Did Jesus exist, Part II

Double post. See next post.This message has been edited by JJMorgan, 01-15-2006 05:50 PM

Are there any professors of history at major universities who deny that Jesus ever existed? I don't think so. The Jesus didn't exist school is dominated by non-historians who are not familar with historiography methods.I cite the following about a professor of German (not history) who is widely cited by the Jesus didn't exist school:

quote:

---

In his book, I Believe in the Historical Jesus, Howard Marshall points out that in the early to mid 20th century, one of the few "authorities" to consider Jesus as a myth was a Soviet Encyclopaedia. He then goes on to discuss the work of GA Wells which was then recently published.

​

There is said to be a Russian encyclopaedia in current use which affirms in a brief entry that Jesus Christ was the mythological founder of Christianity, but it is virtually alone in doing so. The historian will not take its statement very seriously, since ... it offers no evidence for its assertion, and mere assertion cannot stand over against historical enquiry. But more than mere assertion is involved, for an attempt to show that Jesus never existed has been made in recent years by GA Wells, a Professor of German who has ventured into New Testament study and presents a case that the origins Christianity can be explained without assuming that Jesus really lived. Earlier presentations of similar views at the turn of the century failed to make any impression on scholarly opinion, and it is certain that this latest presentation of the case will not fare any better.

​

quote from: Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth

---

Thanks for the link.You are quite right. They have the silliest ideas about how the Bible must have been changed over the centuries for instance, knowing nothing about scholarship in that area. I don't know much but enough to see their errors and muster some evidence against them.But while I see the reasoning of historians about the futility of answering these silly charges, as those who believe them are irrational and will not have their minds changed, there are many others who need to hear that there is another point of view or the irrationalists will prevail. That leaves it up to us nonhistorians to do what we can with the problem. Especially if they are believing Christians they should consider it a calling to be out arguing their case at places like EvC.

Actually there are quite a few Professors, even in history, that study the issue of whether there was a historical Jesus. Here is a list of the Fellows at the Westar Institute.One of the most exciting things I've enjoyed lately has been the Jesus Seminars. They are something every Christian should be following and if there is one in your area, be sure to attend.This message has been edited by jar, 01-15-2006 05:30 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The Westar Institute scholars are in religion and related fields, not history and historiography.The Jesus Seminar is a pathetic joke.

Bit of a logic trap there brother. Are there any professors of economics who deny that Jesus was cost-effective? Are there any professors of dentistry who deny that he had bad teeth? Are there any geologists who deny he was a rock? Most importantly, are there any professors of history who deny that Santa Claus existed?In every case, why would they bother, it would be out of their field. The fact that historians don't base any theories on the assumption that he did exist (unlike say Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great) is the real fact here.There are gobs of professors of theology with good history credentials that harp long and hard on the subject all day long though.

While you may well feel that way, the readers now have access to the list of the Fellows and can make their own judgements.While you may consider it a "pathetic joke", it is yet another reflection of the views and scholarship of much of the Christian Communion.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I checked some at random. Found no historians in the bunch.The Jesus Seminar sit around and make guesses about what Jesus must really have said and not said. I guess we could do that with you too, not bother with what you think or anybody who knows you thinks, just give our best subjective impression of what JAR must think.Pathetic.

Surely we should evaluate this work by the quality of the scholarship, not by the credentials of the scholars.

Actually, they discuss and debate the contents of technical papers prepared and circulated before the meetings. There is no guesswork involved. They publish their findings and it's open for all to examine. ROTFLMAOThat is without a doubt the funniest thing I've read here so far. Thank you Faith. A true Gem.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But JAR is alive and posting responses on this forum. The relationship of the Gospels to the teachings of Jesus is not as well established as say Plato's dialogues to the teachings of Socrates and yet there is still a lot of room for questioning the difference between what Socrates believed and taught and how Plato interpreted it.I haven't paid attention to the Jesus seminar. Don't know if I would agree with them or not but people have the right to form seminar's and discuss ideas just as we are doing now as well as the right to disregard them, just as billions don't bother reading EvC.lfen

Name one professor of history in the link you cited.Name one professor of history at any major university in the whole wide world who denies Jesus existed.Thank you.

And I have just as much right to denounce them as misguided subjectivists I believe.

JJM: It helps for the sake of following your thought if you don't hit the "general reply" button, which addresses the thread as a whole, but the "reply" button directly under the post you want to answer.This message has been edited by Faith, 01-15-2006 08:08 PM

quote:

---

... they discuss and debate the contents of technical papers prepared and circulated before the meetings.

---

In regards to the subject at hand, someone should add that the Jesus Seminar (at least to my knowledge) does not deny the existence of a historical Jesus. In fact, my understanding is that their work is based on the existence of a historical Jesus.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt