It is currently Fri Nov 15, 2019 9:58 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 11:11 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
honorentheos wrote:
Finishing it, the Marcion link is hinted at in the questions section but never discussed. Ehrman offended Price visibly before then when he scoffed at the idea Paul did not write Galatians so I think Price was not willing to offer up much that he knew Ehrman would dismiss.

Two Mormon mentions. Obviously something about Mormons and mythicism I guess. They didn't present well in either case.

The questions with the audience was much more interesting than the initial position staking IMO.



Thankyou, read with interest.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:34 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9724
In fairness to Robert Price, I recognize that there were many things that Ehrman said that I would backfill from my own past readings of his views. And not having that same level of familiarity with Price’s work, I couldn’t do the same equally.

For example, and to tie this to Mormonism – an audience member who was almost certainly a former Mormon asked Dr. Ehrman a convoluted question that basically compared the Jesus story with the story behind the gold plates. His point was meant to attack Ehrman’s position that the invention of a Messiah who was also crucified by the Romans was so improbable an invention given the meaning of Messiah at the time it serves as strong evidence against the story of Jesus being entirely invention. Rather, it makes the most sense if one sees it as people believing the man Jesus was the Messiah and, having been crucified, this act needed explanation which was a lot for the Jews of the time to swallow. The former Mormon tried to argue that the fabrication of a Jesus figure needed a plausible way of killing him off much in the same way Joseph Smith needed angelic snatch-and-grab gold plates to pull his con off. In which case, what is more probable given the reality of the time than that the Romans executed him for claiming to be God? He managed to mangle his argument up so bad Ehrman couldn’t parse what he was trying to argue and instead came back to the basic approaches of higher and text criticism along with how historians do what they do. But his answer really relied a lot on someone have more background info on those processes, and frankly anyone asking the questions that were being asked obviously lacked that background info. So when the person said, “I don’t buy it.” Ehrman rather bluntly said, “It doesn’t matter if you don’t buy it. That’s just how history works.” And then said something about buying something in the hallway after the meeting which got a few laughs.

Backfilling in was easy to do in this case, and I was in agreement with Ehrman though clearly not just by relying on what he was able to share in the debate.

What then intrigues me about Price is his early point that the Jesus-as-myth-only came about through the variety and competition of many different competing views and stories through evolutionary processes until someone that we now would consider the recognizable Jesus the Christ of the New Testament emerged and was capable of definition. Nothing he said in the debate really fleshed that out, IMO, yet there were moments where I got the sense if he went to that argument and spent more time there he may have made compelling points. Instead, it often seemed more like Mormon apologists trying to explain how Egyptian currencies used before the common era combined with Mesoamerican artifacts can be construed as relevant to the Book of Mormon. It often fell flat for me and left me wondering if all apologetics end up sounding the same in order to appear plausible where plausibility is the only standard that matters? I don’t know, but I wonder if a different venue, and more casual less debate-styled discussion between Price and Ehrman would have been better? Certainly Ehrman came in with the intention of establishing his own position rather than refuting that of mythicists which worked better, IMO, than the approach Price took of having prepared points from which to attempt a refutation of Ehrman’s books and public positions. The debate got much better as it moved into the discussion with the audience I thought, where the majority of participants questioned Ehrman and he had a chance to tackle common beliefs about a mythic, non-existent Jesus.

One other item that came out of the discussion was related to the Bayesian Probability methods of Richard Carrier. Ehrman deferred on being able to comment on the specifics of it’s application but noted two things. One of which being that Carrier is one of two people who use Bayesian Probability to tackle the question of Jesus as a historical person. And, since Carrier comes to the conclusions BP makes it clear there is a high probability that Jesus was not a historical figure and the other scholar who uses BP has the conclusion it supports the Resurrection is a real event with a high level of probability it should raise considerable red flags. The other point on it being the accountants who have talked to him about it who are apparently in the know on BP believe it is being wrongly applied on the question in both cases. Price also offered he didn’t feel qualified to comment on it in a self-depreciation way.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:39 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9724
Also. I have not read this book but from the reply Price made in the debate I have reason to believe the Marcion as inventor of Paul theory is explained in this book -

https://www.amazon.com/Amazing-Colossal ... 156085216X

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:49 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
Thankyou.

For me, the book (for the early Mormons and converts) was the hook. People like a good story that connects the supernatural with the mundane and the Book of Mormon does that. It, in part, explains the growth of Mormonism.

For the early christian converts and adherants, resurrection was the initial hook. Both Jews and Gentiles could relate to it, as a common theme running through both Greek and Jewish culture.

Still, the most sense of the evidence is by assuming a real Galilean teacher under the myth. It makes most sense of Paul's evidence in the first instance.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:40 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9724
Mary wrote:
Thankyou.

For me, the book (for the early Mormons and converts) was the hook. People like a good story that connects the supernatural with the mundane and the Book of Mormon does that. It, in part, explains the growth of Mormonism.

For the early christian converts and adherants, resurrection was the initial hook. Both Jews and Gentiles could relate to it, as a common theme running through both Greek and Jewish culture.

Still, the most sense of the evidence is by assuming a real Galilean teacher under the myth. It makes most sense of Paul's evidence in the first instance.

That seems very fair. I might add there are probably a spectrum of reasons both early Mormonism and early Christianity were able to attract sufficient adherents to bet the odds and become successful movements. And part of those reasons are environmental (the Roman context of the 1st Century CE on the one hand, and that of a young Republic with a unique tension between tradition and a wide frontier to escape to on the other) but I would absolutely agree that the appeal of a resurrected God and that of American scripture were major portions of those spectrums.

I'm most often confused by the mythicist position and it's almost absolute need to disprove a historical Jesus in order to create safe distance from Christianity. As if the potential for a historical, non-divine Jesus still embodied sufficient gravity to potentially threaten ones escape from Christianity as myth. Maybe many or even most are simply coming down on that side based on an objective assessment of the evidence but it doesn't usually seem that way when one is engaging on the subject.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 5:10 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
Just been watching this

https://youtu.be/LPZ39rqaIZ0


Which is a discussion with Richard Carrier, Dave Fitzgerald and Robert Price. On their own turf, it was interesting to listen to their views. Robert comes across as the most knowledgeable in christian origins specifically. I like his approach.

His argument appears to be that, yes, there could have been a historical man/men underneath the myth, but that he is totally lost to us.

I am not sure that is the case. I look at the various constructions of Q and Mark and see an an individual beneath it.

Ehrman, yesterday, discussed on his blog the incorrect assumption that mythicists hold that Mark is the only source. It isn't. There are independent sources underneath both the canonical and non canonical writings and accounts of Jesus' life.

We also have to account for people like Papias, and the writings of the Didache. For Good reason ((specially around the Eucharist) many regard it as early in part.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Last edited by Mary on Fri Oct 28, 2016 5:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 5:27 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
They seem to have an issue with Paul referring to Jesus as James brother, which they take as a more more generic brother in the Lord. Okay, but somewhere, before Jesus was drawn as a God, Mark recollects he had a real mum and dad, and real brothers and sisters. One of the brothers was indeed James.

So, Mark 3:21 has his family thinking he has truly lost it.

Quote:
21When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."


Then later in the chapter

Quote:
31Then Jesus’ mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”




and again in Mark 6:3
Quote:
3Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,a Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.



Unless we want to argue that Mark copied Paul somehow initially, then these seem independent witnesses, and that, going against the grain of people who didn't want him to have brothers and sisters....because...God..

The difficulty is knowing when and how Mark was edited and who influenced whom.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 9:37 am 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:18 pm
Posts: 830
Mary wrote:
Thankyou, read with interest.

Seconded! Thanks, honor!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 7:53 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 5764
Location: Firmly on this earth
http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/11435
This is Carrier's realistic assessment of the debate. Like I say, it's too bad Ehrman doesn't man up and debate the actual knowledgable scholar on this.

_________________
Is Midgely serious? Peterson's blog is a patty-cake, surface only, all too frequently plagiarized bit of ephemeral nonsense. Why would anyone suppose avatars must be real? Midgley has lost his tiny little mind. Maybe he can go over to never-neverland and harass Peter Pan for not really knowing how to fly. -Lemmie-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 8:37 pm 
God

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 1:04 am
Posts: 3570
Philo Sofee wrote:
http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/11435
This is Carrier's realistic assessment of the debate. Like I say, it's too bad Ehrman doesn't man up and debate the actual knowledgable scholar on this.


I know Carrier is very smart and all that s***, but is he an expert in New Testament studies and history? Is he a University professor? He may be right, but I think he needs to convince his peers first.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 8:44 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 9724
Thanks for posting this, Philo Sofee. It's interesting to see that at least my impression of Robert Price's performance was not completely biased. ;)

Reading through his assessment, I have to say it may have made for a better debate if he was there instead of Price but it's also much easier to sort out counterarguments from an armchair than at the podium so who knows if it would have been a knock down fight or just a different way of talking past one another.

I do think it's telling Carrier failed to respond to the one place Bayesian Probability came in the Q&A because it's the one place he is specifically mentioned by both parties. One would think he'd have taken some time to address the argument.

_________________
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 8:48 pm 
God

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 1:04 am
Posts: 3570
oh s***! Bob price is just one year older than Bart Ehrman. Poor Bob.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2016 10:20 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 20265
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
Philo Sofee wrote:
http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/11435
This is Carrier's realistic assessment of the debate. Like I say, it's too bad Ehrman doesn't man up and debate the actual knowledgable scholar on this.


Uh, are you saying that Bob Price is not a knowledgeable scholar?

:confused:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 2:45 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
I agree with Kishkumen on this. Of the three, Carrier, Fitzgerald and Price, Price is the one who knows his stuff when it comes to Christian origins specifically. Philo, I really don't understand your approach here.

Did you listen to the presentations I linked to above? I think it might just change your opinion of Robert Price. When it comes to early christian origins, he really is in another league altogether, and I mean that as no disrespect to Carrier.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:10 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 5764
Location: Firmly on this earth
DoubtingThomas wrote:
Philo Sofee wrote:
http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/11435
This is Carrier's realistic assessment of the debate. Like I say, it's too bad Ehrman doesn't man up and debate the actual knowledgable scholar on this.


I know Carrier is very smart and all that s***, but is he an expert in New Testament studies and history? Is he a University professor? He may be right, but I think he needs to convince his peers first.

is the only way to be correct these days is be a university professor?

_________________
Is Midgely serious? Peterson's blog is a patty-cake, surface only, all too frequently plagiarized bit of ephemeral nonsense. Why would anyone suppose avatars must be real? Midgley has lost his tiny little mind. Maybe he can go over to never-neverland and harass Peter Pan for not really knowing how to fly. -Lemmie-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:12 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 5764
Location: Firmly on this earth
Kishkumen wrote:
Philo Sofee wrote:
http://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/11435
This is Carrier's realistic assessment of the debate. Like I say, it's too bad Ehrman doesn't man up and debate the actual knowledgable scholar on this.


Uh, are you saying that Bob Price is not a knowledgeable scholar?

:confused:

No I'm not. But it's obvious he's in no shape to actually debate. Whereas Richard Carrier most certainly is capable of holding a very good debate. But Bart Ehrman withholds. It's not a surprise.

_________________
Is Midgely serious? Peterson's blog is a patty-cake, surface only, all too frequently plagiarized bit of ephemeral nonsense. Why would anyone suppose avatars must be real? Midgley has lost his tiny little mind. Maybe he can go over to never-neverland and harass Peter Pan for not really knowing how to fly. -Lemmie-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:13 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 5764
Location: Firmly on this earth
Mary wrote:
I agree with Kishkumen on this. Of the three, Carrier, Fitzgerald and Price, Price is the one who knows his stuff when it comes to Christian origins specifically. Philo, I really don't understand your approach here.

Did you listen to the presentations I linked to above? I think it might just change your opinion of Robert Price. When it comes to early christian origins, he really is in another league altogether, and I mean that as no disrespect to Carrier.

I think I am being misunderstood. I'm well aware that Price is very knowledgeable about Christian Origins. His book pre Nicene New Testament is simply outstanding. But I'm also aware that Richard Carrier is also very knowledgeable about Christian Origins. But because he doesn't teach at a university he is pooh poohed. It's just too bad that's all.

_________________
Is Midgely serious? Peterson's blog is a patty-cake, surface only, all too frequently plagiarized bit of ephemeral nonsense. Why would anyone suppose avatars must be real? Midgley has lost his tiny little mind. Maybe he can go over to never-neverland and harass Peter Pan for not really knowing how to fly. -Lemmie-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:28 am 
God

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 1:04 am
Posts: 3570
Philo Sofee wrote:
is the only way to be correct these days is be a university professor?


Not necessarily, but like I said he needs to convince his peers first. If he fails to convince them, why on Earth should he convince us?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 1:09 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 5764
Location: Firmly on this earth
DoubtingThomas wrote:
Philo Sofee wrote:
is the only way to be correct these days is be a university professor?


Not necessarily, but like I said he needs to convince his peers first. If he fails to convince them, why on Earth should he convince us?

Then there is the issue of convincing his peers, and who and how do we define them, but yes, you have a point.

_________________
Is Midgely serious? Peterson's blog is a patty-cake, surface only, all too frequently plagiarized bit of ephemeral nonsense. Why would anyone suppose avatars must be real? Midgley has lost his tiny little mind. Maybe he can go over to never-neverland and harass Peter Pan for not really knowing how to fly. -Lemmie-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:44 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1774
Philo Sofee wrote:
Mary wrote:
I agree with Kishkumen on this. Of the three, Carrier, Fitzgerald and Price, Price is the one who knows his stuff when it comes to Christian origins specifically. Philo, I really don't understand your approach here.

Did you listen to the presentations I linked to above? I think it might just change your opinion of Robert Price. When it comes to early christian origins, he really is in another league altogether, and I mean that as no disrespect to Carrier.

I think I am being misunderstood. I'm well aware that Price is very knowledgeable about Christian Origins. His book pre Nicene New Testament is simply outstanding. But I'm also aware that Richard Carrier is also very knowledgeable about Christian Origins. But because he doesn't teach at a university he is pooh poohed. It's just too bad that's all.



Again, did you listen to the youtube presentation with Carrier, Fitzgerald and Price. Price really is in another league. (imo) Both Carrier and Fitzgerald defer to him, because they know it.

Price was the ideal debate partner with Ehrman.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Bart Ehrman vs Robert Price
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 6:41 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 5764
Location: Firmly on this earth
No, not yet.

_________________
Is Midgely serious? Peterson's blog is a patty-cake, surface only, all too frequently plagiarized bit of ephemeral nonsense. Why would anyone suppose avatars must be real? Midgley has lost his tiny little mind. Maybe he can go over to never-neverland and harass Peter Pan for not really knowing how to fly. -Lemmie-


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Fence Sitter, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group