It is currently Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:22 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 29, 2013 2:46 pm 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:49 pm
Posts: 5
Check out this summary on why Jesus is Judeo-Christian MYTH:

1. Fraudulent family history going back thousands of years. Two of them in fact, that differ in more than 30 ways. 
2. Phony census story and contrived birth to fit some “Old Testament prophecy” 
3. One story when he is about 12. Apart from that, his entire childhood and adolescence is missing. 
4. A ministry in his “30s” that talks about him doing miracles for more than thousand people that nobody notices.
5. He never writes or creates anything nor dictates writing to anybody. There is no Biography of Christ or Gospel of Christ. 
6. Every piece of scripture is an anonymous, non-eyewitness account DECADES after he’s allegedly dead and gone. 
7. The church’s foremost apostle, Paul, is SHOCKINGLY SILENT about nearly every single physical aspect of Jesus Christ
 8. Nobody ever physically depicted him or described his appearance. 
9. His empty tomb isn’t venerated for centuries.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
That's a good summary of the problems with the historical Jesus.

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:
Check out this summary on why Jesus is Judeo-Christian MYTH:

1. Fraudulent family history going back thousands of years. Two of them in fact, that differ in more than 30 ways. 
2. Phony census story and contrived birth to fit some “Old Testament prophecy” 
3. One story when he is about 12. Apart from that, his entire childhood and adolescence is missing. 
4. A ministry in his “30s” that talks about him doing miracles for more than thousand people that nobody notices.
5. He never writes or creates anything nor dictates writing to anybody. There is no Biography of Christ or Gospel of Christ. 
6. Every piece of scripture is an anonymous, non-eyewitness account DECADES after he’s allegedly dead and gone. 
7. The church’s foremost apostle, Paul, is SHOCKINGLY SILENT about nearly every single physical aspect of Jesus Christ
 8. Nobody ever physically depicted him or described his appearance. 
9. His empty tomb isn’t venerated for centuries.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2014 3:38 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Quote:
Code:
"Writing Did Jesus Exist was an interesting task. For one thing, before writing the book, like most New Testament scholars, I knew almost nothing about the mythicist movement."

- Dr. Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist as Part One
http://ehrmanblog.org/did-jesus-exist-as-part-one/

Bart Ehrman also confesses on page two in his book, "Did Jesus Exist?," that for 30 years he never even thought to consider to question the existence of Jesus as real historical character because it was a question that he "did not take seriously." Bart goes on to say, "I discovered, to my surprise, an entire body of literature devoted to the question of whether or not there ever was a real man, Jesus ... I was almost completely unaware - as are most of my colleagues in the field - of this body of skeptical literature."

Thank you, Bart Ehrman, for admitting that you knew nothing about mythicism before you started writing your book, 'Did Jesus Exist?'; having read DJE I can confirm that you STILL know nothing about it. So, he's admitting that he was ignorant, as are most of his colleagues, of what is an "entire body of literature" in his field. And there's no way that he could have studied that entire body - which is pretty substantial - in the past couple of years since he finally became aware of it. In fact, it's painfully obvious that he did NOT study even a small fraction of this "entire body of skeptical literature," since he is STILL very ignorant of it, as his book reveals.

From, Religion and the Ph.D.: A Brief History

Image

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:52 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Bart Ehrman: Gospels not written by eyewitnesses, no Jesus in historical record



Bart Ehrman's sloppy errors in his book, "Did Jesus Exist?" for all to see:

The phallic ‘Savior of the World’ hidden in the Vatican

Bart Ehrman caught in lies and libel?

Bart Ehrman errs again – this time about virgin births

Over 80 Rebuttals to Bart Ehrman's Anti-Mythicist Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'

Richard Carrier caught Bart Ehrman in a lie

Quote:
"Such libel only reveals a total disinclination to do a fraction of the research manifest on any single page of Acharya's works."
--Dr. Robert Price, page xxi of the book, "Bart Erhman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman's Did Jesus Exist?"

Cover image at the end of the video is of the collaborative rebuttal book: "Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman's Did Jesus Exist?"

Quote:
"The fact is that New Testament (NT) scholars are so narrowly focused on the NT they don't spend much time in comparative religion to investigate parallels, "borrowing" or syncretism from other pre-Christian religions. It's also significant that it's not a requirement for New Testament scholars or students to examine the case for mythicism or the Mythicist Position in order to receive a PhD. Don't believe us? Here it is straight from the horses mouth, Ehrman himself, one of the most well-known New Testament scholars:

Quote:
"Writing Did Jesus Exist was an interesting task. For one thing, before writing the book, like most New Testament scholars, I knew almost nothing about the mythicist movement."
--Dr. Bart Ehrman

Bart Ehrman also confesses on page two in his book "Did Jesus Exist?" that for 30 years he never even thought to consider to question the existence of Jesus as real historical character because it was a question that he "did not take seriously." Bart goes on to say: "I discovered, to my surprise, an entire body of literature devoted to the question of whether or not there ever was a real man, Jesus ... I was almost completely unaware - as are most of my colleagues in the field - of this body of skeptical literature.""

http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/vie ... f=5&t=3110

So, why would we ever trust New Testament scholars on the subject of mythicism when they admit they know so little about it?

See also:

The Gospel Dates | When Were the Gospels Written?

Does Josephus prove a historical Jesus?

Jesus passage in Josephus a forgery, says expert

Rabbi: Did Jesus actually exist?

Does Church Father Papias Prove the Gospels Existed in the First Century?

The Mythicist Position

Transcript of clips of Bart Ehrman from the Craig Evans vs. Bart Ehrman Debate (3/31/2010):

Quote:
"The truth may not be what you were taught, but if it's true, you should believe it, not run from it!

As I studied more and more, using my intelligence as an evangelical but also praying about it, I became convinced that the New Testament gospels were not written by eyewitnesses or by people who knew eyewitnesses.

The first point to make is the rather obvious one that the gospels don't claim to be written by eyewitnesses. They are all anonymous.

The titles in your gospels - the Gospel According to Matthew and so forth - were added by later editors. They were not put there by the original authors.

Second point, none of the gospels claims to be written by the person whose name it bears. They don't claim to be written by eyewitnesses, and they don't claim to be written by people named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Those are later traditions that were added to the gospels. These traditions do not start appearing for about 100 years.

Some people think that there is an early Church father named Papias who attests to the witness of Mark and Matthew, but in fact there are very solid reasons for thinking that Papias, who lived around the year 120-140, is not referring to OUR Mark or OUR Matthew.

The first time anybody refers to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John by name is Irenaeus in the year 180.

But the unfortunate thing about Jesus is that we have such scanty documentation about his life. Most people don't realize this, but Jesus is never mentioned in any Greek or Roman non-Christian source until 80 years after his death.

There is no record of Jesus having lived, in these sources. In the entire first Christian century, Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!"

--Bart Ehrman

"The truth may not be what you were taught, but if it's true, you should believe it, not run from it!"
--Bart Ehrman


Perhaps Bart should follow his own advice?

What's funny here is Acharya S said essentially the same things as Dr. Ehrman did in this video in her book, Christ Conspiracy from 1999 and throughout most all of her books. I guess Bart missed it when he PRETENDED to read her book. It's very unethical for such intellectual dishonesty coming from a scholar of Dr. Ehrman's caliber and he MUST be called out on it by other scholars and laypeople as well because Dr. Ehrman's book "Did Jesus Exist?" should be a prime example of bad scholarship and intellectual dishonesty. Dr. Ehrman has ruined his own credibility on the subject of mythicism as he is simply not a reliable or trustworthy source on the subject.

Dr. Bart Ehrman owes Acharya S an official apology for libeling her in his book, "Did Jesus Exist?":

Quote:
"In insinuating that I drew the image myself, Ehrman is indicating he did not notice the citation under it in my book, clearly referring to Barbara Walker’s work. He is further implying that I simply make things up, and he is asserting with absolute certainty that no such bronze has existed in the Vatican, essentially stating that I fabricated the entire story. Contrary to these unseemly accusations, the facts are that I did not draw the image, the source of which was cited, and that, according to several writers, the image certainly is “hidden” in the Vatican, as I stated."

"I obviously did not fabricate the image of this artifact, which has been known in scholarly circles for over 300 years."

"As we can see, everything in my book concerning this discussion is cited and accurately represents the original commentary, as found in several publications dating from the 17th century until the present era, reflecting a tradition from antiquity. It is unfortunate when other scholars engage in libelous accusation and gross misrepresentation, of which there are a number of other instances in Ehrman’s book vis-à-vis my work."

- Acharya S/DM Murdock

The phallic ‘Savior of the World’ hidden in the Vatican

Aron Ra
https://www.facebook.com/aron.ra.9/post ... 1949466897

Truth about Religion and Myth
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=922178594461887

Rio
https://www.facebook.com/AuthorBartEhrm ... 5541972242

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2014 7:30 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Bart Ehrman has just admitted on Facebook that his book contains FALSEHOODS about the work by Acharya S ... it's a start:

Quote:
"Bart D. Ehrman What a scream. The statue does exist, it is in the Vatican libray, and as I have repeatedly stated, it has NOTHING to do with "Peter the Cock," as our scholar of antiquity Acharya S would have us believe. Maybe she means it as a joke?"

Facebook: Bart D. Ehrman

Dr. Ehrman: "The statue does exist, it is in the Vatican libray"

You are now claiming the complete opposite of what you said in your book:

Dr. Ehrman: "There is no penis-nosed statue of Peter the cock in the Vatican or anywhere else except in books like this, which love to make things up."
- Did Jesus Exist?, page 24

Which is it Dr. Ehrman? So, you need to issue a retraction and apologize for your errors and your LIBEL. Had you actually read her book you would've seen the source citations so, accusing her of "making stuff up" is very malicious. You owe her an apology.

Dr. Ehrman, since it's obvious that you never did read her book you are also still repeating the error regarding the statue itself - she never claimed the statue was a symbol of St. Peter and here you are repeating that falsehood again.

"(Note that I do not say here or elsewhere that the bronze sculpture itself is a symbol of St. Peter, but only the cock or rooster, as in the story of Matthew 26:34, etc., in which Peter denies Christ three times before the cock crows. In several places elsewhere in my book I provide the citation for the cock/rooster being a symbol of St. Peter. I apologize for the ambiguity, but I was not in error here, despite the constant attempts to make me appear as such.)"

Cock Christian Symbol

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:03 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
New Blog by Acharya S: Bart Ehrman caught in lies and libel?

Image

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:30 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
New Blog: Bart Ehrman errs again – this time about virgin births

Did the historical Jesus exist -Bart Ehrman (2.5 minute)


At 1:55 (or 53:13 in the full version) you can hear Ehrman claim:

Quote:
"I think that atheists have done themselves a disservice by jumping on the bandwagon of mythicism because, frankly, it makes you look foolish to the outside world."
– Bart Ehrman

Image




"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

- Upton Sinclair


It's frustrating that the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) will invite Bart Ehrman for a lecture and even give him an award but, refuse to invite Acharya S/Murdock for a lecture or their radio show or anything. I have lost loads of confidence in the FFRF and other secular organizations who refuse to invite Murdock - THAT is the true "disservice" here. She should be invited to speak at every major freethought and mythicist lecture event like Skepticon for example. Supporters of Murdock's work need to start putting in requests for her to speak at lectures.

Mythicist Books for the Atheist's Toolbox - Through Atheist Eyes with Frank Zindler




Zindler at 13:45: "My friend, DM Murdock..."

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 5:45 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
So, I've stumbled across a video on Youtube by Prof Sickbock who claims we've taken Dr. Bart Ehrman's comments out of context in our video of Bart Ehrman saying:

Quote:
"The truth may not be what you were taught, but if it's true, you should believe it, not run from it!

As I studied more and more, using my intelligence as an evangelical but also praying about it, I became convinced that the New Testament gospels were not written by eyewitnesses or by people who knew eyewitnesses.

The first point to make is the rather obvious one that the gospels don't claim to be written by eyewitnesses. They are all anonymous. The titles in your gospels - the Gospel According to Matthew and so forth - were added by later editors. They were not put there by the original authors.

Second point, none of the gospels claims to be written by the person whose name it bears. They don't claim to be written by eyewitnesses, and they don't claim to be written by people named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Those are later traditions that were added to the gospels. These traditions do not start appearing for about 100 years.

Some people think that there is an early Church father named Papias who attests to the witness of Mark and Matthew, but in fact there are very solid reasons for thinking that Papias, who lived around the year 120-140, is not referring to OUR Mark or OUR Matthew.

The first time anybody refers to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John by name is Irenaeus in the year 180. But the unfortunate thing about Jesus is that we have such scanty documentation about his life. Most people don't realize this, but Jesus is never mentioned in any Greek or Roman non-Christian source until 80 years after his death.

There is no record of Jesus having lived, in these sources. In the entire first Christian century, Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!"

- Bart Ehrman



The point was to show Bart Ehrman's contradictions within his own writings and in a video debate (2012) just a couple years previous to the publication of his book "Did Jesus Exist" (DJE) (2014) and expose a few facts about Ehrman that anybody who cares about facts and accuracy should care about. Dr. Ehrman's scholarship was shoddy, sloppy and he made egregious errors and Dr. Ehrman got caught lying about and misrepresenting the mythicists he addressed in his book.

Prof Sickbock's video:

Quote Mining Bart Ehrman on the Historical Record for Jesus



Quote:
Ehrman: "there's no doubt that the historical Jesus is the most important person in the history of Western civilization there is no doubt of that at all in my opinion"

The bible and Jesus are certainly pivotal in western society, however, that does not prove a historical Jesus. Zeus and Hercules etc were the most important people in Greek society and Osiris, Isis and Horus were important to the Egyptians too - does that prove they existed - NO. All Ehrman is doing here is confirming his BELIEF in a historical Jesus nothing more.

Quote:
"Pliny doesn't even name him Jesus he simply refers to his name Christ in passing - that is the only reference within 80 years of Jesus death. Jesus is mentioned two times very very briefly by the Jewish historian Josephus in the year 93 over 60 years after his death but he's mentioned in no other Jewish source of the first century at all."
- Bart Ehrman

Prof Sickbock proclaims to be a historian. He should already know that Pliny, Suetonius nor Tacitus ever mention "Jesus" by name they called him "Christ" and that is a title not a name and there were many Christ's back then. It is embarrassing to claim this proves the historicity of Jesus. Pathetic.

Regarding Josephus, I highly recommend this article peer reviewed by one of the worlds leading linguists, Dr. Paul J. Hopper:

Josephus’s Testimonium Flavianum Examined Linguistically: Greek Analysis Demonstrates the Passage a Forgery In Toto

Quote:
"historians of course do use the Gospels of sources principally as sources for knowing about the life of the historical Jesus they have to because there are no other sources that are reliable that exists which leaves us with a problem since the only sources that do exist are the Gospels and they're not reliable either there's no doubt that the historical Jesus is the most important person in the history of Western civilization there is no doubt of that at all in my opinion the stories are changed and reach changed over the years so that historians have to use these Gospels very carefully and critically because they don't contain eyewitness reports and we can assume that what they say is historically accurate..."
- Bart Ehrman

Well, thanks for admitting that historians are forced to use the Gospels as a source since: "there are no other sources that are reliable that exists ... "and they're not reliable either" ... and "they don't contain eyewitness reports and we can assume that what they say is historically accurate."

Nope, not that last one: "we can assume that what they say is historically accurate." We absolutely CANNOT assume anything at all if we care about honesty and accuracy.

Quote:
Prof Sickbock's #1 at 3:24 : "The statement is technically correct, but rhetorically skewed with the purpose to have as much effect as possible on the conservative Christian audience."

So, Prof Sickbock insinuates that we lied to fool the Christians as if they couldn't check for themselves to see who is being dishonest. That is Prof Sickbock projecting his own biases and bigotry upon those who are simply trying to expose the fact that Bart Ehrman has made these comments quoted on video and in his books for all to see. So, stop blaming everybody else for pointing out just how untrustworthy and unreliable Bart Ehrman and academia really is on the issue of the historical Jesus or the case for mythicism as well as most all of New Testament studies as Bart Ehrman himself also admits.

To claim Ehrman's comments have been taken out of context just reminds me of this hilarious video:

Context!!!!!!


Quote:
Prof Sickbock's #2: "Taken out of context of Ehrman's preceding and following statements it can leave a misleading impression."

It appears to me that Prof Sickbock fears people, especially Christians, being aware of the fact that Ehrman did in fact make the comments on video in a debate just two years prior to his anti-mythicist book "Did Jesus Exist" where he desperately misrepresented most every mythicist in his book and even got caught lying too. Ehrman also admitted a few significant things which is what the Stellar House video is pointing out:

Quote:
"Writing Did Jesus Exist was an interesting task. For one thing, before writing the book, like most New Testament scholars, I knew almost nothing about the mythicist movement."
- Dr. Bart Ehrman

Bart Ehrman also confesses on page two in his book "Did Jesus Exist?" that for 30 years he never even thought to consider to question the existence of Jesus as real historical character because it was a question that he "did not take seriously." Bart goes on to say: "I discovered, to my surprise, an entire body of literature devoted to the question of whether or not there ever was a real man, Jesus ... I was almost completely unaware - as are most of my colleagues in the field - of this body of skeptical literature.""

From the "Mythicism and the Ph.D.: A Brief History" thread
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3110

These point out two very significant things: 1. Bart admits that he and most New Testament scholars know almost nothing about the case for mythicism (it is not part of academia so they do not need to study mythicism to receive a Ph.d.) and 2. Bart Ehrman himself said that for 30 years never questioned the existence of Jesus as real historical character because it was a question that he "did not take seriously."

So, why on earth would we ever trust Bart Ehrman or New Testament scholars on the case for mythicism - a subject that they know almost nothing about? THAT is the point that the Stellar House video is making and that is the point Prof Sickbock willfully omits and is desperate to suppress.

Quote:
Prof Sickbock at 3:35 : "Ehrman does not say that there is NO historical record for Jesus AT ALL."

No, and nobody claimed he did, he just says that there's no credible evidence mentioning Jesus until decades after his death and Ehrman speaking about the Gospels saying: "We don't have the originals! We have only error-ridden copies" and we have Ehrman admitting that for 30 years he never even thought to consider to question the existence of Jesus as real historical character because it was a question that he "did not take seriously." So, Ehrman's belief in a historical Jesus is simply based on his own wilful ignorance, biases and bigotry - not credible evidence.

Quote:
Prof Sickbock: "Therefore, taking this quote out of context as if Ehrman says that there is no historical record for Jesus is misleading and deceptive."

Baaahahaha, nope, even other more honest Christians concede that there's no credible evidence for a historical Jesus including Bart Ehrman as per your own quote: "In the entire first Christian century Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!"

Prof Sickbock is only out to preach and attempt to defend to the indefensible and even the quotes provided by Prof Sickbock prove him wrong - unless Prof Sickbock is now going to attempt to argue that his own quote by Ehrman is out of context he's merely re-iterating the point Stellar House was making in their video, just Prof Sickbock doesn't like it because it tells the truth about Ehrman.

Here is the person Prof Sickbock is endorsing:

Over 80 Rebuttals to Bart Ehrman's Anti-Mythicist Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'
http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/vie ... 719#p25719

The phallic ‘Savior of the World’ hidden in the Vatican
http://freethoughtnation.com/the-phalli ... e-vatican/

Bart Ehrman errs again – this time about virgin births
http://freethoughtnation.com/bart-ehrma ... in-births/

Ehrman Errs: Yes, Bart, There Were Dying & Rising Gods
https://atheologica.wordpress.com/2016/ ... sing-gods/

Bart Ehrman caught in lies and libel?
http://freethoughtnation.com/bart-ehrma ... and-libel/

Here's what Dr. Robert Price had to say about the issue regarding Bart Ehrman maliciously smearing Acharya S in his book:

Quote:
“Such libel only reveals a total disinclination to do a fraction of the research manifest on any singe page of Acharya’s works.”

– Dr. Robert Price, page xxi of the book, ‘Bart Erhman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman’s Did Jesus Exist?’

Richard Carrier defended Acharya on this issue in the book too as well as across several of his own blogs:

Quote:
“At the very least I would expect Ehrman to have called the Vatican museum about this, and to have checked the literature on it, before arrogantly declaring no such object existed and implying Murdock made this up … She did not make that up. The reason this error troubles me is that it is indicative of the carelessness and arrogance Ehrman exhibits throughout this book … [Ehrman] often doesn’t check his facts, and clearly did little to no research. This makes the book extremely unreliable. A reader must ask, if he got this wrong, what other assertions in the book are false? And since making sure to get details like this right is the only useful purpose this book could have had, how can we credit this book as anything but a failure?”

http://freethoughtnation.com/the-phalli ... ment-11233

So, when New Testament scholars and historians attempt to discuss the case for mythicism they are well outside of their area of expertise. If you disagree then simply provide the course within academia proving both historians and New Testament courses study the case for mythicism - it does not exist.

Bart Ehrman has ruined his own credibility and we have exposed the double-standards and dishonesty within academia on the subject of mythicism = suppression by omission.

Quote:
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

- Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-71), Historian

More honest Christian scholars prove Dr. Bart Ehrman wrong on the historical Jesus:

Quote:
"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"

- F.F. Bruce, a founder of the modern evangelical movement

Quote:
"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy. In the end, the historian is left with the difficult task of sifting through the Four Gospels for historical tradition."

John P. Meier

- Who Was Jesus? 86

* Dr. Meier is a Catholic University New Testament professor, ex-Catholic priest and monsignor

Quote:
"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century. As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."

Merrill C. Tenney

- Who Was Jesus? 85-86

* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Tenney was also one of the original translators of the NASB and NIV editions of the Bible.

Quote:
"The gospels are in fact anonymous"

- Dr. Craig L. Blomberg

- Who Was Jesus? 60

Quote:
"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."

Dr. John Dominic Crossan

- Who Was Jesus? 24

* Dr. Crossan is Professor Emeritus of Biblical Studies at DePaul University in Chicago, Illinois and is a major figure in the fields of biblical archaeology, anthropology and New Testament textual and higher criticism. He is especially vocal in the field of Historical Jesus studies and is generally acknowledged to be the premier historical Jesus scholar in the world.

Quote:
"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2 "...According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3

1. Metzger, HLS, 8.
2. Meier, II, 536.
3. Geisler, CA, 320.

- Who Was Jesus? 259

Most Jews also disagree that Jesus was a historical character:

Quote:
"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"

- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Truth Be Known | Stellar House Publishing
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Live Support