Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
[A]ll we need for the case for the historicity of Jesus to be solid is some evidence that weighs strongly in favor of his historicity. And we have it, and so in theory, mythicism should simply vanish. But as with all forms of denialism, it will persist regardless of the evidence. — McGrath, Jesus Mythicism: … Continue reading “That one piece of solid evidence that weighs strongly in favour of historicity…..”
Without citing any instances to support his claim, Bart Ehrman charged “mythicists” as sometimes guilty of dishonestly quote-mining Albert Schweitzer to make it sound as if Schweitzer supported the view that Jesus was not a historical person. Ehrman’s unsubstantiated allegation has been repeated by Cornelis Hoogerwerf on his blog (without any acknowledgement to Ehrman); Jona … Continue reading “Albert Schweitzer on the Christ Myth Debate”
The following is a write up from notes I took at the time of my first listening to the debate supplemented by a second listening earlier today. So there will be more detail than in with my summary of Ehrman’s opener. If anyone thinks I have been unfair to Ehrman then let me know and … Continue reading “Ehrman-Price Debate #2: Price’s Opening Address”
No doubt there will be to-and-fro on “the brother of the Lord” passage in Galatians 1:19. I would love to see any such discussion go beyond the face-value interpretation of the words and to explore both the provenance and nature of the source containing that line. That is, some serious discussion of the historical evidence … Continue reading “Price-Ehrman Debate Wish”
There is no need for any argument to prove Jesus existed. In Galatians 1:19 Paul says he met Jesus’s brother so of course Jesus existed. What need is there for any further discussion? That’s how the case for the historicity of Jesus goes. But some would say that I’m being unfair. Paul also says in … Continue reading “How Many Bible Verses Does It Take to Prove Jesus Existed?”
James McGrath’s review of Maurice Casey’s Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths? has appeared in RBL. Casey’s work is a diatribe against persons who have been associated with the Christ Myth arguments (even though some of them do not argue a mythicist case themselves), and against a selection of what he asserts (often inaccurately) are their … Continue reading “The Casey-McGrath Profiles of Mythicists and Mythicism”
Here is my response to the six point and 500 word Jesus Challenge issued by Ben Goren. I copy his specific challenge questions and respond in blue font beneath each one. 1. Start with a clear, concise, unambiguous definition of who Jesus was. Do the Gospels offer a good biography of him? Was he some random … Continue reading “Taking Up Ben Goren’s Jesus Challenge”
Good old reliable Professor James McGrath and a few of his peers*, blissfully unaware of some of the highly respected names both within and outside New Testament scholarship who have happened to be bold enough to declare their maverick suspicions that there was no historical Jesus, make it clear that if you come out as … Continue reading ““It is absurd to suggest. . . . ” (A rare bird among the anti-mythicists)”
* The Brother of the Lord . COVERED IN THIS POST: brother of the Lord the meaning of “brother” in the epistles brethren of a sect? plain meanings apologist objections: who is “the Lord”? battle of the prepositions question begging as methodology why not “brother of Jesus”? or “brothers of Jesus”? separating Cephas and James … Continue reading “20. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Part 20”
“You aren’t allowed to make up your own facts.” That’s a brilliant piece of wisdom that is lost on many of us from time to time because a certain familiarity with habitual ways of thinking prevents us from seeing that we sometimes really do just make up our own facts — or at least just … Continue reading “The fallacy that invalidates historical Jesus studies, conspiracy theories and creationism”
James McGrath has ridiculed any reference to an argument for interpolation if there is no manuscript evidence for it. But this simply avoids addressing the actual arguments that are sometimes advanced for an interpolation. By avoiding the arguments he sophistically reasons that if there is a claim for interpolation then he is equally free to … Continue reading “A Case for Interpolation Does NOT Rely On Manuscript Evidence”
Just two points from James D. G. Dunn’s response to Robert M. Price’s chapter, “Jesus at the Vanishing Point”, in The Historical Jesus: Five Views are addressed here. Maybe will address more over time in other posts. Dunn’s responses are lazy and insulting dismissals of Price’s arguments, not rebuttals based on logic or evidence, as … Continue reading “Historical Jesus: two vacuous responses from Dunn on Price”
I have been recently addressing some common misconceptions about mythicist arguments. Another one is that “mythicism” places strained interpretations on passages that refer to Jesus as “the seed of David” and as being “born of a woman.” This post does not explore all the ins and outs of the arguments, but briefly points to what … Continue reading “Seed of David, born of woman, and mythicism”
Following is a silly post, one of the silliest I have ever written. Maybe the silliest. Its only point is to foolishly respond to baseless and ignorant slurs written and spoken by Associate Professor James McGrath against people who argue Jesus was a mythical or legendary figure, not a real historical one. I do not … Continue reading ““Creationist” slurs have no place in an honest mythicist-historicist debate”