>>1313463
It's interesting that people lose their shit over what he says when half of what he says is historically solid and the other half is backed by decent evidense. Most attacks I've seen him are character attacks but everyone with a real phd seems to think he is fine, if a little mediocre.

There is a push from theists that hate him to paint him as a lone gun man pushing his crazy theories when infact what he pushes doesn't deviate much from the normal historical understandings. When angry Christians here this they than just declare the whole study of history to be invalid since it doesn't confirm their prejudices.

>>1313540
>>1313463
His opinions seem pretty mainstream as far as academics go.

>>1313463

A very unfortunate character.

He went into academia interested in the historicity of the Bible and eventually lost his faith because of it.

And then he gets shat on by the community he used to belong to.

His work is hella legit though.

>>1313704
From what I gather the only thing he says that is very contested is whether or not Jesus understood the apocalypse to be a literal or metaphorical thing.

If you put more faith into things like the Gospel of Thomas and early Gnosticism you will end up with a Jesus that is more of a mystic that see's the material world as sinking and you need to get off the boat. If you think these sources are less authentic such as Erhman you will end up with Jesus being an apocalyptic prophet that expects armegeddon within his life time.

>>1313463
Jesus studies are sort of hilarious, because because you even start them, you're going to have to decide whether you are allowed to deduce a miracle from a study of history. Your answer to that question is the only relevant factor, since the best explanation for various facts seems to be a miracle.

This isn't even a unique situation in history, there are lots of cases where the best explanation for something seems to be a miracle. I mean real life is really weird, and only some evidence survives. Does that give you leverage to stop using the framework of physics?

He's probably the most thorough scholar in an area where extreme bias is the norm. Funnily enough I see him shat on mostly by christians and mythicists for not supporting their positions.

Historians and classicists and the like seem to think his work is solid.

>>1313463
Absolutely kicked William Lane Craig's ass in their debate.

Christ predicts the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, so
>It also appears that the Gospel writers know about certain later historical events, such as the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70 ce . . . That implies that these Gospels were probably written after 70.

-"Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)"

>>1314485
Huh, so that isn't anywhere near as bad as you were stating it. Saying it implies it (which it does), is not the same as stating it's an absolute certainty that this means it had to have been written after.

I feel bad for agreeing with you once.

>>1314493
>is not the same as stating it's an absolute certainty
Literally nothing in ancient history is treated as absolute certainty. At the most it's treated as fact for all intents and purposes, as it in this work.

>>1314485
Not an unreasonable assumption given else we know about the gospels.

>>1314485
I'll paraphrase how Bart justifies this thinking. If we allow for the idea of prophecy in the New Testament are you willing to allow it in other sources? The study of the Quaran, of Egyptian thinking, of Babylonian history, of Rasputin, of every society and culture that claims to have them? Religious fundmentals are quick to allow for this type of thinking when it suites their needs but are not consistent in their thinking.

>>1314485
Hi there!

You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of 4chan are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!

Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!

>>1315769
It's Constantine. You obviously new to /his/ and also a huge faggot

>>1314434
What facts are you talking about?
Miracle are never the best explanation.