>>42847756
Don’t let the man that fooled himself drag you with him to the dens of hell. Practically a fallen angel.

>>42847842
So you believe?

I doubt you. If you would really have studied Christianity your entire life, you would have long been confronted with what Ehrman says. His positions are not the results of his own research, nor are they eccentric opinions. These are the consensus within the historical community.

>>42847940
Fuck off

Just pray and sing the songs every Sunday and do the prayers about how much of a disgusting sinner you are and yeah you feel like shit, and it's unnecessary but it's more than enough. Getting into the theology of it all is a waste of time. You have bills to pay bro.

File: IMG_1032.jpg (395 KB, 1206x1773)

395 KB JPG

>>42847756
It’s true in the sense that Jesus is an amalgamation of ancient seers/holy men. We all know they moved his birthday to saturnalia winter solstice
Resurrected in the spring just like the sun, what a surprise
Brett is great btw
Love his stuff. He’s always getting interviewed by this young girl who respects his work. I wonder if she calls him “Mesopotamian sky daddy myth”

>>42847756
Bart Ehrman?
Just wait until you find out about Bartholomew Simpson

>>42847756
Gnostic informant and myth vision do great interviews with him

>>42847756
>Eat my sandals

>>42848430
If you end up a Catholic priest, then I think the Church will pay your way.

>>42849910
Adam Green did a great podcast with Gnostic Informant recently
https://www.youtube.com/live/eF_3vEHKRV8

>>42850169
sweet

>>42847756
This faggot wrote a whole book shitting on mythicists.
It's impossible to know whether rabbi yeshua ben yosef lived or not, there's not enough historical evidence.

File: IMG_0483.jpg (370 KB, 960x1216)

370 KB JPG

>>42850620
100% of the evidence demonstrates that it’s a myth.

>picrel: the 3 marys

>>42848017
what exactly is incorrect about his work?

Our evidence for the historical Jesus could roughly be divided into non-Christian and Christian sources.

First let’s talk about the absence of evidence:

There is no physical or archaeological evidence tied to Jesus, nor do we have any written evidence directly linked to him.
But strictly speaking, we have no archaeological evidence for any upper-class Jew from the 20s CE either. Nor do we have more evidence for Pontius Pilate, who is a Roman aristocrat in charge of a major province, than we do for Jesus.

Okay, on to non-Christian references.

>Pliny the Younger, writing in 112 AD, letter 10, discusses the issue of Christians gathering together, illegally. He knows a few facts about early Christian practice, and so by the early second century we know that Christians exist and believe in a Christ figure.
>Suetonius,115 AD, in his Lives of the Caesars, discussing Claudius (41-54), mentions the deportations of Jews after riots “on the instigation fo Chrestus”. There is a possibility that he means a Jew named Chrestus, a not uncommon name, but more likely this is a common misspelling for Christus. At best, Suetonius supports that Christians were living in Rome in the 50s AD.
>Tacitus, in his Annales (15.44) written in 115, covers history from 14-68AD. He treats the fire in Rome under Nero in 64CE, and discusses Nero’s blaming of the Christians. He mentions “The author of this name, Christ, was put to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate, while Tiberius was emperor; but the dangerous superstition, htough suppressed for the moment, broke out again not only in Judea, the origin of this evil, but ieven in the city”
>So Tacitus claims that there were Christians in Rome in the 60s, that the sect originates in Judea, that they are named for a figure/founder ‘Christ’, and that Pontius Pilate executed him.

>>42851430
There are claims by mythicists that this passage in Tacitus is an interpolation, but there is no evidence for this and almost no serious classicist supports it.
Tacitus’ information is clearly second-hand, and he is incorrect in that Pilate was prefect, not procurator. At the same time, in those circumstances prefect and procurator were virtually equivalent

Jewish sources

>*Josephus * He’s a Jewish aristocrat and military leader. Lost in battle during the 66 uprising and ultimately surrendered to the Romans. He was later used as an interpreter during the siege of Jerusalem, then taken to Rome and where he became a writer of history.
>He makes 2 references to Jesus. 1 in Antiquities book 20, referring to the death of James, the brother of Jesus (Antiquities 20.9.1). The other passage is known as the Testimonium Flavianum, in Antiquities 18.3.3 This passage refers to Jesus as a miracle worker, a leader of Jews and Greeks, the Messiah, condemned by Pilate to the Cross, apperaring alive on the third day, and his followers continue until the present.

The major problem with this passage is that Josephus is a Jew, and shows no evidence of being a Christianity, and so this depiction is inconsistent with Jospehus. There are three possibilities – that the text is entirely made-up (the Mythicist position), that the text is entirely genuine (the hyper-conservative Christian position), that the text is original but altered (the position taken by most scholars). For my part, a less sensational version of the text with obviously Christian elements removed is more likely to be original.

>>42851434
Christian sources

We still need to treat these as historical documents, they are not more or less reliable because they are Christian.

>We have Mark, written around 70AD, then we have Matthew and Luke, based in large degree upon Mark, written probably in the 80-85 period. And yet Matthew and Luke share common material not found in Mark, which is typically referred to as Q (from quelle, German for ‘source’), besides material distinct to Matthew (M) and Luke (L), so you have in fact 4 likely documentary sources. Plus you have John written in the 90s AD, an independent source from the other canonical gospels.
>There are also non-canonical gospels written after John, some of which show independence from the canonical gospels. For example Thomas, dated to 110-120AD. Thomas is primarily a collection of sayings, it is not a narrative text. Similarly the fragmentary Gospel of Peter. Bart Ehrman also likes to highlight Papyrus Egerton 2 as a non-parallel independent account.
>There are many other gospels but most are significantly later, and show development of miraculous and legendary accounts, often disconnected to the earlier documents.

So, on Ehrman’s count, you have at least 7, maybe 8 early independent accounts about Jesus of Nazareth.

Furthermore, while no doubt that there is oral tradition behind these texts, there are almost certainly written sources. For example the Q material in Matthew and Luke is frequently identical, enough that you would suspect it was a written document, not merely oral material. Matthew and Luke almost certainly used other documentary sources, whether one or several, we simply don’t know.

Then you should factor in how you account for other early Christian literature, including the other NT documents, and documents written shortly after, for example Papias, quoted later in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, claims to have directly inquired about the apostles’ teaching, and so is about a 3rd generation source.

>>42851442
So, to conclude, there is a considerable amount of documentary evidence to support the supposition that Jesus existed as a historical human being. This write-up is drawn from my notes on introduction to historical Jesus studies. I’m happy to go on to discuss individual issues, primary documents, or provide a further bibliography for secondary reading.

Short Bibliography
Ehrman, Bart “Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth”
Crossan, John Dominic, “The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Meditarranean jewish Peasant”
Meier, John, “A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus”
Sanders, E.P, “The Historical Figure of Jesus”
Vermès, Géza, “Jesus the Jew: A Historian’s Reading of the Gospel”
Marshall, I.H. “I believe in the Historical Jesus”

>>42847756
That dude is so obviously a reptoid its a farce.

>>42847756
To me it is not important what "historical sources" show, our memory and time feel fluid and in the end what matters is how we perceive the ideas we meet in the moment. The idea of Jesus, at least in this age, is very powerful and i think to dismiss it or consider it "fake" is very ignorant. Trying to find out if the Gospel events ever "happened" is foolish, time, memory, "history", are irrelevant here

>>42851430
>But strictly speaking, we have no archaeological evidence for any upper-class Jew from the 20s CE either. Nor do we have more evidence for Pontius Pilate, who is a Roman aristocrat in charge of a major province, than we do for Jesus.
In addition to several historians' references to Pilate, we have the rock with an inscription comissioned by him
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_stone

Pilate also isn't the sort of person you would expect to be fictional by himself. He isn't the protagonist of a dramatic story filled to the brim with magic, for one thing.

>>42852070
But strictly speaking, we have no archaeological evidence for any upper-class Jew from the 20s CE either. Nor do we have more written evidence for Pontius Pilate, who is a Roman aristocrat in charge of a major province, than we do for Jesus [We do have epigraphic evidence for Pontius, in the form of the Pilate Stone, an archaeological find that bears his name. However, there is no reason to expect any similar archaeological evidence for a figure like Jesus].

The oft quote maxim is “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”. This needs to be tempered here, since one can easily adopt an immoderate position. What is reasonable is to expect there to be not only evidence consistent with the existence of Jesus, but the kind and amount of evidence that would be consistent with his existence. Demanding more evidence than there is likely to be is raising the historical standard for Jesus more than other historical situations, which means casting similar, if not more severe, doubts on other less well attested figures.

>>42852099
>However, there is no reason to expect any similar archaeological evidence for a figure like Jesus
The tomb owned by Joseph of Arimathea would've made a nice monument. Of course, Jesus historicists believe the gospel writers made it up, so they don't expect to find it. But they can't have made everything up, surely. Only everything that would be at odds with the picture of a plausibly historical person who would leave about the same amount of evidence we currently have.

>>42852259
>the picture of a plausibly historical person
Correct.
What plausible reason do you have for that family owning a tomb?

File: sddefault (2).jpg (39 KB, 640x480)

39 KB JPG

>>42847756
Is he a Jew?

That will be very important for me in assessing this man.

No Jew writing about Jesus Christ can be trusted, because all Jews hate Jesus Christ and despise Him, and despise all His followers. The Jewish post-Temple texts, literally written by the descendants of the PHARISEES, say that Jesus is boiling in a vat of shit in Hell.

So if he is a Jew I will not listen to a word he says. He should be lucky he hasn't been hunted down for physical harm by Christians, if he is a Jew. Christians do not need to listen to Jews, when they talk about Christianity. Spit on them instead.

>>42847756
Ehrman was the beginning of the end for me. It's taken a few years, but my faith is gone. And I didn't even read any of his books, I just watched him debate Christians. I went into it a Christian doing his due diligence and now I'm a devastated wreck rethinking my entire life and 30 years of study and prayer wasted.

>>42847756
That's a german spy, do not trust him

4400 years ago jewish slavery had a problem. They would capture a people and hold them a few centuries before they would try to escape. Happened more than once and the jews chased down their property to kill the entire population of them only to repeat the process again over the next few centuries.

So they were seeking for any jew to come up with the solution for decades. Finally one did. They would begin to create religions for their captive herds.

The first appearance of the zoroastrian religion was less than 40 years later.

You are far down the chain of created weaponized belief systems.
After the complicated process of indoctrinating the romans a faction of ronans took over ownership of the movement and a later subsequent one was cultivated to wage war against it.

Mohammed was also a jew.

It is 1397 in Iran right now
Most other mohammedian rag heads think it's 1447
It is 2026 anno domini
It is 5786 anno mundi
It is 6026 anno lucid

The illuminati was founded more than 18000 years ago and still uses the mayan calendar

If you "believe" this narrative provided to you by their minions they use that to measure what they think of you, which is not much

>>42850169
red ice also did a recent episode with Gnostic informant

https://odysee.com/@redicetv:1/how-yahweh-became-god-gnostic-informant-neal-sendlak:8

>>42847756
>not looking good
before you believed there was one rabbi who had super powers... at least the power to make his second-generation disciples believe he had such powers. now you know that many if not most rabbis have this power, if they so choose to lose it. you feel as if you are poorer for knowing this information? or did you not read all Bart's books?

>>42850127
Yeah they have offered. But Catholics are the type to keep turning you away until you submit and do weird stuff. Christianity was changed to a master slave thing at some point and it still goes on. Jews and Muslims actually help each other. Whereas Christians keep putting you through shit and tell you it's god testing you before they help you.

>>42852902
this is the fun part; now YOU get to define your life and figure out what your purpose is. Won't happen overnight either

>>42854031
https://archive.4plebs.org/x/search/text/A%20very%20interesting%20parallel%20to%20the%20Christ%20case/

>>42854213
I'm starting to rebuild after the total collapse of my world view. It was shocking how much it affected. The freedom is terrifying at first, I'm ashamed to say

>>42855212
It's all cope and nonsense. No.gods, no spirits, no magic. There are conspiracies, but they're all shitty human motivations. And we're all on this board desperately trying to reassure ourselves that we have some amount of control over this fucked up life of random brutality and pervading stupidity. There's no plan, there's no one to save us, we get one shitty chance at life and then we're forgotten forever. The truth hurts so fucking much.

>>42855264
Not everyone is here for same reason.
People tend to think everyone else has their same life conditions and experience.

The truth is not even recognized and is fought against. That which is hurtful is the inability to identify truth and the resultant inability to identify the absence or presence of it.. or of attachments to that which is not truth as though it can somehow fill the lack otherwise.

Christianity is not truth.
Keep unearthing the history that has been deliberately hidden from you.

Currently
5786 Anno Mundi

>>42847756
He’s cool

>>42852902
>Ehrman was the beginning of the end for me.

OP here and same...

what gets to you is how much he knows that you dont know

>>42852902
So, what was his argument?

>>42859029
the only argument that Ehrman makes is "if God is real, why do bad things happen, mmkay?"

>>42855264
You sound weak and gay.

>>42859036

By the way, whenever I hear that argument, I always feel like making this one: "If science is good, then why was the atomic bomb created?" Because it’s the same level of argumentation.

>>42851448
It's a very different thing to understand that Jesus did exist than it is to say that what the bible says about him is correct.
I think the most likely possibility is that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher, that is, he was the ancient equivalent to those dudes with cardboard signs saying "END IS NEAR" on the street. If you take his quotes it's very compatible to that kind of person.

>>42859036
You're so full of shit! That's really NOT Ehrman's argument. Ehrman started out as a Fundamentalist at Bible college until he found within the texts no proof that Jesus claimed divinity for himself, and that it was pretty common for wonder-working rabbis in the first century to have miracles and prophecies attributed to them. The early Christians didn't believe a lot of what Christians believe today. Watch a debate that Ehrman debates against Bible believers. He picks them apart without breaking a sweat. That's what got me: he calmly dismantled two debaters I liked - one Protestant and one Catholic. I was a believer when I started watching his debates

>>42859500
>You're so full of shit! That's really NOT Ehrman's argument

Is too

>>42859500
>Ehrman started out as a Fundamentalist at Bible college until he found within the texts no proof that Jesus claimed divinity for himself

Lol @ needing to go to college for that. He could have just read the new testament

>>42859143
Genius post. I'm going to use this

>>42849533
I hate it when I click on a video and this woman comes up, asking stupid questions, wearing stupid glasses. Is she his daughter?

>>42859428
>I think the most likely possibility is that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher
So you - and Ehrman - agree that Jesus was real.
I dont care AT ALL about the Bible and its retardation.
But it is just as retarded to read the evidence and think Jesus didnt exist.

>>42859143
The difference is no one in science says it is "good." It is accurate and reliable and the least subjectively biased method we have for discerning reality.
That doesnt make it "good."
Christians and a great many theists DO say that god is "good." That god has an active care in the outcome of your life.
Are you saying god should be viewed like science?
God is some man-made tool that can produce results both good and bad?

>>42859143
I don't think it's a common claim that science is omnibenevolent or even that it's an unalloyed good. Science isn't a being with intentions, so the concept of benevolence doesn't apply to it, and the fact that it can lead to things like the atomic bomb is a point against it being considered good in an absolute sense.

>>42860840
It's in Ehrmans interest to give it a lot of credibility.

>>42860849
And?

>>42860840
If you cared more about the Bible, you might have an easier time perceiving the possibility of mythicism.

>>42860881
That possibility is irrelevant to the question of whether he existed.

>>42860883
Once you accept what's possible, then you can go on to argue about what's probable. I don't feel like infodumping at the moment when, if you were interested, you could just look it up yourself, but personally I am very confident that mythicism will become a major if not unanimous position among academics eventually, just like with Moses. It's a hopefully rare case when an academic field is currently widely wrong in a way that a layman should be able to recognize.

>>42860907
All completely irrelevant.
Jesus was a real person, and the Bible is for morons.

>>42860918
The new testament was written by people who were somewhat smarter than the average Christian.

>>42860925
Smart enough to understand the difference between
>from morons
and
>for morons

>>42860925
Not an accomplishment, just low iq still

>>42847756
>fart durrman

>>42860847

Indeed, true scientists do not act that way—usually. However, whenever science is viewed as something other than a method of inquiry, it transforms into an objective source of truth and, subsequently, into a sort of idol. And since an idol possesses no intrinsic moral value, it must be defined in opposition to something perceived as inferior—namely, religion. The reverse can also occur: a hatred of religion and spirituality narrows one's perspective, leading to the deification of science and the assumption that it is inherently good. The entire "New Atheism" phenomenon—"fedora-twirlers" and the Reddit crowd—operates on this principle. Unfortunately, certain researchers also fall into this trap at times, particularly Marxists who equate Marxism with science.

>>42852902

you can't base your relationship with God, divinity, and your soul on material sciences. your faith shouldn't require proof. seek direct experience with God. practice mysticism. its devestating to see Christianity's incessant need on biblical literalism and historical *proof* destroy its followers faith. You built it on the wrong foundations. You don't see Hindus religious beliefs falling apart when they can't reconcile the battle of the Bhagavad Gita with archaeological evidence. Its because they build their religious beliefs on direct and consistent practice.

I'm not a Christian but I find people losing their religion an absolute tragedy. This problem is unique to the Christian faith because they are not teaching their followers what real religious practice is. Go back, live your holy text instead of treating it as a literal interpretation of material reality. Then you'll understand why your book is from God.

>>42859500
>until he found within the texts no proof that Jesus claimed divinity for himself
It took him until the NT to find something he finds fishy about the Bible?

>>42862744

Everything an ordinary theologian would tell you, but expressed in a conspiratorial tone and with the suggestion that it is hidden knowledge, like: "Did you know there were more than four Gospels?!" or "Did you know that the number of people wanting to visit Jesus's tomb changes depending on the Gospel?!!!!"

File: images(2).jpg (42 KB, 554x554)

42 KB JPG

>>42859143
>>42860805
Science does not claim to be all benevolent, all knowing and all powerful.

Sounds like until today, you abrahamic Nicene nutjobs still have no answer for a more than 2000 year old observation.

Stop being intellectually dishonest and shitting up our board with dogmas, paid shills and same fagging.

>>42847756
>38.5 years old
>been "studying" Christianity for years desperately hoping it will be true, somehow haven't figured out Earth is flat, still retarded
>find out about literally who
>listen to literally who
>now I think Christianity isn't true
You don't believe in anything except Satan and are probably going to hell unless you wake up absolute fucking retard

>>42867625
> If you don't believe in my dogma you will burn in hell forever!
> Anyone questioning my beliefs is a sinner and will burn in hell!

Are you sure you're not the demons from hell? Calling people retards and threatening them with eternal punishment doesn't seem very loving. Being instruments of fear, control, pain, suffering and mental torture sounds pretty demonic to me.

File: IMG_0924.jpg (286 KB, 1206x1174)

286 KB JPG

>>42861016
Kek

https://libraryofrickandria.com/ehrman/

>>42860815
You know every baby boomer would fuck her because she’s young,
Baby boomer dudes are 80% sexual perverts , at minimum

>>42847756
Don’t trust people with glasses

>>42847756
>Bart Ehrman
Good for you!
this guy is well worth your time

>>42849910
>Gnostic informant and myth vision
good for you too!
is summerfags time over already?

>>42872344
Yes zoomer, having sex in sign of perversion, but only when is heterosexual. Furrry vore, transexual nonbinary queernes and autistic hypno porn are normal.