Ehrman v. Bob Price debate?

[perseusomega9]

you should do an intense youtube research program on Price, not read any of his books, and share your conclusions here where we can draw on your vast insights

[John T]

I have watched some of Dr. Price lectures on YouTube. You may think knowledge can only come from a fictional book on myths but my vast insight says otherwise.

Try it some time and see what happens and then share your conclusions.

Thanks in advance.

John T

[perseusomega9]

'vast'

[Bertie]

Also, does Dr Price actually have a Christ Myth theory of his own? I've never seen one outlined. The closest thing is his review of Acharya S's "Suns of God". Dr Price writes:

His theory is more or less Detering's. 1st Century origins of the cult in esoterica and the Judean fringe (Samaritans, Essenes, gnosticism), but in the New Testament text as we have it this is been obscured by Marcion versus proto-orthodox exchange. All texts except maybe some Johannine literature date 2nd Century and Paul didn't exist (although a Paul tradition of some sort had to come from somewhere).

(My source for this is mostly his Pre-Nicene New Testament book, an odd text to be sure but one I do recommend to the sort of people who read this forum.)

---

If there's really going to be an in-person debate, then Ehrman is a stronger debater and will win easily (which may or may not have anything to do with the actual views of either man).

[Peter Kirby]

Personally, I would prefer a face-to-face, though hopefully in the form of an extensive back-and-forth conversation rather than a rigid debate format where it can turn into a game of debate tactics.

I disagree. The "game of debate tactics" looms largest in an oral debate, where it comes down to who can remember the right cites and come up with the right things to say on the spot. A less time-pressured format diminishes this element.

[outhouse]

Price's work comes down to his 3 pillars.

They are easy to refute.

[Ulan]

I always thought that Bob Price was an excellent critic. His book reviews are usually well argued and spot-on. His own writings, at least those I read, didn't leave the same positive expression. They often resembled a free association game with not enough substance.

[slevin]

I can see the new Dr. Price 3,000 years from now. George Washington was a myth. The myth says he prayed to the sun of god to give him a miracle as he was surrounded by his enemies when a providential thick fog swallowed the sun allowing his men enough time to escape Long Island across the East River unnoticed by the British fleet.

Yep, if you know what to look for you can turn anyone including George Washington into a myth.

Fog is not supernatural. You confound myth with legend. Jesus walking on water, curing blindness with spittle, raising the dead, represent supernatural actions. Fog arising on the East River is a natural occurrence. Escaping an enemy because of sudden climate change, rather than overt skill, is legendary.

[cienfuegos]

Personally, I would prefer a face-to-face, though hopefully in the form of an extensive back-and-forth conversation rather than a rigid debate format where it can turn into a game of debate tactics.

I disagree. The "game of debate tactics" looms largest in an oral debate, where it comes down to who can remember the right cites and come up with the right things to say on the spot. A less time-pressured format diminishes this element.

I agree that I disagree. Those debates are sometimes entertaining, but only scratch the surface. I would love to see a written debate. Price has said he is going to write a book called "Ehrman Interrupted" and has expressed a lot of respect for Ehrman's work. I would like to see Carrier-Ehrman debate though. Bring the gloves, no love lost there.

[Blood]

What could they possibly say that you haven't heard from them before?