Stephen
Thanks for the video.
Steefen
You are welcomed.
Stephen
Blind leading the blind; disregard blind leaders so you will not fall into a pit.
Steefen
Either you are thankful for a valuable video or you are not thankful for a video that has at least four errors and you are sharing what those errors are.
Steefen don’t assume that I cannot enjoy a video that contains opinions I fundamentally disagree with. But then I constantly seek out opinions with which I disagree. I just watched a YouTube video from a flat earther who claims to have seen the ice wall that apparently surrounds the earth disk. Great stuff. Fatal if you actually believe it.
Don’t you see? I know what I think. People who agree with me can’t teach me anything.
First 11 minutes
Dr. Price speaks of Jesus as the personification of the zeitgeist, syncretism, and revitalization.
Steefen
Of course after the First Jewish Roman War, a propaganda for revitalization would have been in order.
The Roman culture that produced the propaganda for the Herodians and for the Jews who surrendered to Vespasian and Titus to become non-rebels needed the propaganda of the non-messiah/secret messiah/messiah-not-of-this world. However, I go even further, the conquerors, the Romans wanted/needed the source of zealot messianism destroyed, so, the content of the propaganda has Holy Communion which undercuts the integrity of the Hebrew theology and religion upon which Christianity is based.
Dr. Price
II Maccabees is anti-Hellenism but by the time you get to IV Maccabees, stoic ideas appears in the text, hence syncretism, there.
Bruno Bauer said Mark created the character of Jesus because Seneca said it would be good if people chose an ideal figure. This leads to a personal relationship with Christ.
Pick up at 15:04.
Stephen said
Steefen don’t assume that I cannot enjoy a video that contains opinions I fundamentally disagree with. But then I constantly seek out opinions with which I disagree. I just watched a YouTube video from a flat earther who claims to have seen the ice wall that apparently surrounds the earth disk. Great stuff. Fatal if you actually believe it.Don’t you see? I know what I think. People who agree with me can’t teach me anything.
And you can’t teach anything to anyone because you cannot construct a rebuttal to the video, as asked, and from past experience, you cannot be trusted in discussions because your description of content are not factual.
Your credibility cannot improve even to par. That is the price you pay for your choices to render opinions without substantial support for those opinions. Some opinions have weight, some opinions do not. You have the freedom to write your opinions as comments/replies, but only the ones constructed by evidence are worthwhile.
In the meantime, there are those who are taught not by those with whom they have disagreements by those who know so much more than another who has not even formed a position of disagreement or agreement.
So, when I do not respond to you or block you, you have an idea why: your comment / reply either does not interest me, is not a high quality, constructive addition to the thread, or subjectively, I have judged your comment / reply non-critical for my edification.
Price reviewed Caesar’s Messiah years ago.
Some of what he thinks today about the book:
– He still does not buy the grand harmonization of the Empty Tomb narratives.
– He agrees the Romans had an interest in fabricating some version of the Jesus story.
– It throws light on Brandon’s hypothesis of Jesus and the Zealots. Romans would want to conspire with Christians who found their failed revolution moot and in need of whitewashing and covering their … (CYA).
– There is no second coming of Jesus in Mark, chapter 13. We read that into it. The person who came was Titus, the third-person Son of Man. There is no second coming of the first-person Son of Man, Jesus.
It would seem to me that Dr. Ehrman can’t truly be any more specific on his views and of both the historical and current state of the evidence as he already has. The mythicists and form-critics will always have a new angle (or new to those unfamiliar with the recycling of the old) and is thus unnecessary and redundant to rehash worn-out arguments, unless for the exponunciaton to a newer generation
It would seem to me that there have always been people propounding crank theories with no substance behind them, convinced they alone have the truth. They just didn’t always have the internet to disseminate them.
This is fairly harmless compared to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, or Qanon. But it’s cut from the same cloth. And the same could be said of those who disseminate it.
captainchazz said
It would seem to me that Dr. Ehrman can’t truly be any more specific on his views and of both the historical and current state of the evidence as he already has. The mythicists and form-critics will always have a new angle (or new to those unfamiliar with the recycling of the old) and is thus unnecessary and redundant to rehash worn-out arguments, unless for the exponunciaton to a newer generation
He could expound to his new classes and new generations with specificity why the current “rehashed” arguments are not fresh and energizing. I’ve heard he hides behind high fees and expenses rather than debate authors with new arguments. The bar he sets is about $20,000. That is what Joe Atwill has claimed regarding a public debate with Bart.
Since we know so little about the historical Jesus – a consensus view among PhD scholars who have devoted their entire lives to the subject would be one short paragraph – a never ending cottage industry of speculation exists.
It’s intriguing to me for a very short period of time and reminds me a great deal of shows like Ancient Aliens on the history channel.
Soon I get bored with it and go back to reading things I actually feel like I’m learning from.
As an old man now I have to make good use of my remaining time. Endless speculation down dark rabbit holes doesn’t seem to be a good use of it.
Fun for a short time though !
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)