- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Mar 19
2 edits
Seeking truth is not part of their agenda.
Did you ever answer my question put to you multiple times now? In the search for truth, historical truth, I asked you -
What caused the tremendous shift in cultural practice of Jerusalem Jews by the thousands? The seventh day Sabbath was their main day of worship. Suddenly within weeks of the death of Jesus they began to regard the THIRD day after His deatth, the first day of a new week, the eighth day as "the Lord's day".
That was a day to remember the resurrection of the Jesus.
You have been asked repeatedly to give some historical explanation.
What caused this great cultural shift after over a thousand years of Sabbath Day worship for first century Jews ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Mar 19
5 edits
What about the book in the OP?
I have heard 54 minutes of this video.
And I am beginning to think maybe I heard it before. Probably I heard him discuss some of the points before.
Now he is saying that the Roman Emperors were called gods. Which is true. And he says to compete the Christians began to say Jesus was God.
That is not a change. That is an emphasis in the face of persecution.
IE. the citizens of Rome - "Why don't you worship the Roman Emperor like all good Roman citizens?"
the Christians in the Roman empire - "Well to us the true God is the Lord Jesus Christ."
You want to say "THAT is how Jesus BECAME God" Dr. Ehrman ?
It is not really wrong to figure that way.
The lecture has mixture of many things. Some are kind of contradictory. Or at least Ehrman could always say "Well I SAID that, ie. they regarded Jesus BEFORE as God."
He covers himself real well.
By the way, Ehrman is a NT textural critic. THAT is his area of training. Ehrman is not a historian. Well that is not the area of his MAIN training. He is at the top of the field in New Testament textural criticism.
You looked up his credentials. Correct me if you saw a doctor's degree in history.
Mike Licone is professional historian. Mike Licone is always respectful and friendly with Ehrman in debates and those should be seen too IMO. His debates are a pleasure to watch.
Bart Ehrman vs Mike Licone
Ehrman & Licona: Are the Gospels Historically Reliable? Part 1
19 Mar 19
@sonship saidWhy did Judaism demonize Satan only after captivity ?
@caissad4
Seeking truth is not part of their agenda.
Did you ever answer my question put to you multiple times now? In the search for truth, historical truth, I asked you -
What caused the tremendous shift in cultural practice of Jerusalem Jews by the thousands? The seventh day Sabbath was their main day of worship. Suddenly within weeks of the death o ...[text shortened]... his great cultural shift after over a thousand years of Sabbath Day worship for first century Jews ?
Why did Judaism only believe in a heaven after death after captivity ?
Why did Judaism become an apocalyptic cult after captivity ?
Why did Judaism only believe in resurrection of the dead only after captivity ?
All these changes are taken from Zoroasterism , the religion of their captors.
You sir, are a Zoroaster-Judaic-Christian . That is your real history.
Christianity is just another resurrection cult, among many, emanating from Judaism. Just another temple cult which found favor with the Romans.
The answer to your oft repeated question is that Judaism changed their beliefs frequently, like changing socks.
19 Mar 19
@sonship saidIs he?
You looked up his credentials. Correct me if you saw a doctor's degree in history.
Mike Licone is professional historian.
He has a BA in "music performance" (playing the saxophone); an M.A. in Religious Studies and a PhD in New Testament Studies.
How is he any more or less of a "professional historian" than Professor Bart Ehrman?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Mar 19
@FMF
Ehrman, like other popular critics of the Christian faith, steps outside of his area to have you assume he's an expert in some other area as well.
Again, good enough for them being able to converse with one another on the level they do.
Do you think only doctor degreed individuals can know truth ?
If so then you can forget about you knowing the truth.
Sorry. Not enough education.
19 Mar 19
@sonship saidYou are making false claims about education and expertise you approve of and disapprove of and then back peddling. You are doing it repeatedly. You made a claim about Licona being a "professional historian" and that "Ehrman is not a historian". This crumbles immediately under scrutiny and so you back away from it.
@FMF
Ehrman, like other popular critics of the Christian faith, steps outside of his area to have you assume he's an expert in some other area as well.
Again, good enough for them being able to converse with one another on the level they do.
Do you think only doctor degreed individuals can know truth ?
If so then you can forget about you knowing the truth.
Sorry. Not enough education.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Mar 19
Why did Judaism demonize Satan only after captivity ?
You intend to not answer the question but ask some more of others ?
You can do both you know?
Answer and pose some additional questions.
When is Satan NOT "demonized" ? Ever ??
Why did Judaism only believe in a heaven after death after captivity ?
I don't know that they did.
Why did Judaism become an apocalyptic cult after captivity ?
I dont know what you mean by "apocalyptic cult".
Are you suggesting that God did not promise Abraham
that through his seed the whole world would be blessed?
That goes back Genesis 12, 15.
I think it obviously means a turn over of the world situation as Abraham knew it.
Why did Judaism only believe in resurrection of the dead only after captivity ?
I don't know that to be true or relevant.
Before Judaism, the oldest book in the Bible Job has Job expecting to see God on the earth at the end of time.
All these changes are taken from Zoroasterism , the religion of their captors.
You sir, are a Zoroaster-Judaic-Christian . That is your real history.
Christianity is just another resurrection cult, among many, emanating from Judaism. Just another temple cult which found favor with the Romans.
The answer to your oft repeated question is that Judaism changed their beliefs frequently, like changing socks.
Are you going to answer my question now ?
I reject your analysis because Judaism considered the "cult" of Jesus worshippers to be clearly outside of their traditions.
They were cast OUT of the synagogues.
Both Sadducees and Pharisees still made up the governing council of Judaism though one believed in resurrection and the other could be considered the ancient modernists.
No followers of Jesus were part of the Sanhedrin except secretively like - Nicodemus. And he has to soon show his true colors.
The Sanhedrin governing body of Judaism consisted of both Jews who did and did not believe in resurrection and had varying takes on Messianic promises.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Mar 19
Why did Judaism demonize Satan only after captivity ?
Why did Judaism only believe in a heaven after death after captivity ?
Why did Judaism become an apocalyptic cult after captivity ?
Why did Judaism only believe in resurrection of the dead only after captivity ?
All these changes are taken from Zoroasterism , the religion of their captors.
The parallels you propose are not equivalent. Because the events leading to the Babylonian captivity and the captivity occured over a very long period of time.
The changing of the most important sacred day happened within WEEKS of the event of Christ's execution.
The time frames are not at all equivalent.
19 Mar 19
@sonship saidSo after thousands of variant readings from thousands of copied manuscripts the effect of human error has been nil on the original documents.
It was pointed out that on interview after Ehraman has done his speale and lest the interviewer astounded he was finally asked in essence " Well then what do you think the Gospels really originally said ? " Ehrman replies in essence "What do you mean?"
It ended up with Dr. Ehrman saying the New Testament originially said pretty much what we know them to say today! ...[text shortened]... well. I'm sure Oxford Press royalty checks to Ehrman will keep him in good stead for years to come.
Which of Ehrman's books, available lectures or debates did he say this?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
20 Mar 19
4 edits
@FMF
I wrote:
So after thousands of variant readings from thousands of copied manuscripts the effect of human error has been nil on the original documents.
You ask:
Which of Ehrman's books, available lectures or debates did he say this?
I didn't say he said it.
The discussion of thousands of variants was in this debate with James White.
.Between 6:56 and 9:28.
And some more between 21:29 and 22:58
&t=68s
And the information about how much variants have effect the original message was given by James White with much quotation of Ehrman's own words after this critique of the implication that we don't know what the original NT taught.
Roughly between 30:10 - 33:47 and 36:49 - 40:50.
I never said that Ehrman said this what I wrote:
So after thousands of variant readings from thousands of copied manuscripts the effect of human error has been nil on the original documents.
And on second thought I should say the thousands of variants
have "nil effect on the major teachings of the New Testament."
20 Mar 19
@sonship saidSo YOU said it?
@FMF
I wrote:
So after thousands of variant readings from thousands of copied manuscripts the effect of human error has been nil on the original documents.
You ask:
Which of Ehrman's books, available lectures or debates did he say this?
I didn't say he said it.
The discussion of thousands of variants was in this de ...[text shortened]... he thousands of variants
have "nil effect on the major teachings of the New Testament."
Or someone else said it?
A critic of Ehrman said it? James White said it?
Ehrman didn't say it?
You seem to be back peddling again.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
20 Mar 19
1 edit
@FMF
I just told you I said it.
You should have seen the FIRST time that I said it.
And if you were as eager to watch the debate as you were I listen to your long audio book, you'd understand why I said it.
And you would also understand that Ehrman comes close to saying that it is hopeless to know what the New Testament originally taught.
Go back and see his own words as quoted by white in the sections I outlined for you.
In fact watch the entire debate including the questioning of the two of each other and cross examinations and questions FROM the audience. Its all worth the time.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
20 Mar 19
What have I done here that FMF has not done?
He points to a place for you to go and get some skepticism.
And I point to a place where you can go and get some answers to some skepticism.
I don't see his OP so purerer in intention then my recommendations for responses.
20 Mar 19
@sonship saidWhere is the "interview" where you claim he said what you say he did?
@FMF
I just told you I said it.
You should have seen the FIRST time that I said it.
And if you were as eager to watch the debate as you were I listen to your long audio book, you'd understand why I said it.
And you would also understand that Ehrman comes close to saying that it is hopeless to know what the New Testament originally taught.
Go back and see his o ...[text shortened]... each other and cross examinations and questions FROM the audience. Its all worth the time.
@sonship saidYou appear to be taking the opinion of James White - with whom you agree - and projecting it onto Professor Ehrman - with whom you do not agree - and framing it as some sort of admission or confession that Ehrman has made.
What have I done here that FMF has not done?
He points to a place for you to go and get some skepticism.
And I point to a place where you can go and get some answers to some skepticism.
I don't see his OP so purerer in intention then my recommendations for responses.