Even Bart Ehrman knows that Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried!
This refutes the Qur'an at Surah 4:157, which denies that Jesus Al Masih (The Messiah) was crucified and died.
See “Bart Ehrman: A Hero for Islam?” by Keith Thompson
Keith Thompson has an excellent article that refutes Muslim dependency on Bart Ehrman. He not only shows how using Ehrman defeats the Muslim’s view of the crucifixion, but several other issues also that are key to the Islamic Polemic.
http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/thompson/bart_ehrman_hero.html#fnr_2
Even Bart Ehrman knows that:
Jesus was crucified,
Jesus was buried,
that Paul met with James and others of the 11 disciples/apostles,
and that the gospel of John really does teach the Deity of Christ!
"In any event, Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate." (footnote 2 in Keith Thompson’s article)
(Bart Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, Oxford University Press, 2000], p. 197)
Here are the topics that Keith Thompson covers and shows that each one of the Islamic polemic is not supported by Ehrman.
Topic 1: The Crucifixion of Jesus
Topic 2: Paul the Usurper or Real Apostle of Christ?
Topic 3: Jesus was buried & His Apostles Reported Visions
Topic 4: Does the Bible anywhere teach that Jesus is God?
Another example of Dr. James White's saying, "Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Yup.
Ken, thanks for this reminder, which again reflects that there is a confluence of historical understanding among "liberal" and "conservative" scholars.
It wasn't long ago, that Bertrand Russell was saying "Historically, it is quite doubtful whether Christ ever existed at all, and if He did we do not know anything about Him." (Bertrand Russell, Why I am not a Christian.)
That's just no longer the case any more.
And this is one more reason why conservatives are winning.
I need to check your blog more often, Rhology! Good one!
John,
Indeed, which is also why using Lampe for post-canonical issues of the history of the Roman early church is good; but not relying on his liberalism on Scripture and the Pastoral epistles; and that there is no necessary logical inconsistency in using him that way, as you did.
You say even Bart E. knows Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried? I think you need to listen to the underlying message here...Bart makes it very clear the texts we have of the New Testament can not be trusted...we don't have the originals, etc. etc. I hardly think Bart would back any "claim" as "fact" from a text he so openly "REFUTES"...The Christian Bible. I say, Try again Ken....:)
You completely missed the point, Used to.
Post a Comment