Did Jesus Exist

R

RJM

God Feeds the Ravens
Veteran Member
Messages
12,243
Reaction score
4,190
Points
108
25 min
Fair and open Imo, although as a believer in the Incarnation, I obviously disagree with the conclusion.

These scholarly videos make it so much easier to grasp the essentials than reading hundreds of pages of writing

 
Last edited:
I really enjoyed the Ehrman vs Price debate on this same topic, if it's alright for me to post that here.
 
Thanks. Saved to watch later.
Interesting that Josephus's reference, once discounted as a fabrication, now seems to be accepted as essentially valid, but with some later outside additions, that are easily recognised and separated from Josephus's original text?
 
I find that there is a scholarly consensus that Jesus did actually exist, and most of them consider that
he was a born a Jew, raised as a Jew, and was involved with the Jewish community in the first century.

..so the divergence in views occurs at the point of his arrest. :)
 
muhammad_isa said:
I find that there is a scholarly consensus that Jesus did actually exist, and most of them consider that
he was a born a Jew, raised as a Jew, and was involved with the Jewish community in the first century.

..so the divergence in views occurs at the point of his arrest. :)
Click to expand...
In this regard there is the standard Christian belief, the standard Muslim belief....a Jewish belief...

But when it comes to the scholars in each religion there exists debate... And when it comes to outside the Abrahamic we will find all sorts of discussion.

I think a man existed. I think he had a following. I think the experiences, stories, and words of other men may have influenced those who have written about him...words that many take as "gospel".

But I should watch the video!
 
Ella S. said:
I really enjoyed the Ehrman vs Price debate on this same topic, if it's alright for me to post that here.
Click to expand...
Bart Ehrman's intro is really powerful! Nuff said, lol. I didn't listen to the whole debate. I don't think anyone can argue with what he says, especially as he has no axe to grind -- not being a 'believer' himself. Thanks for posting it
 
Last edited:
Well if he didn't, there's a quite a few folk that have been misled over the years and as a result the world would need to have a rethink.

Anyone for Peteristianity or Paulistian teachings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
wil said:
Anyone for Peteristianity or Paulistian teachings.
Click to expand...
I think I'd go for Paulianity, although he's a bit like yourself (from your description, a bit of a grump) but he had vision.
 
Thomas said:
Yes, many do. My mum was never much of a fan ...
Click to expand...
Ehrman says in that debate that Paul only definitely wrote 7 of the 13 Pauline letters, so it may also be a question of what Paul actually did say?
 
RJM Corbet said:
Ehrman says in that debate that Paul only definitely wrote 7 of the 13 Pauline letters, so it may also be a question of what Paul actually did say?
Click to expand...
Yep. But then you look at the theology. The disputed letters are Pauline in influence, the way the Johnnanine letters are not by John, but you couldn't put them in with the disputed Pauline epistles, the theology doesn't fit.
 
Thomas said:
Yep. But then you look at the theology. The disputed letters are Pauline in influence, the way the Johnnanine letters are not by John, but you couldn't put them in with the disputed Pauline epistles, the theology doesn't fit.
Click to expand...
Can you list the disputed ones? I've always known that some of them -- the Timothy letters and others are disputed -- but I'm not clear which?
 
RJM Corbet said:
Can you list the disputed ones? I've always known that some of them -- the Timothy letters and others are disputed -- but I'm not clear which?
Click to expand...
Quick wiki

Most scholars agree that Paul actually wrote seven of the Pauline epistles (Galatians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philemon, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians), but that three of the epistles in Paul's name are pseudepigraphic (First Timothy, Second Timothy, and Titus[2]) and that three other epistles are of questionable authorship (Second Thessalonians, Ephesians and Colossians)
 
When I was doing my degree, we had a student who was convinced Paul wrote the Letter to the Hebrews (as a kid in Church it was always 'St Paul's letter to', can't remember when that was dropped.

Every tutor said no, he didn't, but the guy dug his heels in and would not be moved.

If your into Christian metaphysics, Christian Gnosis, then the Letter to the Colossians is always close at hand:

The Hymn of Colossians (1:15-20):

(First verse)
He who is the image of the invisible God,
Firstborn before all creation,
because in Him all things were created —
things in heaven and things on earth,
things visible and invisible,
whether thrones or dominions,
whether principalities or powers —​
they have all been created through Him and for Him

(Link)
He indeed is before all things,
and they all cohere in Him;​
He is also the head of the body, the church

(Second verse)
He is the beginning,
Firstborn from the dead,
that He might be preeminent in all things,​
because in Him it was decreed that all the fullness should
take up residence​
and that through Him, [God] should reconcile all things
to Himself,​
having made peace through the blood of His cross —
[through Him], whether those on earth or those in heaven
​
+++

Many scholars hold Colossians to be not by Paul's hand, but possibly an amanuensis, and date it as early as the 50s, as late as the 90s. So hold somewhere towards the beginning of that era, when Paul was in prison, as it has close ties with Philemon (authentically Paul) and Ephesians (which, like Colossians, is questioned).

Two things strike me, from the above –
The first is this is a classic statement from which all Christian metaphysics and theology can be unpicked. The first verse is Christ the Creator (Logos), the second is Christ the Redeemer.

The thing is, scholars see in the above verses a hymn of the early Church, and that the author knew and folded the hymn into the letter for the edification of the congregation at Colossae.
 
Ella S. said:
Click to expand...
@Ella S. I've Finished listening to this now. Thanks again. As Ehrman says, the mythicist argument seems intended to 'break' Christianity by showing that Jesus never existed, but can only really do so by rejecting all serious scholarship and -- as usual -- rejecting as interpolations whatever Pauline passages do not support the argument? Price rejects all the Pauline writing
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top