Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (481276)	5/16/2009 12:38:44 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) of 1575189

Okay, cut to the chase. One, Ehrman claims we can't know much about Jesus due to the alleged unreliability of the NT. Yet he also claims he knows Jesus didn't rise from the dead, that Jesus didn't make a claim of divinity, etc. IOW he claims both that the NT is unreliable but that he possess reliable information about what Jesus did and didn't do and did or didn't believe. Self-contradiction. Two, Ehrman makes a lot of minor discrepencies between this and that Gospel passage. Those discrepencies however aren't significant and there may be explanations for them. At any rate, they have no bearing on the known facts about the testimony re. the crucifixion and resurrection. Third, Ehrman's doubts and lack of faith have nothing to do with his "scholarship". Rather by his own testimony, he became an agnostic for philosophical reasons - the ancient problem of evil or problem of pain. So his scholarship is affected by his philosophical adoption of agnosticism, not the other way round. He became an agnostic for philosophical reasons and uses bad and misleading scholarship to attack his former faith. Fourth, in attacking the Gospels he brings in late "Gospels" written centuries after the fact by heretics and depicts them as being equal in historical evidentiary value to ones written a few decades after Jesus's death and resurrection by people who knew and got information from eyewitnesses. An example is the "Gospel of Judas" which he falsely treats as if it were a real gospel. Of course its not. It wasn't written by Judas Iscariot and doesn't reflect the testimony of anyone alive curing Jesus life. Instead it was written as a parody of a gospel by Gnostics in the second century. In a following post I'll show Ehrman's (and others) work on the Gospel of Judas has been thoroughly debunked by April DeConick of Rice University.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next