Bart Ehrman & Jesus, Interrupted

[WarK]

 

[SpecialFrog]

Only slightly related but there appears to be an attempt to get a Bart Ehrman / Robert Price debate happening:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1202932161/did-jesus-exist-bart-ehrman-and-robert-price-debat

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Only slightly related but there appears to be an attempt to get a Bart Ehrman / Robert Price debate happening:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1202932161/did-jesus-exist-bart-ehrman-and-robert-price-debat

:lol:

I would love to see that. I love Robert Price. He is one of my four trusted sources when it comes to biblical studies and/or biblical history. Ehrman is one of the four as well.

 

[WarK]

Only slightly related but there appears to be an attempt to get a Bart Ehrman / Robert Price debate happening:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1202932161/did-jesus-exist-bart-ehrman-and-robert-price-debat

:lol:

I would love to see that. I love Robert Price. He is one of my four trusted sources when it comes to biblical studies and/or biblical history. Ehrman is one of the four as well.

Oh come on, give as the other two, will you?

edit:
I found another interesting video:

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Oh come on, give as the other two, will you?

I am sure you already know one of them, it is Richard Carrier. The last (and personal favorite) is Hector Avalos. To be honest, I cannot wait until Avalos takes on the Historicity question of Jesus, because there is no one I trust more when it comes to biblical history/studies.

 

[Collecemall]

After reading a handful of books now I difinetly think the myth position is at least as plausibe and likely probable. The book Ehrman did doesn't hold a candle to the depth and arguments that are laid out by Carrier, Dougherty, and Price. The rebutal book Dougherty did (as well as the one they all did together) just made Ehrman look sloppy. Which is odd because I've never thought his other works to be that way. In this case he tended to argue from authority rather than actually showing an argument. When he wasn't doing that he just plain did not address the positions of the myth theory that are held by Carrier, Price, Dougherty, etc. or even when he tried to (such as with interpolations) he just waved them away as wishfull thinking on the part of those who hold the myth position. I don't think it's necessary to make the argument but it's also not nearly as crazy as I thought it would be when I set out to read these books. If we were talking about any figure other than Jesus we'd already have accepted that we don't know and that either could be the case.

 

[WarK]

Argument against mythisists that Ehrman gave in the first vid I linked seemed really weak to me. His argument was basically "but why would anyone make this up?"

There's a first part to the second vid I linked:

They mention Ehrman in that vid.

 

[SpecialFrog]

Yeah, I find the responses to the mythicist arguments to be one of the more compelling reasons to think mythicism might be correct.

 

[Laurens]

Yeah, I find the responses to the mythicist arguments to be one of the more compelling reasons to think mythicism might be correct.

I agree. Ehrman's attempts at rebutting mythicism are laughable

He sounds like a fundamentalist in a lot of his arguments and subsequent back tracking. It's a shame to see, because I've loved his books.