(6 votes, average: 4.67 out of 5)
Loading...I think what surprised me the most about the vitriolic response I received from (some) mythicists to my book “Did Jesus Exist” was that when I actually spoke or corresponded with them, it became very clear that many knew almost nothing about the Bible, let alone biblical scholarship.
I was at a social event for mythicists some years ago now, after I wrote my book. Even though a lot (most?) of the people there thought I was completely out to lunch, everyone was extremely friendly and affable in person and I had some very pleasant conversations.
But often, after small talk and a few jokes, when we’d get to issues or questions, it would be clear that the person I was talking with literally
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
How is it possible to master 6/7 ancient languages in a life time? I learned english to a sufficient level to read, write and speak in 6/7 years!!! Are we saying that a scholar of ancient Christianity needs at least a couple of decades of studying just to be able to read the documents of interest?
Well, some people have. I myself haven’t mastered any but English, though I can read some others. I do know people who are fluent in multiple modern languages and can read multiple ancient languages. I’d love a partial brain transplant with one of them some day.
“…how one can be sure about something they’ve never actually looked into, …”
In psychology it’s called the Dunning-Kruger Effect–thinking you know more than you actually know. All humans exhibit DKE to a greater or lesser degree. With these mythicists, you enter a type of twilight zone where all of the people there have advanced cases of DKE.
Yes, and that coupled with Cognitive Dissonance! I have learnt that in anything involving human behaviour (thought, speech, actions) we must never overlook biology & psychology – because we are bound by them whilst we breathe! I still like Einstein’s take on it all : Three great forces rule the world – Stupidity, Fear and Greed!
Hi Bart,
Do you know any similar persons who does the same work as you and write about it but in Islam?
You should look at the books on Islam by Steven Shoemaker; and check out the course I did with Islamic scholar Javad Hashmi on “the Bible and the Quran” at http://www.bartehrman.com/courses (scroll down till you see it)
Bart-Are you familiar with the Valliant and Fahey Book “Creating Christ”? If so, thoughts?
I’m afraid I’m not. Sorry!
I am a biologist and many of the ideas about the “theory of evolution” have little relationship to the things I was taught about it 50 years ago. Yes there certainly is an evolutionary process which is undeniable but a lot of it appears to happen by mechanisms we didn’t even know about decades ago (reticulate evolution, lateral gene transfer, symbiotic relationships, genetic toolboxes). So much like the “theory of evolution” our ideas about the historical Jesus are now a plethora of ideas, we know evolution occurs but it is hard to pin down exactly what has happened in the past. So scholars like biologists almost universally come to the conclusion that Jesus existed, but exactly who that Jesus was and did is a matter of speculation and perspective.
Mythicists want Jesus to not exist because they want his Dad to not exist.
Ahh, Professor you startled me with ‘the “theory” of evolution, put forth by every reputable biologist on the planet.’ I wonder what Darrow, Scopes or most particularly Bryan would think of that? It’ll be a hundred years next year!
I find it much more interesting to explore Jesus’ connection to the “Messiah”, or perhaps even more “Christ/ Logos, or/and if some like even the Platonic Perfect Form (whatever that might imply) than to debate his historical existence. While I find the discussion on whether Jesus existed is quite interesting and also important, for me it often skips over the “whats”, “hows” and “in what ways” of these deeper ideas. The relationship between Jesus as a historical figure and the divine Logos—the reason and order of the universe—or as a Platonic ideal, a perfect form transcending reality, a unified and perfect conciousness or whatever , gives the question a more interesting philosophical/spiritual perspective.
I don’t doubt that he existed but I do think that the person he was made into was conceived, not in the womb of the Virgin Mary, but in the mind of Paul. What’s most curious to me is trying to grasp what was at the heart of Paul’s kerygma. What was the simplest version of the message that resonated enough to cause people to abandon their other practices and to believe it?
My guess is that no one just heard it and believed, especially when it wsa stated in a very simple/basic form. It must have taken many long discussions and back-and-forths.
Bart, What is Amy-Jill Levine’s opinion on the “did Jesus really exist?” question? I find your arguments persuasive – that a person of that name existed, preached an end times message to fellow Jews (including parables and directives towards more just and ethical lives), and was executed by the Roman procurator Pilate. And that after his death his followers re-interpreted (and in later gospels, created their own interpretation of) his message in order to make sense of the trauma caused by his execution and the dashing of their expectations for how the story was going to end.
I found Dr. Levine’s interpretation of the parables in a 1st century Jewish context to be really eye-opening. I’m thinking she must also have a very educated opinion on the matter of Jesus’ existence and that of other Jewish apocalypticists of that time period?
And a corollary: if there were several such apocalypticists in that period, why was Jesus of Nazareth the (only) one who was transformed into a deity and ultimately developed a self-sustaining post-mortem cult, but none of the others did? Or did the same thing happen with others, but their cults fizzled out for lack of converts?
She has zero doubts about it. Same as virtually every critical New Testaement scholar I know.
I know you have exchanged views with Dr. Richard Carrier–and that he can be caustic and unpleasant at times. However, he did write a book published by a respected press–On The Historicity of Jesus. Do you ever plan on reviewing that book or looking at the arguments he makes in that book? Thanks!
The issue of serious scholarshipo is never whether someone convinceds a press to publish their book — since presses have a variety of reasons for what they publish (and as you will have noticed, some presses publish truly awful books even though they have a generally good reputatoin) — but whether scholars who are experts in the field find the work credible. Many scholars / reviewers will find the conclusions of a book unpersuasive but the scholarship itself to be decent. Other times even the scholarship is not decent. I’ve read the book, and no, I have no plans of reviewing it. I wonder if any scholar did review it (and if so, reviewed it favorably). I assume Carrier would be advertising it if that had happened, but I don’t know of anything. Do you happen to know by chance?
A further thought – was it because Paul was such an effective marketer/propagandist, especially by “sanitizing” a Jewish worldview to allow non-Jews to sign up for it without having to accept many/most regulations in the Torah? But the followers of other Jewish apocalypticists maintained their Jewish practices, thus limiting their appeal to non-Jews?
Or was it the resurrection belief that was the key element – because it promised the happy afterlife to followers? Did other apocalypticists promise the same?
Are you asking wh yPaul was a successful missoinary? I should think he woud not have had much success at all among gentiles if he insisted they had to become Jews to be followrs of Jesus. But yes, the afterlife was a prominent feature of most early preaching, even though for the earliest Christians it was not heaven for the soul after death but eternal life in a utopian world here on earth.
Bart – just out of curiosity when you say the “Jesus did exist” you’re really saying he did to some level of certainty, right? What level of certainty might you apply to his existence? I’m a lawyer so I’m used to thinking in terms of burdens of proof – preponderance of the evidence (i.e., more than 50% / more likely than not), clear and convincing evidence (higher than preponderance but a moving target depending upon the case), or beyond a reasonable doubt (in criminal cases). If you were asked to put it in terms of a legal burden of proof what might you say? To be clear I am NOT a mythicist looking to argue with you about it in case that matters.
Probably as a lawyer you never say something like “there is a 87% chance the accused is guilty.” It’s like that with historians. We don’t do it with statistics. But as a legal burden of proof, with a hundred separate fair minded juries, I don’t think you’d have any of them voting against his existence. It’s nowhere near as certain as the existence of, say Bill Clinton or Billy Graham, which I would put at 100% certainty (even though logically that’s not demonstrable; so, say, 99.9%); but still very very high.
You are correct – I am forever telling clients (and others) that I don’t, and couldn’t if I wanted to, give percentages. And I know historians don’t either (or shouldn’t I guess). Thank you for the response.
Hello. Is there any well independent and documented facts or data confirming that Jesus existed? If Jesus really existed; was him a god, prophet, rabbi, etc.?
That’s the topic of my book.
I don’t see how we can establish that someone existed just based on writing! I don’t really think Paul was talking about Jesus as a real man! He was talking of a messiah. Later scribes introduced on Paul’s letters the name Jesus. If you pay attention on his letters there is Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus. Or the lord. Jesus name obviously was interpolated in his writings. I can see the evidence there and the truth is that is too hostile to reveal it and a lot of Bible scholars are afraid to say it. I think they see it too. Look at what lengths they are willing to keep their lies! That even Josephus had to be interpolated. Are we supposed to keep believing this writers?? Of course not!
I’m not sure how you know about anyone from the past (living prior to say a hundred years ago) apart from writing.
Indeed so.
One should know what it is before accepting or rejecting an idea.
US Atheists are particularly bad at this, automatically rejecting all of Christianity without consideration as if perhaps the domination of public life by (so-called) evangelical Christians is so annoying that everything they say must be rejected.