4 ms·
Richard Carrier has made a decent case against a historical Jesus, but I'm not a scholar. On the other side, Bart D. Ehrman is an atheist who backs a historical
by mgamache 8y ago
Richard Carrier has made a decent case against a historical Jesus, but I'm not a scholar. On the other side, Bart D. Ehrman is an atheist who backs a historical Jesus. If he was based on a real person, The Jesus we know is like a Hollywood biography where the story was 'based on actual events' but was exaggerated beyond recognition for rhetorical impact. It's allegorical fiction.
- mgamache 8y agoI am not sure why I got downvoted. Mark is the oldest of the Gospels. The others, especially Matthew and Luke are just derivative works. They are anonymous embellishments of anonymous writing that was never meant as historical record. They were meant to convey the basic ideas to a non-christian populations.
- owens99 8y agoPeople fighting back because the truth hurts.
- ttonkytonk 8y agoWikipedia says Bart Ehrman is "agnostic atheist".
- mgamache 8y agoRight, I think the most common atheist is the agnostic or 'weak' position. Like Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot, a God is possible but the burden of proof is on proving God exists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot