Did Jesus Exist? Ehrman’s Complete Failure – Part 5

Because my main objection to a key argument in Chapter 3 of Bart Ehrman's book Did Jesus Exist? (hereafter: DJE) is a strong and decisive objection (i.e. Ehrman provided ZERO historical facts to support the main historical premise of a key argument),  I have felt some concern that my identification or interpretation of the ABSIG argument (Agreements Between Seven "Independent" Gospels) might have been incorrect or inaccurate.  In my view, Ehrman is an intelligent and knowlegable N.T. scholar, so … [Read more...]

Did Jesus Exist? Ehrman’s Complete Failure – Part 4

A Brief Review of My Previous ObjectionsOne key argument for the existence of Jesus presented by Bart Ehrman in Chapter 3 of Did Jesus Exist? (hereafter: DJE) is based on an historical claim about alleged Agreements Between Seven "Independent" Gospels:(ABSIG) There are seven Gospels which were written within "a hundred years after the traditional date of Jesus's death" (DJE, p.78) that are "either completely or partially independent" from each other (DJE, p.78) and yet they "agree on … [Read more...]

Did Jesus Exist? Ehrman’s Complete Failure – Part 3

The Independence of Passages vs. BooksAmong the seven "independent" Gospels to which Ehrman's ABSIG (Agreements Between Seven Independent Gospels) refer are the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Mark.A "basic aspect" of the life or death of Jesus is the claim that Jesus was crucified by the Romans.  There is agreement between Matthew and Mark on this "basic aspect":And they [the soldiers] crucified him [Jesus], and divided his clothes among them, casting lots to decide what each s … [Read more...]

Did Jesus Exist? Ehrman’s Complete Failure – Part 2

Existence vs. Basic Aspects/Attributes"Did Jesus exist?" - What does this question mean?Clarity is a gateway standard of critical thinking.  If you are UNCLEAR about the meaning of a question, then your thinking about that question will also be unclear, and your thinking will probably not be very useful or productive or logical so long as you remain UNCLEAR about the question at issue.On the one hand, it is certain that there was no Jewish man who lived in Palestine in the first cent … [Read more...]

Draft Paper on the Jewish Hearsay Testimony and the Empty Tomb

I wrote this about 10 years ago but never finished it. In light of recent discussions, however, I thought it might be of interest to some readers.Please do not cite without my permission.Jewish_Hearsay_Evidence_v1.0_DRAFT_1 … [Read more...]

The Resurrection: Types of Skeptical Views

The traditional Christian view of the resurrection of Jesus involves a number of beliefs or claims:Jesus existed. Jesus was crucified. Jesus died while he was on the cross. After he was crucified, Jesus was buried in a stone tomb in the evening on the day that he was crucified. The stone tomb where Jesus was buried (on the day that he was crucified) was empty on Sunday morning, about 48 hours after Jesus was crucified. On Sunday, about 48 hours after Jesus was crucified, some of … [Read more...]

Apologist Responds? Check. Uncharitable? Check. Uses Cheap Shots and Insults? Check.

I stopped reading Triablogue some time ago, but today I decided to make an exception. After I posted my comment about the twin hypothesis, I thought to myself, "I'll bet Steve Hays responds to this and uses the 'Village Atheist' tag." My prediction was accurate. (See his post here.)In my comment, I didn't defend the twin hypothesis. I didn't even lay out Cavin's case for the Twin hypothesis in his Ph.D. dissertation. All I did was define the hypothesis in order to prove the point that R … [Read more...]

Why Skeptics Do Not Need the Hallucination Theory to Reject the Resurrection

According to Victor Reppert, skeptics need the hallucination theory in order to reject the resurrection. Why? Read his blog post to find out.I see his point, i.e., I understand where he is coming from when he says that he thinks (non-extreme) skeptics need the hallucination theory. But I disagree with him for at least two reasons.First, Reppert assumes that the Resurrection hypothesis explains the data, but that's merely an assumption on his part. He gives no good reasons to believe that … [Read more...]