independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Thu 16th Aug 2018 9:35am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Atheist Bible expert Bart Ehrman: Jesus did exist!
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 05/04/18 12:04pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Atheist Bible expert Bart Ehrman: Jesus did exist!

He told this to Sam Harris. He said myths that Jesus never existed are fringe views. Hitchens believed this guff. Jesus is real people.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 05/04/18 12:19pm

lust

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

He told this to Sam Harris. He said myths that Jesus never existed are fringe views. Hitchens believed this guff. Jesus is real people.




Whether he existed or didn’t is moot. The likelihood of a Messianic preacher rabbi with the name Yeshua existing at that time is high, there were probably loads that fit that description.

The real question is did one of them happen to be his own Dad and have the ability to turn a simple Chardonnay into a highly complex Pinot Noir and wander about on lakes!
[Edited 5/4/18 12:21pm]
If the milk turns out to be sour, I aint the kinda pussy to drink it!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 05/04/18 12:27pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Living wine

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 05/04/18 12:48pm

lust

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

Living wine




Umm, dead beer!

Your turn.

(Cool game)
If the milk turns out to be sour, I aint the kinda pussy to drink it!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 05/04/18 3:18pm

NorthC

lust said:

2freaky4church1 said:

He told this to Sam Harris. He said myths that Jesus never existed are fringe views. Hitchens believed this guff. Jesus is real people.




Whether he existed or didn’t is moot. The likelihood of a Messianic preacher rabbi with the name Yeshua existing at that time is high, there were probably loads that fit that description.

The real question is did one of them happen to be his own Dad and have the ability to turn a simple Chardonnay into a highly complex Pinot Noir and wander about on lakes!
[Edited 5/4/18 12:21pm]

The secret of walking on water is knowing where the rocks are, baba!
I may disagree with everything you say, but I will defend your right to say it.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 05/04/18 3:52pm

lust

avatar

NorthC said:

lust said:




Whether he existed or didn’t is moot. The likelihood of a Messianic preacher rabbi with the name Yeshua existing at that time is high, there were probably loads that fit that description.

The real question is did one of them happen to be his own Dad and have the ability to turn a simple Chardonnay into a highly complex Pinot Noir and wander about on lakes!
[Edited 5/4/18 12:21pm]

The secret of walking on water is knowing where the rocks are, baba!

lol
If the milk turns out to be sour, I aint the kinda pussy to drink it!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 05/04/18 5:52pm

damosuzuki

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

He told this to Sam Harris. He said myths that Jesus never existed are fringe views. Hitchens believed this guff. Jesus is real people.

i listened to that interview as well (i love harris's podcast). i read ehrman's book 'did jesus exist' a few years back & found it incredibly interesting, perhaps more so as a primer for how historians use various techniques to filter through information to assess likelihoods of events occuring than anything specific to do with jesus or religion.

i also agree with with lust said.

[Edited 5/4/18 19:14pm]

"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little."

http://www.thelifeyoucansave.com/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 05/04/18 6:13pm

damosuzuki

avatar

while you only focused on the discussion of whether jesus existed, there were many other things brought up during their nearly 2hr conversation, including contradictions in the bible, the questionable ethics of the crucifixion story, the nature of heaven hell, end time prophecies, etc.


i think the interview is pretty great, & worth hearing.

[Edited 5/4/18 18:15pm]

"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little."

http://www.thelifeyoucansave.com/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 05/04/18 7:12pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

I'm sure there was a Jesus. Why not?

Having said that, I take an email I receive TODAY with a grain of salt, much less second or third or fourth hand anonymous hearsay written years or decades or centuries after such supposed events. No security cam footage, it never happened. lol

Crooked Donnie. Lock him up!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 05/05/18 7:27am

Graycap23

avatar

So did the tooth fairy.

Yes....I'm in a Cult. We brainwash people into THINKING ............4 Themselves. FAMILIAR BONDAGE OVER FOREIGN FREEDOM
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 05/05/18 2:57pm

toejam

avatar

It's a good listen, this episode.

Hitchens did think there was a Historical Jesus, whom he once described as "some deluded Rabbi". He wasn't a mythicist, though he wasn't as certain of Jesus's historical existence as Ehrman. It is simply wrong to say that Hitchens believed mythicist "guff".

2freaky, what are your thoughts on Ehrman's view of Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher who thought the end was to occur within his generation?

.
[Edited 5/5/18 15:01pm]
Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 05/05/18 5:38pm

IanRG

toejam said:

It's a good listen, this episode. Hitchens did think there was a Historical Jesus, whom he once described as "some deluded Rabbi". He wasn't a mythicist, though he wasn't as certain of Jesus's historical existence as Ehrman. It is simply wrong to say that Hitchens believed mythicist "guff". 2freaky, what are your thoughts on Ehrman's view of Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher who thought the end was to occur within his generation? . [Edited 5/5/18 15:01pm]

.

Agreed, Hitchens largely kept out of this argument stating a number of times that it was irrelevant. He said we have his teachings and he probably existed and then used this to more on whether that teaching was worth following.

.

The topic is not what was Jesus, it is was there a Jesus at all - you have tried to take over so many, many threads to make them about your pet topic. Seriously, Scott, you don't have to make virtually every thread you visit in P&R to be about was Jesus the Son of God - We get it, this is contrary to your beliefs. The topic is about the conflict between the popularist atheists where some say he did not exist at all and other's say he probably did.

[Edited 5/5/18 18:25pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 05/05/18 6:53pm

toejam

avatar

^It is up to 2freaky as to whether or not my question to him was on or off-topic. You are not a moderator. As far as I can see, it is entirely within fair boundaries of on-topic.

.

[Edited 5/5/18 18:56pm]

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 05/05/18 7:04pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

Lovebirds Ian and Toejam. Some things never change. lol

Crooked Donnie. Lock him up!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 05/05/18 7:30pm

IanRG

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Lovebirds Ian and Toejam. Some things never change. lol

.

If it was only the 50th time toejam had asked this same question. <img src=" />

.

I am very willing to discuss the disagreement between popularist atheists on the existance of Jesus as a man, but other than a reference to the tooth fairy, no one is discussing this disagreement. I assume, therefore, there is general agreement here that Jesus, the man, probably existed?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 05/05/18 7:33pm

toejam

avatar

^Ian's a troll. Harris and Ehrman discuss the topic of Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher, and the failed imminent expectation of an apocalypse / Jesus' return by the earliest Christians at some length in the podcast. For Ian to protest that my question to 2freaky is off-topic is simply silly.

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 05/05/18 7:36pm

IanRG

toejam said:

^It is up to 2freaky as to whether or not my question to him was on or off-topic. You are not a moderator. As far as I can see, it is entirely within fair boundaries of on-topic.

.

[Edited 5/5/18 18:56pm]

.

As far as you can see, the same question always is on topic.

.

Whether or not this forum continues to exist is up for debate and one of the reasons is every single relgious thread get derailed by people making it about whether God exists as Christians understand it - regardless of the actual discussion.

.

The actual discussion is whether Jesus as a man existed. Here I agree with Ehrman, Hitchens and you that it is reasonable to assume the Jesus as a man existed in history. This has nothing to do with whether he was just a man or something more.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 05/05/18 7:40pm

toejam

avatar

^Again, you are not a moderator. So stop trolling. It's up to 2freaky as to whether he wants to answer my question or whether he deems it "off topic".

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 05/05/18 7:45pm

IanRG

toejam said:

^Ian's a troll. Harris and Ehrman discuss the topic of Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher, and the failed imminent expectation of an apocalypse / Jesus' return by the earliest Christians at some length in the podcast. For Ian to protest that my question to 2freaky is off-topic is simply silly.

.

This is false accusation that demonstrates you don't know what a troll is.

.

A troll is a person who seeks to get others to post by deliberately provoking them - the troll's primary purpose is the enjoyment of making every thread into an argument - kind of like when people just make every thread they can about the very same question.

.

The last two times you falsely accused of being a troll was when you were publicly supporting a self confessed cyber bully who was attacking me here, in org notes and in the real world. In matters like this, your judgement is questionable.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 05/05/18 7:50pm

toejam

avatar

^Now you're off topic. Like I said, it's up to 2freaky as to whether he wants to answer my question and whether he deems it on or off topic.
Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 05/05/18 8:07pm

IanRG

IanRG said:

.

This is false accusation that demonstrates you don't know what a troll is.

.

A troll is a person who seeks to get others to post by deliberately provoking them - the troll's primary purpose is the enjoyment of making every thread into an argument - kind of like when people just make every thread they can about the very same question.

.

The last two times you falsely accused of being a troll was when you were publicly supporting a self confessed cyber bully who was attacking me here, in org notes and in the real world. In matters like this, your judgement is questionable.

.

toejam said:

^Now you're off topic. Like I said, it's up to 2freaky as to whether he wants to answer my question and whether he deems it on or off topic.

.

We actually agree on this topic - we both agree that it is reasonable to assume that Jesus, the man, historically did exist. We both reject the fringe view that Jesus did not exist. We both agree that Hitchens was less strong than Ehrman but he was also on our side.

.

Why are you seeking to make this into an argument?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 05/06/18 10:27am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Ehrman is seeing too much into the Bible. He mentions the Jesus Seminar than says Jesus was apocalyptic. Jesus just said he would come back and he did, when he appeared in the Upper room and next week will rise to heaven. The writer of the text put too much excess into it.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 05/06/18 10:28am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

NT Wright is more conservative on the Bible but he says Jesus meant one day the earth and heaven will be one. We just do not know when. Time is flued with God.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 05/06/18 1:37pm

IanRG

2freaky4church1 said:

Ehrman is seeing too much into the Bible. He mentions the Jesus Seminar than says Jesus was apocalyptic. Jesus just said he would come back and he did, when he appeared in the Upper room and next week will rise to heaven. The writer of the text put too much excess into it.

.

The irony is Ehrman does what he does because of his personal rejection of fundmentalism, yet he remains so fundamentalist in how he does it. He was a normal Christian until he got a fundamentalist girlfriend. He lost his faith when he started to analyse the Bible from a purely fundamentalist point of view. However, he only lost his faith in God: He has made his career on still taking the Bible the way a Fundamentalist does or more so.

.

There is no one as Fundamentalist about the Bible than an atheist seeking support for their beliefs. They leap on anything without ever seeking to make any sense out it because they want to find it nonsense. They will grab a word or a phrase and analyse that to death to find a flaw rather than looking the section and seeking to understand it as a whole.

.

This is the source of the conflict between "Jesus never existed" and "The Historical Jesus probably existed" atheists. Note the use of the "H" in Historical here and in toejam's post - this is because the latter (the Jesus Seminar, their precessors and those that followed them) are not talking history, they are talking a deliberate campaign to take the Son of God out of the man and replace him with the Historical Jesus - a human anywhere between a deluded monk and militant radical depending on the author's spin. This puts them in conflict with the "Jesus never existed" group because this group wants to find the whole thing is just completely made up, even the person. At least the Historical Jesus group demonstrate a better understanding of history.

[Edited 5/6/18 14:18pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 05/06/18 5:02pm

toejam

avatar

IanRG said:

[Ehrman] lost his faith when he started to analyse the Bible from a purely fundamentalist point of view

.

^That's all backward. Ehrman didn't lose his faith due to finding discrepancies in the Bible. He states explicitly in the podcast that he remained a liberal Christian for many years after losing his fundamentalism in his early 20s. What finally did it for him was the problem of suffering - not his rejection of Biblical fundamentalism.

[Edited 5/6/18 17:06pm]

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 05/06/18 7:41pm

IanRG

toejam said:

IanRG said:

.

The irony is Ehrman does what he does because of his personal rejection of fundmentalism, yet he remains so fundamentalist in how he does it. He was a normal Christian until he got a fundamentalist girlfriend. He lost his faith when he started to analyse the Bible from a purely fundamentalist point of view. However, he only lost his faith in God: He has made his career on still taking the Bible the way a Fundamentalist does or more so.

.

There is no one as Fundamentalist about the Bible than an atheist seeking support for their beliefs. They leap on anything without ever seeking to make any sense out it because they want to find it nonsense. They will grab a word or a phrase and analyse that to death to find a flaw rather than looking the section and seeking to understand it as a whole.

.

This is the source of the conflict between "Jesus never existed" and "The Historical Jesus probably existed" atheists. Note the use of the "H" in Historical here and in toejam's post - this is because the latter (the Jesus Seminar, their precessors and those that followed them) are not talking history, they are talking a deliberate campaign to take the Son of God out of the man and replace him with the Historical Jesus - a human anywhere between a deluded monk and militant radical depending on the author's spin. This puts them in conflict with the "Jesus never existed" group because this group wants to find the whole thing is just completely made up, even the person. At least the Historical Jesus group demonstrate a better understanding of history.

.

^That's all backward. Ehrman didn't lose his faith due to finding discrepancies in the Bible. He states explicitly in the podcast that he remained a liberal Christian for many years after losing his fundamentalism in his early 20s. What finally did it for him was the problem of suffering - not his rejection of Biblical fundamentalism.

[Edited 5/6/18 17:06pm]

.

It is not all backwards, it is from his explanation in his books.

.

From his own words: He had a weak faith as normal Christian, he developed a strong faith as a fundamentalist as a result of his girlfriend of the day being one but started to question his faith whilst he was a fundamentalist as a result of his studies into their beliefs - He states this, not me. Sure, on his way to becoming an atheist, he was briefly a more liberal Christian but continued to struggle with suffering and unanswered prayers.

.

None of this changes what I said, it just broadens and clarifies his path to atheism. He still is, ironically, more fundamentalist than most fundamentalist - and in the wrong way because he seeks to find misunderstandings to justify his lack of belief.

.

I have broken my rule to not respond to you unless you address the whole of my replies because you constantly take part of sentence and only address that. If you do not address the whole post, I will not respond.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 05/07/18 10:53am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Jesus suffered on the cross. Why do Atheists miss this?

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 05/07/18 11:38am

NorthC

He is not the only one who suffered on a cross.
I may disagree with everything you say, but I will defend your right to say it.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 05/07/18 12:18pm

Empress

lust said:

2freaky4church1 said:

He told this to Sam Harris. He said myths that Jesus never existed are fringe views. Hitchens believed this guff. Jesus is real people.

Whether he existed or didn’t is moot. The likelihood of a Messianic preacher rabbi with the name Yeshua existing at that time is high, there were probably loads that fit that description. The real question is did one of them happen to be his own Dad and have the ability to turn a simple Chardonnay into a highly complex Pinot Noir and wander about on lakes! [Edited 5/4/18 12:21pm]

This!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 05/07/18 1:54pm

toejam

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

Jesus suffered on the cross. Why do Atheists miss this?

.

Do we? Of course the historical Jesus almost certainly suffered on the cross.

Toejam @ Peach & Black Podcast: http://peachandblack.podbean.com
Toejam's band "Cheap Fakes": http://cheapfakes.com.au, http://www.facebook.com/cheapfakes
Toejam the solo artist: http://www.youtube.com/scottbignell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Atheist Bible expert Bart Ehrman: Jesus did exist!