The "Reliability" Of Bible Scholars

[SoldierofFortune]

Correct, though I believe in his G-d, even if Muhammad was forgotten, his G-d would remain ;-)  His G-d is my G-d, is Jesus' G-d ;-)

Don't count Islam out, even if marginalized.  A great tree starts from a single seed.

U mention of Abrahamic religions: Respectively: Judaism, Cristianism, Muhammedism: A great treenity.

Sorry, i am so very sensitive to alliterations, rhyming, implying innuendo, embedded meaning, etc. :D

[Jagella]

How can you prove a human Jesus didn't exist?

The inability to prove a person didn't exist is perhaps mytyicism's greatest weakness. At best the mythicists can cast doubt on the historicity of Jesus, but as far as the faithful are concerned, no doubt can overcome their faith in their ticket to paradise.

[Baruch]

U mention of Abrahamic religions: Respectively: Judaism, Cristianism, Muhammedism: A great treenity.

Sorry, i am so very sensitive to alliterations, rhyming, implying innuendo, embedded meaning, etc. :D

Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism are equally great.  There is only one true inspiration, in many voices.

[Baruch]

The inability to prove a person didn't exist is perhaps mytyicism's greatest weakness. At best the mythicists can cast doubt on the historicity of Jesus, but as far as the faithful are concerned, no doubt can overcome their faith in their ticket to paradise.

I have a US silver dollar, from the administration of George Washington, it is real.  But I can't use that to prove that George Washington was real.  The question isn't proof, but self confidence.  If you believe that Jesus existed, then go with that.  If not, then go with that.  You are the judge, we all are.  But the meter stick you use on others, will be be used to measure you.

[Mike Cl]

The inability to prove a person didn't exist is perhaps mytyicism's greatest weakness. At best the mythicists can cast doubt on the historicity of Jesus, but as far as the faithful are concerned, no doubt can overcome their faith in their ticket to paradise.

the problem with trying to use reason and thinking to prove anything to a theist is that they don't reason or think critically; they have their belief/faith which is emotional.  Reason does not work on them.  And I think it is possible to prove Jesus (of the christian faith) did not exist by the total lack of any evidence that he did.  For far too long, the christian religion has had a free ride in that they have been allowed to proclaim Jesus existed without the need to produce credible proof.  More and more they are being asked to produce credible proof of his existence and have come up short.  Why?  Because there isn't any proof that he did exist--except for the bogus data that said he did.

[Jagella]

I have a US silver dollar, from the administration of George Washington, it is real.  But I can't use that to prove that George Washington was real.  The question isn't proof, but self confidence.  If you believe that Jesus existed, then go with that.  If not, then go with that.  You are the judge, we all are.  But the meter stick you use on others, will be be used to measure you.

The issue of coinage has been brought up regarding the existence of Jesus. Some mythicists argue that there are no known coins with the image of Jesus on them. Coins with his image from the early first century would be evidence for Jesus, of course, but I see no reason to expect such coins. Jewish preachers from Galilee were never to my knowledge so important that the Romans would place those preachers' images on coins.

[Jagella]

the problem with trying to use reason and thinking to prove anything to a theist is that they don't reason or think critically; they have their belief/faith which is emotional.  Reason does not work on them.  And I think it is possible to prove Jesus (of the christian faith) did not exist by the total lack of any evidence that he did.  For far too long, the christian religion has had a free ride in that they have been allowed to proclaim Jesus existed without the need to produce credible proof.  More and more they are being asked to produce credible proof of his existence and have come up short.  Why?  Because there isn't any proof that he did exist--except for the bogus data that said he did.

One of the biggest bones of contention between mythicists and real-Jesus apologists is the issue of what evidence we should expect for Jesus. Some scholars explain away the dearth of evidence for Jesus as what we could expect for a Galilean preacher. Jesus was "small time," they say, so people like Philo would not have noticed him. If these scholars are correct, then clearly the gospels lie about Jesus making him out to have been very famous. In any case, it seems to me that many people have "pared down" Jesus to make his historicity more plausible. But why strive so hard to make him real?

[Mike Cl]

One of the biggest bones of contention between mythicists and real-Jesus apologists is the issue of what evidence we should expect for Jesus. Some scholars explain away the dearth of evidence for Jesus as what we could expect for a Galilean preacher. Jesus was "small time," they say, so people like Philo would not have noticed him. If these scholars are correct, then clearly the gospels lie about Jesus making him out to have been very famous. In any case, it seems to me that many people have "pared down" Jesus to make his historicity more plausible. But why strive so hard to make him real?

Because he is a money maker and a power broker of the highest order!  The bible does not claim he is a backward, country preacher.  Wise-men came to see him born; a unique star appeared, as well.  He was super smart, walked on water, turned water to wine, brought the dead to life, cast curses on pigs, wandered all over the land making deep impressions on all who was near him, cured blindness and sickness, and on and on.  The world became darkened at his death and the earth stood still.  And nobody at the time saw fit to mention it?????  There was not a lack of writers at that time, and they would have at least mentioned stuff like that--especially one like Philo who traveled that area of the world extensively and wrote tons of stuff.  If a man had done all of that stuff, and more, all the writers would have told of it.  That lack of evidence speaks very loudly to me.  Clearly, he is a retrofitted godling made into the image of those who shaped him for them to use to gather power and money.  And it worked, didn't it?

[Jagella]

Because he is a money maker and a power broker of the highest order!

If Jesus existed, then to him it would be the greatest irony that his preaching poverty has led to so much greed. Yes, you can get very rich on Jesus, and many do get rich that way.

The bible does not claim he is a backward, country preacher.  Wise-men came to see him born; a unique star appeared, as well.  He was super smart, walked on water, turned water to wine, brought the dead to life, cast curses on pigs, wandered all over the land making deep impressions on all who was near him, cured blindness and sickness, and on and on.  The world became darkened at his death and the earth stood still.  And nobody at the time saw fit to mention it?????

To make Jesus seem real, many scholars have cut out those details. What's left, they call the "historical Jesus." If we reduce Superman to Clark Kent, would we then have a historical Superman?

There was not a lack of writers at that time, and they would have at least mentioned stuff like that--especially one like Philo who traveled that area of the world extensively and wrote tons of stuff.  If a man had done all of that stuff, and more, all the writers would have told of it.  That lack of evidence speaks very loudly to me.

Some say that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That's not always true. As you suggest, we should expect evidence for Jesus from the time he supposedly lived. Since we have no such evidence, we do have a problem with his historicity.

Clearly, he is a retrofitted godling made into the image of those who shaped him for them to use to gather power and money.  And it worked, didn't it?

Yes. Did you ever notice how rare it is for a preacher to condemn the sin of greed? Jesus criticized the Pharisees for their alleged hypocrisy, but Jesus failed to rid the world of hypocrisy himself.

[aitm]

The babble has a whole book dedicated to how to pay the priests. If ever there was a neon light, this is it, and yet....some are blind to the light.

[Jagella]

The babble has a whole book dedicated to how to pay the priests. If ever there was a neon light, this is it, and yet....some are blind to the light.

What is "the babble" and what is the name of the book?

I don't think I need to read it, though. i already know how to pay the priests. I don't pay them.

[aitm]

What is "the babble" and what is the name of the book?

I don't think I need to read though.

Question answered.

[Cassia]

I once had a debate with a self proclaimed Christian Bible scholar on whether the Creation "Museum" is a museum at all. His "scholarship" was pathetic. He insisted that the 'Arc Encounter' is full of 'artifacts'. I am sure that there are much better faithful Bible scholars that that guy, but faith can only cloud up real scholarship IMHO.

[Jagella]

I once had a debate with a self proclaimed Christian Bible scholar on whether the Creation "Museum" is a museum at all. His "scholarship" was pathetic. He insisted that the 'Arc Encounter' is full of 'artifacts'. I am sure that there are much better faithful Bible scholars that that guy, but faith can only cloud up real scholarship IMHO.

I'd recommend Hector Avalos' book, The End of Biblical Studies. He does a great job of exposing modern Biblical scholarship as a front for and as a "liberal Christian apologetic." He should know because he's a Bible scholar himself who is blowing the whistle on his peers. So the person you mention is not so unusual among Bible scholars. They are very poor in their use of logic skewing their work in favor of liberal Christianity.

[SGOS]

I sometimes if "scholarship" deserves to be in the same sentence with "Bible."  Are there any renowned MAD Magazine scholars?