Posts Tagged ‘Jesus’


SeatedBuddhaGandhara2ndCentury (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


Some historical humility from skeptics would be nice.


“Well, in any case, it’s an interesting parallel to the questions and controversies over the “historical Jesus.”  There are, it would seem “historical Buddha” inquiries as well.  But the story also offers a reason and basis for gaining some perspective.  In the case of Jesus, we’re not entirely sure what year he was born (arguments typically ranging between ca. 4-7 BCE), or what year precisely to date his execution (between 28-34 CE; see Helen Bond’s brief discussion of the matter on the CSCO blog site here).  In the case of Gautama, it appears that scholars dispute which century in which to place him.  Neither left writings, and around each one a massive trans-local religious movement developed.  In the case of Jesus, our earliest known accounts were written ca. 40+ years after his death (the four familiar Gospels).  In the case of Gautama, the oldest biographical source is a poem,  Buddhacarita, dated to the 2nd century CE (i.e., approximately 600 years after the time when most scholars think Gautama died).”

via On Getting Some Perspective: The “Historical Buddha” | Larry Hurtado’s Blog.




simul iustus et peccator, 




Eric Adams 


Rossville, GA 






Reductio ad Absurdum

Reductio ad Absurdum (Photo credit: \|\!!!)


It is always interesting to see Jesus’ interaction with His opponents, in the context in which they occur. He treated confrontational, non-repentant questioners heavily with the Law. He responded to contrition and repentant humility with comfort. When He dealt with the Pharisees, Sadducees, and professionals in the Law, who came with nefarious motives, He pulled no punches, and was quite logical in His treatment. The following quote is from an excellent post dealing with Jesus’ use of the reductio ad absurdum in His argumentation with His antagonists. Read the whole post, it is very gander-worthy.


Christ and The Pharisees

Christ and The Pharisees (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


“In their book The Apologetics of Jesus authors Norman Geisler and Patrick Zukeran demonstrate that Jesus was a master logician and very adept with making arguments.  For example, they point out an example of Jesus arguing reductio ad absurdum in the gospels:”Reductio ad absurdum reduction of absurdity is an argument that demonstrates that if something is supposed to be true but it leads to a contradiction or absurdity, then it cannot be true.  It works this way: The argument begins with the premises your opponent holds.  Then you reveal how this leads to a contradiction, and thus your opponents view is reduced to absurdity.  This is a powerful way to reveal the false nature of a view, for if we can show that it leads to a contradiction, then it cannot be true.


Matthew 12:22-28.  Jesus uses the reductio ad absurdum argument to respond to the Pharisees accusation that he is exorcising demons by the power of Satan.  Jesus demonstrates that their premise leads to a contradiction:


“Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand.  If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself.  How then can his kingdom stand?  And if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out?” vv. 25-27


Jesus begins with the Pharisees premise that he drives out demons by the power of Satan.  He points out that if he is empowered by Satan to drive out demons, Satan is casting out his own servants.  This would mean Satan is divided against himself, and any kingdom, city, or household that develops internal strife will destroy itself.  Jesus goes on to point out that there are contemporary Jewish exorcists who also cast out demons.  If they believe these men cast out demons by the power of God, why do they not believe that Jesus does so by the power of God?…Thus, Jesus uses the reductio ad absurdum argument to show that the claim that his authority to cast out demons is from Satan creates a contradictory and absurd conclusion.” “


via Truthbomb Apologetics: Jesus Argued Reductio Ad Absurdum.


simul iustus et peccator,


Eric Adams


Remember this the next time a skeptic, postmodern Emergent, or cult member makes the statement that ascribing Divinity to Christ was a later development. Read the whole article, it’s worth the effort.


English: close-up of P46 reading of textual va...

English: close-up of P46 reading of textual variant in 1 Co 2:4 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)



“So how does Paul fit Jesus in with this strong statement of Jewish monotheism?


English: Papyrus Nash, fragment of the Ten Com...

English: Papyrus Nash, fragment of the Ten Commandments and the Shema Yisrael prayer, found 1930 in Egypt Česky: Papyrus Nash, fragment obsahující desatero a modlitbu Šema Jisrael, nalezen 1930 v Egyptě (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Paul alludes to the Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.


4  So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.


5  For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”),


6  yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.


Holy mackerel! How did that get in there? Paul is splitting the roles of God in the the Shema and identifying Jesus in one of the divine roles! Jesus is not an ordinary man. That passage “through whom all things came” foreshadows John identifying Jesus as “the Word of God”, which “became flesh and dwelt among us”. Holy snark – did you guys know that was all in here so early?


The date for 1 Corinthians is 55 AD. It should be noted that skeptical scholars like James Crossley accept these passages, and you can check it out in the debate audio yourself.”


via Did the divinity of Jesus emerge slowly after many years of embellishments? | Wintery Knight.


simul iustus et peccator,


Eric Adams