Search Results for: Messiah

Two Adams, Human-Divine Mediators and Angels, and a Very Different View of Early Judaism

The point of this post is to highlight, with reference to the sources, some of the less widely known beliefs among Jews around the time Christianity was emerging, and that would seem to have some resonances among Christian ideas we find in Paul and other early letters and gospels. The Jewish world from which Christianity … Continue reading “Two Adams, Human-Divine Mediators and Angels, and a Very Different View of Early Judaism”

Seed of David, born of woman, and mythicism

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”

The Real Jesus Challenge, Bart Erhman, and Nazareth

The Real Jesus Challenge “I think it is historically virtually certain that Jesus existed.”—Bart D. Ehrman See René Salm’s Reply to Bart Erhman on Nazareth and The Real Jesus Challenge Award. This is an excerpt from the American Freethought podcast with Bart Ehrman, hosted by John C. Snider. Professor Ehrman’s remarks have led to the … Continue reading “The Real Jesus Challenge, Bart Erhman, and Nazareth”

Do mythicists rely on arguments from silence and too many assumptions?

No. This is another common charge against arguments that Jesus was mythical, and it likewise seems to be circulated among those who show little evidence of having read much in the way of mythicist publications. (I am responding here to remarks made in a comment to McGrath’s post, Why I find mythicism disturbing, since the … Continue reading “Do mythicists rely on arguments from silence and too many assumptions?”

Do mythicists read Paul’s references to Jesus’ humanity as interpolations or metaphors?

No. (But historicists do argue for interpolations and interpret contrary evidence metaphorically.) This is another misinformed assertion advanced by some who appear never to have read mythicist publications. I most recently noticed it in a response to another post by James McGrath complaining that mythicists do or don’t do or argue this and that, and … Continue reading “Do mythicists read Paul’s references to Jesus’ humanity as interpolations or metaphors?”

Jesus was no physician

Jesus’ miracles of healing in the Gospels are often taken as evidence that the historical Jesus himself was a healer. Studies have accordingly been undertaken into ancient healing practices. The associations between ‘medicine’ and ‘charms’, the physical and the supernatural, is well-documented. We have books about Jesus titled “Jesus the Healer” and “Jesus the Magician”. … Continue reading “Jesus was no physician”

Baptism of Jesus is not bedrock fact. It is entirely creative literature.

The baptism of Jesus by John in the Gospel of Mark is stitched together with images from Old Testament passages, and serves the particular theological agenda of Mark that was challenged by later evangelists So, if a passage in the Gospels can be shown to serve a theological agenda of an evangelist, then according to … Continue reading “Baptism of Jesus is not bedrock fact. It is entirely creative literature.”

Mark: failed geography, but great bible student

Much has been said about Mark’s poor knowledge of the geography of Palestine. A classic case is his bizarre itinerary for Jesus leaving Tyre to go north, then south-east, then back east again, to reach is final destination. On the map here, locate Tyre, run your finger north to Sidon, then let it wander to … Continue reading “Mark: failed geography, but great bible student”

Some reasons to favour a “mythical Jesus” over a “historical Jesus”

The various historical Jesus explanations for Christian origins are without analogy, are highly improbable, and rely on filling in gaps with “something unknown” or “something we don’t understand”. How plausible is it, after all, that all of the following somehow come together in a coherent “explanation”: Jews scarcely believing Jesus was nothing more than a … Continue reading “Some reasons to favour a “mythical Jesus” over a “historical Jesus””

“According to the flesh” — Doherty’s mythicist argument

But it’s not that Earl advocates lunacy in a manner devoid of learning. He advocates a position that is well argued based on the evidence and even shows substantial knowledge of Greek. But it cannot be true, you say. Why not? Because it simply can’t be and we shouldn’t listen to what can’t be true. … Continue reading ““According to the flesh” — Doherty’s mythicist argument”

How Philo might have understood Christ in the NT epistles

Philo was a Jewish philosopher in Egypt who died around 50 ce. Much of his literary work was an attempt to explain Jewish beliefs in the language of Greek (or Hellenistic) philosophers. Curiously (for us at least) he spoke of “a second God” who was a manifestation of “the High God”. This second God was … Continue reading “How Philo might have understood Christ in the NT epistles”

The Dishonesty of a “Scholarly” Review of Robert Price

Associate Professor of Religion at Butler University, and professing Christian, James McGrath, has written in his review of Price’s chapter, “Jesus at the Vanishing Point”, in The Historical Jesus: Five Views, the following: Crossan rightly highlights that Price’s statement that he will simply skip the matter of the Testimonium Flavianum is “not an acceptable scholarly argument as far … Continue reading “The Dishonesty of a “Scholarly” Review of Robert Price”

Reviewing McGrath’s review of Robert Price on mythicism (2)

This continues my previous post in which I began discussing McGrath’s “review” of Price’s arguments for mythicism, although as I pointed out there, “review” must remain in quotation marks because McGrath simply writes a lot without actually addressing Price’s arguments! In my previous post I remarked on the ignorance of the oft-repeated claim that there … Continue reading “Reviewing McGrath’s review of Robert Price on mythicism (2)”

Observations on McGrath’s “Review” of Robert Price on Mythicism

I place “review” in quotation marks because Associate Professor of Religion of Butler University James McGrath simply avoids addressing Dr Robert Price’s arguments. I used to think McGrath was not very bright, but I have recently come to understand that he is as subtle and smart as a serpent when it comes to those twisting … Continue reading “Observations on McGrath’s “Review” of Robert Price on Mythicism”