Did Jesus Exist? by Bart Ehrman

quote:

---

It often feels like your understanding of what people say is at serious odds with what they actually said.
​
--Percy

---

You never complained about historian's methodology when it comes to the existence of Jesus?Because those who claim he never existed always complain about the methodology of the 99% of historians that say he did exist.

quote:

---

This is a substantial misunderstanding of what you just quoted me saying.

---

So do you deny the human existence of Jesus, 2000 years ago, or not?

quote:

---

I don't know who the "Jesus Mythers" are. If that's Carrier and Price then, as I said earlier, I'm not familiar with them and was certainly not trying to capture their spirit.

---

You also deny you ever complained about the methodology of mainstream historians, when it comes to the existence of Jesus.

quote:

---

Again, I've heard the names of Carrier and Price and that's it. I have no idea what their "big issue" is and so could never have commented on it. Your understanding of what people are saying often does not match what they are actually saying.

---

I find it hard to believe that somebody who claims Jesus never existed:A - claims he never complained about the methodology of mainstream historiansB - has no opinion on Richard Carrier and Robert M Price

I'm afraid not. It's more likely that Jesus isn't even within the purview of 99% of historians.--Percy

Name me a single (known ethnic) Jewish historian that says Jesus did not exist.Israel has a ton of specialists that are massively interested in Biblical studies.

How many Ivy League historians ever doubted Jesus existed?

I don't think I could name even one contemporary historian, let alone an ethnic Jewish historian who happens to be single.--Percy

You seem to be very evasive when it comes to bringing some sort of methodological criticism to the table.You don't have to be a technician to have technique.You have a fringe view, and you act like methodology is almost an afterthought.Why don't you trust the near unanimity of historians, who work in the field?Why is the massive consensus wrong?

You seemed to be focused on the argument from authority, a common fallacy. Discussion here should focus on building arguments around evidence.--Percy

quote:

---

You seemed to be focused on the argument from authority, a common fallacy. Discussion here should focus on building arguments around evidence.
​
--Percy

---

Oh, I was going to allow you to pick and choose radical historians, but you need to have an idea what is wrong with the mainstream ones.

There are some ethnic Jewish scholars who deny Jesus existed. I need to check my book inventory. Some books I have never read yet come to mind.But all deniers are fringe.Robert Eisenmann has moved much closer to the myther viewpoint, but he is not one I am referring to.

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/16065Theodoric never told us that!

I have never told you anything about Carrier or Price or any other mythicists. I have no idea what you are going on about and doubt you do either.

I thought you said you have his book On The Historicity Of Jesus

After doing a search on this thread, if Theodoric ever said that it wasn't here.--Percy

You added to your message after I read it. I don't know why you would say that latter part. Are they really historians, though? Or are they religious scholars? Primarily Biblical religious scholars. The primary reason is that religious beliefs prevent objectivity. Another reason is that the consensus itself causes its own feedback loop, strengthening faith in the belief.--Percy