|
Evidence for Jesus: Response to Brian Flemming's DVD
"The God Who Wasn't There" (Part 2)
see also Part 1: Parallel
Pagan "Crucified Saviors" Examined
The Reliability of the New Testament
The Historical Evidence for Jesus
Response to Brian Flemming's DVD "The God Who
Wasn't There"
Sources, Links, and Audio
text text
text text summarize Raymond Brown, John P. Meier, N. T. Wright, Craig Blomberg, Luke Timothy
Johnson, Robert van Voorst, Gregory Boyd, etc
text text
 The Reliability of the New Testament
text text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
 The Historical Evidence for Jesus
text text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
text
- Jeffery Jay Lowder of Internet Infidels: There is simply nothing intrinsically improbable about a historical Jesus; the New Testament alone (or at least portions of it) are reliable enough to provide evidence of a historical Jesus. On this point, it is important to note that even
G.A. Wells, who until recently was the champion of the christ-myth hypothesis, now accepts the historicity of Jesus on the basis of 'Q'. ("Josh McDowell's 'Evidence' for Jesus," also Wells
The Jesus Myth [Open Court, 1999])
- Secular historian Will Durant: The Christian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul....No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in his flesh. The accepted epistles frequently refer to the Last Supper and the Crucifixion....in essentials the synoptic gospels agree remarkably well, and form a consistent portrait of Christ....no one reading these scenes can doubt the reality of the figure behind them. That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel. (Ceasar and Christ, volume 3 of Story of Civilization)
- Graham Stanton of Cambridge: Today, nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which has to be weighed and assessed critically. There is general agreement that, with the possible exception of Paul, we know far more about Jesus of Nazareth than about any first or second century Jewish or pagan religious teacher.
(The Gospels and Jesus)
- Bishop N.T. Wright: It is quite difficult to know where to
start, because actually the evidence for Jesus is so massive that,
as a historian, I want to say we have got almost as much good
evidence for Jesus as for anyone in the ancient world....the
evidence fits so well with what we know of the Judaism of the
period....that I think there are hardly any historians today, in
fact I don't know of any historians today [aside from G.A. Wells,
etc], who doubt the existence of Jesus....No Jewish, Christian,
atheist, or agnostic scholars have ever taken that [proposition]
seriously since. It is quite clear that in fact Jesus is a very,
very well documented character of real history. So I think that
question can be put to rest. ("The Self-Revelation of God in Human History" from There Is A God by Antony Flew and Roy Abraham Varghese [HarperOne, 2007])
- Robert Van Voorst: Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their
[i.e. Jesus-mythers] arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate
them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely....The theory of Jesus'
nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question....Biblical
scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.
(Jesus Outside the New Testament, 6, 14, 16)
text text
 Response to Brian Flemming's DVD "The God
Who Wasn't There"
text text
text text
BF = Brian Flemming, Q = Question by interviewer, RC = Richard Carrier,
RP = Robert Price
BF: "Christianity was wrong about the solar system, what if it's wrong about something else
too?"
text response
BF: "Of course those aren't the only faces of Christianity." (pics of Charles Manson, Pat Robertson, Dena Schlosser,
LaHaye and Jenkins, David
Koresh)
text response
Q: "After Jesus died and was resurrected, in your own words, what happened then? How did Christianity begin to
spread?"
text response
text response
text response
After decades of examining the historical and geographical details mentioned in the book,
Sir William Ramsay concluded:
Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, he is possessed of the true historic sense....In short this author should be placed along with the very greatest of
historians. (The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New
Testament, 1953, p. 80); Twenty-five years have elapsed since
this book was written, and the time has come when its relation to the
progress of study in the subject should be estimated...It was founded on
the firm conviction that Luke was, not merely trustworthy, but a
historian of the highest order; it followed his guidance unshrinkingly
through regions and topics which were extremely obscure; and in this
respect I have nothing to withdraw, but would only emphasise anew what
was said already. (St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen,
1925, page v).
text response
Long ago the British scholars J. B. Lightfoot and W. M. Ramsay
pointed to the extraordinary accuracy of Acts' knowledge of the widely
differing titles of municipal and imperial officials in the various towns
visited (e.g. 13:12; 17:6; 18:12; 19:31,35) -- an accuracy often proved by
datable inscriptions discovered in the respective sites. Overall the book
is also accurate about the boundaries and alignments of districts and
provinces in the 50s. These observations are a major factor in challenging
the thesis that Acts was fiction written in the mid-2d century, for by
that late date even a meticulous researcher would have been hard put to be
accurate about such details. Also much of what Acts tells us correlates
very well with what we can determine from Paul's own letters.... (An
Introduction to the New Testament by Raymond E. Brown, page 321-2)
text response
And Luke is the historian of this enterprise [the spreading of the
Church by St. Paul to Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia, and Asia, etc] -- one of
the most far-reaching in world history. He shows plainly how it was
done..... Something of his [Paul's] achievements as he worked in one after
another of these centres [Damascus, Jerusalem, Tarsus, Antioch, Corinth,
Ephesus, Rome, etc], and preached the gospel as he journeyed on the
roads from one to the other, may be gathered from allusions in his
epistles. But it is Luke that we have to thank for the coherent record of
Paul's apostolic activity. Without it, we should be incalculably poorer.
Even with it, there is much in Paul's letters that we have difficulty in
understanding; how much more there would be if we had no book of Acts!
(NIV Commentary on the New Testament: Book of Acts by F.F. Bruce,
page 26-27)
text response
text response
BF: "Why is it that Christians can be so specific about the life of Christ, but they're vague about what happened after he
left?" .... "Aren't Christian leaders telling them the
story?"
text response
text response
The blue areas represent the spread of Christianity in the major
countries of today.
text response
BF: "Mark was the first one written, and the other three are clearly derived from
Mark. Mark mentions the destruction of the Jewish temple which happened in the year 70, so the Gospels all came later than that, probably much
later." (graphic appears to have Mark 70+, Matt 80+, Luke 95+, John 110+)
text response
BF: "There's a gap of four decades or more. Most of what we know about this period comes from a man who says he saw Jesus Christ come to him in a vision. He was the apostle Paul, formerly known as Saul of
Tarsus."
text response
BF: "Paul says the Lord told him to start spreading the word of Jesus Christ, and he did it with a
vengeance." "Paul was a bit of a scold, but the salvation he offered through the God he called Christ Jesus was very popular. He traveled widely and in his wake left behind groups of new Christians who formed the early Christian church. Paul wrote lots of letters about Christianity, in fact, he wrote 80,000 words about the Christian religion. These documents represent almost all we have of the history of Christianity during this decades long
gap."
text response
BF: "And here's the interesting thing. If Jesus was a human who had recently lived, nobody told Paul. Paul never heard of Mary, Joseph, Bethlehem, Herod, John the Baptist. He never heard about any of these miracles. He never quotes anything that Jesus is supposed to have said. He never mentions Jesus having a ministry of any kind at all. He doesn't know about any entrance into Jerusalem, he never mentions Pontius Pilate, or a Jewish mob, or any trials at all. Paul doesn't know any of what we would call 'the story of Jesus' except for these last three events [graphic has Christ put on the cross, The Resurrection, and The Ascension].
And even these, Paul never places on earth."
text response
text
BF: "Just like the other savior gods of the time, Paul's Christ Jesus died, rose, and ascended all in a mythical
realm."
text response
 RP: "The early Church Fathers understood
this was a problem because they were already getting the same objections
from pagans....even they didn't deny that these other Jesus-like
characters were before Jesus, or they never would have resorted to
something like that: Satan knew it would happen and counterfeited it in
advance?" Brian Flemming adds: "In case you're wondering,
Yes. This remains the explanation to this day. Fortunately for Christian
leaders, they almost never have to offer it [since most Christians
have never heard of Osiris, Mithras, or Dionysos,
then follows this MP3 clip]."
A graphic shows a little "demonic" cartoon character placing
the "crucified" Orpheus amulet and dating it well before
Christ, but it should be dated to the 3rd or 4th century AD
(post-Christianity). Guthrie's book tells us (Orpheus and Greek
Religion, [2nd edition 1952, reprint 1993], note on page 278) some
scholars believe it is a forgery.
text
text
text
First Apology, chapters 21 - 55
Flemming's DVD shows on screen:
"When we say that Jesus Christ was produced without sexual
union, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven,
we propound nothing new or different from what you believe regarding
those whom you call the sons of Jupiter." -- Justin Martyr,
church father
The actual quote is:
"And when we say also that the Word,
who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and
that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose
again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what
you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter [or
Zeus]." (First
Apology, chapter 21 "Analogies to the history of Christ")
Commentary: Justin appeals to the pagans, and is saying hey, you guys
already believe much of this stuff. While he includes virgin birth,
crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension among these, Justin realizes
neither Dionysos nor Mithras (nor any Greek/Roman god) was crucified; he
also recognizes Mithras was "born from a rock" not virgin born
(see below).
"And what kind of deeds are recorded
of each of these reputed sons of Jupiter [Zeus], it is needless to tell
to those who already know. This only shall be said, that they are
written for the advantage and encouragement of youthful scholars; for
all reckon it an honourable thing to imitate the gods." (First
Apology, chapter 21)
Commentary: Justin notes the stories of the gods were written to
encourage the youth, for everyone knows it is honorable to imitate the
gods. As St. Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" (1 Cor
11:1; cf. 1 Cor 4:16; 1 Thess 1:6; 2:14; 2 Thess 3:7ff; Phil 3:17).
First Apology, chapter 22 covers "Analogies to the sonship of
Christ"
chapter 23 presents "The argument"
chapter 24 "The varieties of heathen worship"
chapter 25 "False gods abandoned by Christians"
chapters 31-53 many predictions/prophecies
And chapter 54 "Origin of heathen mythology"....
"But those who hand down the myths
which the poets have made, adduce no proof to the youths who learn them;
and we proceed to demonstrate that they have been uttered by the
influence of the wicked demons, to deceive and lead astray the human
race. For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the
Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished
by fire, they put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter [i.e. Zeus],
under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea
that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere
marvellous tales, like the things which were said by the poets. And
these things were said both among the Greeks and among all nations where
they [the demons] heard the prophets foretelling that Christ would
specially be believed in; but that in hearing what was said by the
prophets they did not accurately understand it, but imitated what was
said of our Christ, like men who are in error, we will make plain."
(First Apology, chapter 54)
Commentary: Again, Justin is claiming the Hebrew prophets were first
with their prophecies on Christ, the Greeks copied from them, inspired by
the devil/demons. Justin also notes no "proof" is offered for
the Greek gods, because they were not historical but myth. By contrast,
Christianity is a historical religion with a historical Christ and Hebrew
prophecies.
"But in no instance, not even in any
of those called sons of Jupiter [Zeus], did they imitate the being
crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it
having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet foretold, is the
greatest symbol of His power and role; as is also proved by the things
which fall under our observation." (First Apology, chapter 55)
Commentary: Here Justin notes none of the sons of Zeus (which includes
Dionysos/Bacchus) were crucified. Dionysos was ripped apart by the Titans,
not crucified.
Dialogue with Trypho, chapters 69-70
Flemming's DVD shows on screen:
"For when they say that Dionysus arose again and ascended to
heaven, is it not evident the devil has imitated the prophecy?"
-- Justin Martyr, church father
The actual quote is:
 "Be well assured, then, Trypho,"
I continued, "that I am established in the knowledge of and faith
in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which he who is called the devil
is said to have performed among the Greeks; just as some were wrought by
the Magi in Egypt, and others by the false prophets in Elijah's days. For
when they tell that Bacchus [or Dionysos], son of Jupiter [or Zeus], was
begotten by [Jupiter's] intercourse with Semele, and that he was the
discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces,
and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they
introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil]
has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded
by Moses? And when they tell that Hercules was strong, and travelled
over all the world, and was begotten by Jove of Alcmene, and ascended to
heaven when he died, do I not perceive that the Scripture which speaks
of Christ, 'strong as a giant to run his race,' has been in like manner
imitated? And when he [the devil] brings forward Aesculapius as the
raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in
this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? But
since I have not quoted to you such Scripture as tells that Christ will
do these things, I must necessarily remind you of one such: from which
you can understand, how that to those destitute of a knowledge of God, I
mean the Gentiles, who, 'having eyes, saw not, and having a heart,
understood not,' worshipping the images of wood, [how even to them]
Scripture prophesied that they would renounce these [vanities], and hope
in this Christ." (Dialogue
with Trypho, chapter 69)
Commentary: Justin notes Dionysos was not virgin born (Zeus had
intercourse with Semele, etc) and was "torn in [to] pieces" (by
the Titans), not crucified. He also notes it was the O.T. prophecies
recorded by Moses that the Greeks were "imitating."
As for whether Dionysos was "resurrected" he was basically
put back together from his "heart" and/or re-born from the
"thigh" of Zeus. See my section on Dionysos
and the meaning of his "dismemberment."
Justin notes that Mithras
(Persian, then Roman god) was not virgin born:
"And when those who record the
mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the
place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not
perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands
was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that
they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah's words? For
they contrived that the words of righteousness be quoted also by them.
But I must repeat to you the words of Isaiah referred to, in order that
from them you may know that these things are so. They are these....
[Isaiah 33 is quoted]
"Now it is evident, that in this
prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to
eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His
believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to
drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks. And this
prophecy proves that we shall behold this very King with glory; and the
very terms of the prophecy declare loudly, that the people foreknown to
believe in Him were foreknown to pursue diligently the fear of the Lord.
Moreover, these Scriptures are equally explicit in saying, that those
who are reputed to know the writings of the Scriptures, and who hear the
prophecies, have no understanding." (Dialogue with Trypho, chapter
70)
Commentary: Mithras was begotten of a rock, and his myth imitates the
stories found in Daniel and Isaiah. Again, Justin is saying these Old
Testament prophecies came first, and were then copied by the
Greeks/Romans. That's how "the devil has imitated the prophecy."
text
BF: (shows on screen Hebrews 8:4, translated as) "If Jesus had been on earth, he would not even have been a
priest." Hebrews 8:4
text response
BF: "Paul doesn't believe that Jesus was ever a human being. He's not even aware of the idea. And he's the link between the time frame given for the life of Jesus, and the appearance of the first gospel account of that life. This is why you don't hear many Christian leaders talking about the early days of Christianity. Because once you assemble the facts, the story is that, Jesus lived, everyone forgot [referring to decades from 30 AD to 70 AD],
and then they remembered [referring to the Gospels beginning in 70 AD]."
text response
BF: "But it gets even shakier than that. Allegorical literature was extremely common back then [again graphic shows the Gospels]."
text response
RC: "Mark himself probably did not believe he was writing history. He was writing a symbolic message, he was writing a Gospel, the good news, and symbolizing it using biblical parallels, using parallels to pagan religions, and so
forth."
text response
From this point, I'll let Mike Licona's review
and critique answer the rest.
see also Part 1: Parallel
Pagan "Crucified Saviors" Examined
also Part 3: Archaeologists on the
"Lost Tomb of Jesus"
and Part 4: Was Inanna (Ishtar) Crucified?
Was Zalmoxis Resurrected?
Sources, Links, and Audio
on the Reliability of the New Testament and the Gospels
- conservative / evangelical:
- The
New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? by F. F. Bruce
(Intervarsity/Eerdmans, 1981 sixth edition)
- Can We Trust the Gospels? by Mark D. Roberts (Crossway Books, 2007)
- The Historical Reliability of the Gospels by Craig Blomberg
(Intervarsity, 1987, revised/updated 2nd edition, 2007)
-
moderate / evangelical:
-
What are the Gospels? A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography by Richard Burridge (Cambridge / Eerdmans, 1992, 2004)
-
Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony by
Richard Bauckham (Eerdmans, 2006)
-
moderate / Catholic:
-
An Introduction to the New Testament (and appendix
on the "Jesus Seminar") by Raymond Brown (Doubleday,
1997)
- radical / liberal:
- Can We Trust the New Testament?
Thoughts on the Reliability of Early Christian Testimony by G.A.
Wells (Open Court, 2004)
- The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man:
How Reliable is the Gospel Tradition? by Robert M. Price (Prometheus, 2003)
on the Historical Jesus (Christian scholars, historians, apologists,
skeptics)
- conservative / evangelical:
- The Evidence for Jesus by R.T.
France (Intervarsity Press, 1986)
- Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus edited by Wilkins / Moreland
(Zondervan, 1995)
- Jesus and the Victory of God by N. T. Wright (Fortress, 1996)
- The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ by
Gary Habermas (College Press, 1996)
- The Case for Christ: A
Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (Zondervan,
1998)
- Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? : A Debate between William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan
(Baker Academic, 1998)
- Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence by Robert van Voorst
(Eerdmans, 2000)
- Studying the Historical
Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods by Darrell L. Bock (Baker
Academic, 2002)
- The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic
Jesus Tradition by Eddy / Boyd (Baker Academic, 2007)
- conservative / Catholic:
- Jesus of Nazareth by Pope
Benedict XVI (Doubleday, 2007)
- moderate / Catholic:
- A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the
Historical Jesus (volume 1) by John P. Meier (Anchor / Doubleday,
1991)
- The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels by
L.T. Johnson (HarperSanFrancisco, 1996)
- secular / non-Christian:
- Jesus: An Historian's Review of the
Gospels by Michael Grant (Charles Scribner's Sons, 1977)
- The Historical Figure of Jesus by
E.P. Sanders (The Penguin Press, 1993)
- Jesus: Apocalyptic
Prophet of the New Millennium by Bart D. Ehrman (Oxford Univ
Press, 1999)
- radical / liberal:
- The Historical Jesus: The Life of a
Mediterranean Jewish Peasant by John Dominic Crossan (HarperSanFrancisco,
1991)
- The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty (Age of Reason, 1999, 2005)
Responding to Critical Scholars About Jesus
- What Have They Done With Jesus?
Beyond Strange Theories and Bad History -- Why We Can Trust the Bible by Ben Witherington III (HarperSanFrancisco, 2006)
-
Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels by Craig
Evans (Intervarsity, 2006)
- Reinventing Jesus: How Contemporary
Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture by
Komoszewski / Sawyer / Wallace (Kregel Publications, 2006)
- Evidence for Christianity: Historical
Evidences for the Christian Faith by Josh McDowell (Thomas Nelson, 2006)
- The Case for the Real Jesus: A
Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ
by Lee Strobel (Zondervan, 2007)
- Shattering the Christ Myth: Did Jesus
Not Exist? edited by James Patrick Holding (Xulon Press, 2008)
- The Historical Jesus: Five Views
(R.M. Price, J.D. Crossan, L.T. Johnson, J.D.G. Dunn, D. Bock) edited by Beilby / Eddy (Intervarsity, 2009)
DVDs Responding to "The God Who Wasn't There"
Lost
Gospels or False Gospels: The Truth About the "Other Gospels"
and Early Christianity DVD by Ignatius Press
Did
Jesus Really Rise from the Dead? DVD by Ignatius Press
The
Case For Christ DVD by Lee Strobel, et al
The
Case For Faith DVD by Lee Strobel, et al
The
Real Jesus: A Defense of the Historicity and Divinity of Christ DVD by
Eric Holmberg, J.P. Holding, et al
Online Articles
Articles on the "Jesus Myth" from Bede's Library
Shattering
the Christ-Myth by J. P. Holding of Tektonics.org
Extrabiblical,
Non-Christian Witnesses to Jesus by Glenn Miller of Christian
Think-Tank
Analysis
of "The God Who Wasn't There" by GDon
Review
and Critique of "The God Who Wasn't There" by Mike Licona
Josh
McDowell's 'Evidence for Jesus' : Is it Reliable? by Jeffery Jay Lowder
Richard
Carrier blog on "The God Who Wasn't There" by Richard
Carrier
Sample Lectures ( The
Teaching Company )
by PhilVaz -- postponed until 2010 (sorry, must read more to gather
the "best arguments" from both sides)
|
|