• In total there are 23 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 22 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
Vallhall
Eligible to vote in book polls!
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:38 am
12
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

ant wrote: You refuse to recognize the plethora of differences between the historical Jesus and the gods that mythicists claim have the exact same narrative attached to them. That simply is false.
Perhaps you could outline the narrative of the argued historical Jesus, because I am somewhat confused by your comparison. Usually mythical images of various gods are compared to the mythical images found in christian religion. When removing mythical images from Jesus story in order to claim historical Jesus, would naturally reduce compatibility. Removing similarities is known to reduce similarity.

But the important thing is essentially what narrative, what story, does the historical Jesus provide without miracles and supernatural claims? The historical Jesus argued by Celsus is one of the earliest, if not earliest, described historical Jesus. Although rejected by Origen because of the historical Jesus are founded on miracle birth, miracle works, divine existence, destined savior of humanity, concluded by death, resurrection and return as the metaphysical spirit ascending to heaven in merger with himself as the father god image.

Going back to the narrative of the historical Jesus. I would appreciate outline of narrative, where you of course leave out supernatural and magical mythical images, doctrine, ritual practice and traditional lore infused over time. I hope you make the small effort of outlining historical narrative, as I am really curious where our different views start. Thank you in advance :)
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
12
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

Ehrman concludes his book by getting to the very heart of the matter.

Ehrman speaks of a meeting he attended to receive an award given by the American Humanist Association - the "Religious Liberty Award." The AHA reason for existence is to promote "being Human without God."

Ehrman states (in a nutshell) although he agrees with quite a few of the AHA's views, what was noticeable;

"But what struck me most about the meeting was precisely how religious it was."

I have had similar experiences while in attendance at some of the lectures I go to conducted by The Skeptics Society. Although highly informative, I notice that there is a very religious feel in the air. The scattered hoots and "UH-HUH, that's right!" remind me of a religious flock. The lecturers remind me of preachers (but that's more of a projection of supreme authority bestowed on them by the audience). And anytime Darwin, Dawkins, Shermer, Hawking, etc. etc are mentioned, you get the feeling that they are the apostles of this particular flock.

Ehrman goes on to say that what was not surprising was a good number of the people in attendance at the ceremony were either mythicists or leaning toward mythicism. He says that in a way these mythicists are doing a disservice to Humanists because they are staking out a position that is accepted virtually by no one. They "open themselves up to mockery and to charges of intellectual dishonesty."

The actual problem here is belief in Jesus. Christ stands for the heart of Christianity. If you do away with Jesus completely by claiming he was a myth, then you drive a stake through the very heart of Christianity itself. And if you do that, then perhaps you move closer to the ultimate goal of doing away with the Christian god himself.

Since Christianity is the dominant religion with political, social, and educational influence in our western culture, the agenda becomes clear.

I tend to agree with Ehrman's view on this. The degree of emotion here is high for mythicists. So high, atheists/humanists are willing to develop theories about the historical Jesus that are mostly emotion driven. Unsubstantiated narratives, obscure claims of cabals, scriptural interpretations of convenience and the like are digested with an uncritical eyeball.
Last edited by ant on Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

Here's a document on Facebook by Dave Mack that includes a pile of links for responses to Ehrman by mythicists.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/thebible ... 040301233/
Mythicists' (and key sympathizers') Responses to Bart Ehrman's Did Jesus Exist?

A collection of links still in progress! Please post any other important links I have missed in comments and I will add them later.

Note: Names are listed alphabetically.

==================

RICHARD CARRIER

Ehrman Trashtalks Mythicism

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/667

Ehrman on Jesus: A Failure of Facts and Logic

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1026

Ehrman’s Dubious Replies (Round One)

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1117

Ehrman’s Dubious Replies (Round Two)

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1151

==================

JERRY A. COYNE

Cognitive dissonance

Guest post: Did Church fathers and Jesus see the Bible as metaphor?

Bart Ehrman says that Jesus existed

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com ... ent-198369

Ben Goren's extraordinary comment on Coyne's site

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com ... ent-198369

==================

HERMANN DETERING

Prof. "Errorman" und die nichtchristlichen Jesuszeugnisse

http://www.radikalkritik.de/Ehrman.htm

Excerpts of G.A. Wells review of Ehrman on the Historicity of Jesus and on Early Christian Thinking

In: Free Inquiry June / July 2012

Volume 32, Number 4

http://www.radikalkritik.de/Wells_Ehrman.htm

==================

EARL DOHERTY

A Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism - Introduction

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/ ... roduction/

2. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Chapter 1

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/ ... chapter-1/

3. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Chapters 1-2

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/ ... ers-1-2-2/

4. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Chapter 2 continued

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/ ... continued/

5. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: A Roman Trio

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/ ... oman-trio/

6. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Jewish Sources

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/ ... h-sources/

7. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Telling the Gospels Like It Is

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/30/ ... ike-it-is/

8. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Existence of Non-Existent Sources for the Gospels

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/05/04/ ... e-gospels/

9. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Form Criticism and the Sources of the Gospels

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/ ... e-gospels/

10. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Listening to the Sounds of Silence

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/05/11/ ... f-silence/

=================

NEIL GODFREY (Vridar)

[chronological postings]

Bart Ehrman’s New Book: Did Steven Carr’s Prophecies Come True?

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/ ... come-true/

Bart Ehrman’s Huffing and Posting Against Mythicism

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/ ... mythicism/

Bart Ehrman’s First Attempt to Grapple with Mythicism

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/ ... mythicism/

Bart Ehrman’s false or careless assertions and quotations concerning Earl Doherty

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/ ... l-doherty/

Another Bart Ehrman mis-reading of Earl Doherty’s book

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/ ... rtys-book/

Earl Doherty’s comments on my posts about Ehrman’s treatment of his book

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/ ... -his-book/

Ehrman hides the facts about Doherty’s argument: Part 1

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/30/ ... nt-part-1/

Ehrman suppresses the facts while falsely accusing Doherty: Part 2

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/30/ ... ty-part-2/

Devious Doherty or Erring Ehrman?

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/03/31/ ... ng-ehrman/

Ehrman’s Most Bizarre Criticism Of All Against Doherty

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/02/ ... t-doherty/

Did Bart Ehrman Not Even Read the Cover of Earl Doherty’s Book?

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/03/ ... rtys-book/

Ehrman explains: Doherty could be right after all

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/06/ ... after-all/

Ehrman says Doherty’s argument is “intriguing and worthy of reflection”

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/07/ ... eflection/

So What If Bart Ehrman Did Not Read the Books? His Peers Excuse Him

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/ ... xcuse-him/

Carrier versus Ehrman: Reflections

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/ ... flections/

The Facts of the Matter: Carrier 9, Ehrman 1 (my review, part 2)

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/28/ ... ew-part-2/

==================

BEN GOREN

Extraordinary comment on Jerry A. Coyne's site

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com ... ent-198369

==================

KENNETH HUMPHREYS

(posted by Neil Godfrey on Vridar)

Review: Ehrman’s “Did Jesus Exist?” – Apologetics Lite (by Ken Humphreys)

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/ ... humphreys/

Ken's review also appears here:

JesusNeverExisted.com

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/ehrman.html

Free Thought & Rationalism Discussion Board

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=313610

==================

D.M. MURDOCK

(Acharya S.)

The phallic 'Savior of the World' hidden in the Vatican

http://www.freethoughtnation.com/contri ... tican.html

Bart Ehrman: 'Mythicists' arguments are fairly plausible'

http://www.freethoughtnation.com/contri ... sible.html

Does early Church father Justin Martyr quote the gospels?

http://www.freethoughtnation.com/contri ... spels.html

Councils for God and the development of the biblical canon: Another response to Bart Ehrman

http://www.freethoughtnation.com/contri ... canon.html

==================

ROBERT M. PRICE

MP3 Podcast of April 24, 2012 wherein Dr. Price reads his response to Ehrman's book near beginning of podcast.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-20430/TS-618852.mp3

==================

G.A. WELLS

Excerpts of G.A. Wells review of Ehrman on the Historicity of Jesus and on Early Christian Thinking

In: Free Inquiry June / July 2012 Volume 32, Number 4

http://www.radikalkritik.de/Wells_Ehrman.htm

==================

FRANK ZINDLER

Jesus of where? A response by Frank Zindler to Bart Ehrman

http://freethoughtnation.com/contributi ... hrman.html
User avatar
Vallhall
Eligible to vote in book polls!
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:38 am
12
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

Although I hoped for a response that outlined the purely historical narrative regarding the claimed historical figure. Nonetheless I think a different comment perhaps brought up one important aspect in this discussion.

ant wrote:The actual problem here is belief in Jesus. Christ stands for the heart of Christianity. If you do away with Jesus completely by claiming he was a myth, then you drive a stake through the very heart of Christianity itself. And if you do that, then perhaps you move closer to the ultimate goal of doing away with the Christian god himself.

Since Christianity is the dominant religion with political, social, and educational influence in our western culture, the agenda becomes clear.

I tend to agree with Ehrman's view on this. The degree of emotion here is high for mythicists. So high, atheists/humanists are willing to develop theories about the historical Jesus that are mostly emotion driven. Unsubstantiated narratives, obscure claims of cabals, scriptural interpretations of convenience and the like are digested with an uncritical eyeball.
The message in the bible does not change regardless of historical or myth. And for those bothering to read the bible, the message of the story is repeatedly reminded of being that of importance. If moral and values gained from bible have worth only because of claimed historical background, they are not intrinsically true. But merely embraced out of fear of punishment. Those who drive a stake through the very heart of Christianity itself, are those who need divine gifts and rewards of riches on earth or eternal life in paradise to be historical and factual in order for message to contain value to them. Unfortunately they do so without shame.
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

ant wrote:The actual problem here is belief in Jesus. Christ stands for the heart of Christianity. If you do away with Jesus completely by claiming he was a myth, then you drive a stake through the very heart of Christianity itself. And if you do that, then perhaps you move closer to the ultimate goal of doing away with the Christian god himself.

Since Christianity is the dominant religion with political, social, and educational influence in our western culture, the agenda becomes clear.

I tend to agree with Ehrman's view on this. The degree of emotion here is high for mythicists. So high, atheists/humanists are willing to develop theories about the historical Jesus that are mostly emotion driven. Unsubstantiated narratives, obscure claims of cabals, scriptural interpretations of convenience and the like are digested with an uncritical eyeball.
The actual problem here is belief in Jesus.
:lol: the actual problem here is belief in a literalised metaphor
Christ stands for the heart of Christianity.
give me a break! does santa stand for the heart of xmas, does the easter bunny stand for the heart of easter, does a cat stand for 9 lives!
If you do away with Jesus completely by claiming he was a myth,
you dont do away with Jesus by claiming he was a myth anymore than you do away with efficiency by claiming that you cant really stitch time, you do away with the true significance of the metaphor by insisting the dumbass literal interpretation is the only interpretation when in fact it is a childish and stupid interpretation.
then you drive a stake through the very heart of Christianity itself.
isn't that what you are supposed to do with vampires? literalist orthodoxy has sucked the lifes blood out of many a seeker.
And if you do that, then perhaps you move closer to the ultimate goal of doing away with the Christian god himself.
oh what piffle, what balderdash, poppycock! any god that can be done away with is a numpty, God Shmod!

show me a God that can be done away with and i'll show you an outworn metaphor for the transcendant.

where is this christian God that can be done away with according to ant? is he on the toilet? perhaps he cant hear us because he is old and his ears are failing, would that he would do away with the tiny conception of ant.
Since Christianity is the dominant religion

yawn... literalist orthodoxy is the faith of fools, submissive fools who have subjugated themselves to a priesthood that wouldnt know the truth if it bit them on the arse.

well meaning seekers accepted.
the dominant religion with political, social, and educational influence in our western culture, the agenda becomes clear.
good riddance to bad rubbish.

The degree of emotion here is high for literalists. So high, literalists are willing to develop theories about the historical Jesus that are mostly emotion driven. Unsubstantiated miracles, obscure claims of needing tithe money, scriptural interpretations of convenience and the like are digested with an uncritical eyeball by people who have sacrificed reason on the altar of subservience to a stupid preisthood dumb enough to believe a literalised metaphor because they lack the education to understand mythology and how it works in history and life.

Christ stands for the heart of christianity! sheesh give me a break, Christ is a metaphor, get over it already.

death to literalists, oh wait they are dead in understanding already, perhaps if they understood the reference of the metaphor christ is they could be bought back from among the dead.

literalism RIP!
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

ahhhhh mythicism, it is the espresso to the dishwater of literalism.

so belief in a literal historical jesus is essential eh ant?

cant have salvation without a carnalised christ eh ant?

cant experience union with god unless you believe in a literal historic jesus? god i remember when i was dumb enough to believe that horse manure, i only wish my two buddies who committed suicide in anguish over torment caused in large part by literalist orthodoxy had seen through it in time, and i wish i had been able to help them understand THEY WERE BEING PLAYED.

what do you think ant?

what's your take on Jesus, the Nazarene, Yahweh in the flesh.... you reckon he is risen, ascended, seated at the right hand of the Father in the heavenlies?

or do you have another take on the whole thing?

you know my favourite saying of Jesus? (well i have many, of course)

"I and the Father are one"

"He that has seen me has seen the Father"

have you seen the Father ant?

what do you think of Joseph Campbell and Alan Watts ant?

ahhhh so many questions so little time.
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

Vallhall wrote:Those who drive a stake through the very heart of Christianity itself, are those who need divine gifts and rewards of riches on earth or eternal life in paradise to be historical and factual in order for message to contain value to them. Unfortunately they do so without shame.
thus spake zarathustra :arrow:
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

"…many of them were completely taken aback when they learned that I have a different view, that I think that there certainly was a Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and about whom we can say a good deal as a historical figure."

Formally, this anecdote is merely a reference to personal experience. Even so, it makes the concealed unsubstantiated claim that "we can say a good deal [about Jesus] as a historical figure." One easily can forget that this hidden claim is a wild exaggeration. We can say a good deal about Jesus of Nazareth? Really? Why, then, does Ehrman say virtually nothing specifically pertaining to Jesus of Nazareth in his entire book?
User avatar
tat tvam asi
Reading Addict
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:57 pm
14
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 571 times
Been thanked: 549 times

Re: Did Jesus Exist - Bart Ehrman's new book

Unread post

This "Errorman" ordeal has worked out pretty good because it brought the existence of the argument to a much larger audience. The backlash from the book (much of it listed in my last post) has shown this newer, larger audience out there, the thin line historicists have to walk on. And of course the book was such a hack job that it works out better for the mythicist position than for the historicist.
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”