Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

JoeWallack wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:20 am ARGUMENT FROM EVIDENCE OF FORGED EVIDENCE

1) It's generally agreed that parts of the TF are Christian forgery.

2) Some of this forgery is likely a Christian reaction to whatever was original.

3) This "indicate a passage original to Josephus that has been adjusted and added to by later Christian scribes rather than a wholesale interpolation."
JESUS MYTHICISM 7: JOSEPHUS, JESUS AND THE ‘TESTIMONIUM FLAVIANUM’ (What this indicates is the lack of good Internal evidence that the TF is original).

4) If the TF is original then we can ignore how to get from Josephus writing it in c.100 to Jesus existing God knows when.

5) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM VIRTUOUS ATHEISM

1) Tim O'Neill, Bart Ehrman, and Tom Holland are atheists.
2) Tim O'Neill, Bart Ehrman, and Tom Holland passionately believe that Jesus Mythicists and New Atheists are far more ignorant, stupid, and pernicious than Christianity has ever been.
3) Therefore Jesus existed.

Irish1975 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 7:02 am

JoeWallack wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:20 am ARGUMENT FROM EVIDENCE OF FORGED EVIDENCE

1) It's generally agreed that parts of the TF are Christian forgery.

2) Some of this forgery is likely a Christian reaction to whatever was original.

3) This "indicate a passage original to Josephus that has been adjusted and added to by later Christian scribes rather than a wholesale interpolation."
JESUS MYTHICISM 7: JOSEPHUS, JESUS AND THE ‘TESTIMONIUM FLAVIANUM’ (What this indicates is the lack of good Internal evidence that the TF is original).

4) If the TF is original then we can ignore how to get from Josephus writing it in c.100 to Jesus existing God knows when.

5) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM VIRTUOUS ATHEISM

1) Tim O'Neill, Bart Ehrman, and Tom Holland are atheists.
2) Tim O'Neill, Bart Ehrman, and Tom Holland passionately believe that Jesus Mythicists and New Atheists are far more ignorant, stupid, and pernicious than Christianity has ever been.
3) Therefore Jesus existed.

I like it...

ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF AGREEMENT OF AUTHORITY

1) Historical Jesus authorities disagree about almost everything.

2) They agree though that Jesus existed:

https://historyforatheists.com/2017/05/ ... ory-again/

3) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM CHANGING NAME OF ARGUMENT

1. ARGUMENT FROM THE UNLIKELY

2. The Argument From The Unlikely is that if something is unlikely than it is likely and the more unlikely it is, the more likely it is.

3. The Argument From Embarrassment is An Argument From The Unlikely.

4. The Argument From Embarrassment is used by Christians/Ehrman to say it is unlikely that Christians who believed Jesus was crucified based primarily on faith would believe that Jesus was crucified based primarily on faith.

5. Therefore, Jesus existed.

.
Argument from love

1. I love Jesus.
2. Mythicists are just haters.
3. Let love win.
4. Therefore, Jesus existed.

.
Argument from Matthew's uncraziness

1. Matthew often claimed that something related to Jesus happened to fulfill what was foretold by the prophets.
2. These claims would be completely insane if it didn't actually happen.
3. Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM "OTHERS"

Did Paul Invent Jesus’ Resurrection?

1. We know very little about Paul ("As to the big reason. Paul does not give us a lot of information about his life – just snippets here and there. Virtually the only passages that say anything about his life prior to being a follower of Jesus are Philippians 3 and Galatians 1.").

2. Therefore we know that Paul violently barbequed Christkins Pharicassi style ("Moreover, it is perfectly clear that when he heard about the Christian movement, he was incensed by it, and that he actively engaged in violent persecutions against it.")

3. Paul does not say why he persecuted Christians so it must have been their belief in Jesus' supposed resurrection. ("Paul does not tell us what exactly he found to be so blasphemous about the claims that the followers of Jesus were making about him, after his death").

4. Since there can not be any other reason why Paul persecuted Christians, other Christians must have already been believing in Jesus' supposed resurrection ("Paul could not have invented the resurrection appearances of Jesus himself, before others had done so, precisely because he was persecuting the Christians for their faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus.").

5. If others believed that Jesus was resurrected than they clearly, perfectly clearly, precisely, necessarily and almost certainly believed he existed.

6. Ehrman is the Bible scholar that beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true.

7. Therefore, Jesus existed.

Detective Columbo has never convicted the murderer of Jesus.

The Series Columbo is fiction.

Therefore, the murder of Jesus is real.

1- Early Christians were embarrassed that Jesus was from Nazareth.
2- Nazareth was the Idaho of first century Palestine.
3- Idaho exists.
4- Therefore, Jesus existed.

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Mon Jun 20, 2022 7:16 am "The Next Quest for the Historical Jesus is a conference and larger project ...

The organisers argue that the quest for the historical Jesus has stagnated in the twenty-first century. Nevertheless, the Next Quest project accepts two recent developments in the field. It accepts that the criteria of authenticity and other attempts to get "behind" the Gospel texts have been largely unsuccessful. It accepts that celebrated debates about Jesus's Jewishness have largely updated older anti-Jewish tendencies in historical Jesus scholarship. Building on these developments, the Next Quest is a statement about where historical Jesus studies can go from here, and essentially an answer to the question, "What's next?"
...
The Next Quest for the Historical Jesus will foundationally be a curious quest, a broader quest, a wide-open quest, and one that explicitly links Jesus studies to innovative approaches to Christian origins and the Humanities generally—and brings it up-to-date as a subfield within them both.

Argument from the question about the next proof

1. I accept that the criteria of authenticity is not a proof.
2. I accept that other attempts to get behind the Gospel-Jesus are not proofs.
3. I accept that signs of Jesus' Jewishness in the Gospels are not proofs.
4. But I ask: What will be the next proof?
5. I prophesy that the next proof will foundationally be a curious proof, a broader proof, a wide-open proof, and one that explicitly links our longing for a historical Jesus to innovative approaches to whatever you want.
6. Therefore, Jesus existed.