politically and through indoctrination. the group then covers the errors and lies of each individual member.
it’s interesting and predictable that they spend most of their time and resources attacking our Lord Jesus.
Well, I believe there are contemporaneous historical accounts of Jesus, and even the important Rabbi Gamaliel mentioned the followers of Jesus in his writings. So Jesus isn’t a figment of the imagination of the early Christians.
“Count me in with Jefferson and Payne.”
You are not with Jefferson.
Jesus Christ was either the Son of God or a lunatic. I’m goin’ with “the Son of God.” Someday, I’m literally goin’ with him. Amen.
And if those disciples were just part of the story?
I pray that Ehrman someday travels the road to Damascas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.