Reliable historical accounts of Jesus.

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: windword

I agree with that... watch the debate between him and Dr.Ehrman...

Bart ruined him... Craig had nothing to add but his own personal beliefs... He stumbled around like a drunk trying to explain away what Dr.Ehrman presented... and basically ended up with "well that might be true but I don't believe it"

it was pretty sad

My bad, I just did a search again and that came up. I swear the first search I did a couple days ago, popped up as professor at a presperterian seminary.

The point is still the same. The reason he accepts the historicity of Jesus is he needs it to make his pet theory work. If Jesus didn't exist then his theory of "the disiples hallucinated Jesus and added all the divine stuff" only works if he is real. If Jesus was a "king author " type compilation of a few preachers from that era, then his theory is discredited.

Also is it any suprise someone who's whole education was done at bible schools has an ingrained belief in the basic foundation that he did exist.

Well you can make all the excuses for not agreeing with him that you want.... the fact remains he is an accredited scholar... you are... well no one but a member on this board. You're only disagreeing with the evidence because its an amusing past time, and it seems to be fun to disagree with people around here... even if the person disagreeing doesn't know squat about the subject matter

One of Dr.Ehrman's book's is titled "did Jesus exist"... Read it and educate yourself...

He is one of the worlds foremost Critics of the New testament... and even he says historically its undeniable...

Disagree all you want... it doesn't change the truth of the matter...

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Akragon

I could add what some people here seems to be unaware of. The two books (or epistles) by Jude and by James in question here, are ver much included in the Bible. These are not some apocrypha or uncanonised material.

I apologize... I thought wthose were part of the Dead Sea scrolls.

No problem. Since you mention the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) -- contrary to popular belief, there is actually nothing related to Christianity or Jesus in the DDS material. They were a separate cult.

Huh?!? The Dead Sea scrolls were from a group of gnostic Christians... With books in the early life of Jesus... As well as most of the rest of the NT. A Christian in modern times wouldn't recognize them because of how changed they are, but they definately have info on Jesus.

No, but I suspect you're thinking of the Nag Hammadi library, discovered in Egypt just as the War ended in 1945. Nag Hammadi would fit your description (see link below).

The DSS on the other hand were probably a stowed away library of an Essene community. The books must have been sealed up in jars, hidden around the time of the Great Jewish Revolt culminating with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and the start of the current Diaspora. It includes plenty of material connected to the daily life of the monks, a treasure map promising tons of gold, a few dark prophecies showing off their dualist cosmology, really old Tannakh and Torah fragments, commentaries and teachings, but nothing directly related to Jesus or any of his cults. Check it out. I own copies of most of these texts in English translations:

Nag Hammadi ==> en.wikipedia.org...
Dead Sea Scrolls ==> en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Akragon

I could add what some people here seems to be unaware of. The two books (or epistles) by Jude and by James in question here, are ver much included in the Bible. These are not some apocrypha or uncanonised material.

I apologize... I thought wthose were part of the Dead Sea scrolls.

No problem. Since you mention the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) -- contrary to popular belief, there is actually nothing related to Christianity or Jesus in the DDS material. They were a separate cult.

Huh?!? The Dead Sea scrolls were from a group of gnostic Christians... With books in the early life of Jesus... As well as most of the rest of the NT. A Christian in modern times wouldn't recognize them because of how changed they are, but they definately have info on Jesus.

No, but I suspect you're thinking of the Nag Hammadi library, discovered in Egypt just as the War ended in 1945. Nag Hammadi would fit your description (see link below).

The DSS on the other hand were probably a stowed away library of an Essene community. The books must have been sealed up in jars, hidden around the time of the Great Jewish Revolt culminating with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and the start of the current Diaspora. It includes plenty of material connected to the daily life of the monks, a treasure map promising tons of gold, a few dark prophecies showing off their dualist cosmology, really old Tannakh and Torah fragments, commentaries and teachings, but nothing directly related to Jesus or any of his cults. Check it out. I own copies of most of these texts in English translations:

Nag Hammadi ==> en.wikipedia.org...
Dead Sea Scrolls ==> en.wikipedia.org...

approximately another 30% of them are texts from the Second Temple Period and which ultimately were not canonized in the Hebrew Bible, like the Book of Enoch, Jubilees, the Book of Tobit, the Wisdom of Sirach, Psalms 152–155, etc., and

DSS so thought it was the Gnostics that his them.