What Winger Presently Gets Wrong: Male Headship: Is It Really Biblical?

Response to Mike Winger's Women in Ministry Part 8 on male headship and whether it is really biblical

The Historical Jesus of the Gospels

Craig S. Keener — Kindle highlights from 'The Historical Jesus of the Gospels'. 3 highlights.

Richard Carrier is a mythicist — he denies Jesus existed at all, a fringe position among credentialed scholars

Introduction to Richard Carrier's approach

Carrier teaches that in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul describes events that occurred in outer space — a cosmic/celestial resurrection rather than an earthly one

Carrier's interpretation of the Pauline resurrection kerygma

Denying evidence for Jesus requires denying historical methodology used to establish other historical events

The logical consistency argument for accepting historical evidence for Jesus

Treating the Gospels as ordinary historical documents and applying standard historical methodology, scholars (even skeptical ones) reach broad consensus on a set of historical facts about Jesus. These facts, assembled together, constitute a powerful cumulative case for the Gospel narrative.

The vast majority of historians — including skeptics — affirm Jesus' historical existence. Only a tiny handful of scholars (Price, Carrier) deny it, and Winger notes they represent a fringe position.

Historians accept that Jesus was baptized by John as historically reliable, partly due to the criterion of embarrassment — early Christians would have had reason to explain away or omit a detail where Jesus submits to a baptism of repentance, suggesting it is not invented.

Scholars broadly agree that during his ministry, people viewed Jesus as a miracle worker and exorcist. Even without affirming the miracles themselves occurred, historians confirm this was the contemporary popular perception.

Historians broadly agree that Jesus himself understood his mission in eschatological terms — that he was bringing in the kingdom of God. This is Jesus's own self-understanding as reconstructed by historical methodology.

There is near-universal scholarly consensus that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate. This is treated as one of the most firmly established facts of ancient history.

Historians broadly agree the disciples sincerely claimed to have seen Jesus alive after his death and genuinely believed this. The question of what explains those claims is debated, but the existence of the belief itself is accepted as historical.

Historians broadly agree that Paul genuinely converted as a result of what he at least believed was an appearance of the risen Christ, representing a dramatic reversal from his role as a persecutor of Christians.

A majority (though not full consensus) of scholars accept that Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea and that the tomb was subsequently found empty. Winger treats this majority position as significant in building the resurrection case.

Even Bart Ehrman — one of the most prominent critical scholars — acknowledges that the New Testament documents are the earliest and best sources for historical knowledge about Jesus, undercutting the dismissal of the Gospels as unreliable.

An eighth, somewhat informal way to use the Bible to prove itself: simply look at Jesus as a person — his words, his historical reality, his life. Engaging seriously with who Jesus is, what he claimed, and what he did produces its own evidential force, especially when combined with the historical bedrock facts scholars agree on.

Winger recommends Mike Licona's 'The Resurrection of Jesus: A Historiographical Approach' as a scholarly source for the consensus historical facts about Jesus. He directs readers specifically to the 'historical bedrock' chapters for the data on scholarly agreements about the baptism, crucifixion, post-resurrection appearances, and related facts.

Debate preparation with Matt Dillahunty context

Mike explains this video is part of his preparation for a debate on the resurrection of Jesus with atheist Matt Dillahunty on April 11th on the Capturing Christianity YouTube channel.

Matt Dillahunty's claim: Paul only gives us death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus

Mike cites a specific claim by Matt Dillahunty (paraphrased) that Paul's writings tell us virtually nothing about the historical Jesus other than death, burial, and resurrection.

Galatians 4:4 — Paul affirms Jesus was a human being born of a woman, born under the Law (i.e., Jewish)

First in a series of scriptures Mike walks through to show what Paul knew about the historical Jesus.

2 Corinthians 5:21 — Paul affirms Jesus was sinless

Continuing the list of what Paul knew about the historical Jesus — his moral character.

1 Corinthians 15:3-8 — the resurrection creed: appearances to Peter, the twelve, 500+, James, all apostles, and Paul

The full resurrection appearance list in 1 Corinthians 15 as evidence Paul knew the historical Jesus and the witnesses to his resurrection.

Galatians 1:19 and 1 Corinthians 9:5 — Jesus had brothers, specifically James

Paul's knowledge of Jesus's family members as evidence of biographical familiarity with the historical Jesus.

Empty tomb: majority scholarly agreement exists, but Mike doesn't know a compelling argument against it

Q&A: question about why the empty tomb is only majority (not unanimous) scholarly agreement.

The Jesus Seminar and the consequence of rejecting eyewitness origins

Mike explains what is at stake if the Gospels are not rooted in eyewitness accounts.

Q&A: Did New Testament writers invent Gospel narratives from OT prophecies? — Refuted by extra-biblical confirmation of historical facts

Q&A from a persistent atheist questioner (Doug) suggesting Gospels were reverse-engineered from OT texts.

Jesus-as-myth parallels to dragon analogy — internet claims of mythological foundations are "hokum"

Mike briefly addresses the mythicist position.

Upcoming guest: Mike Licona to discuss the Jesus Myth movement

Announcements at end of stream

Guest introduction: Dr. Mike Licona, historical Jesus scholar with PhD from University of Pretoria

Guest credentials and background

Paul as historical witness: he knew Jesus's brother James, persecuted the church, and lived in the same region and time as Jesus

Discussing Paul's evidence for the historical Jesus

The Gospels (especially Mark and John) contain eyewitness testimony, serving as evidence for a historical Jesus

The Gospels as historical sources

The rapid genesis and spread of the Christian movement is hard to explain if Jesus were fictional and not within living memory

Sociological argument for historical Jesus

Licona published a critique of the Keith/Le Donne volume in the Bulletin for Biblical Research, arguing scholars are too pessimistic about the criteria

Licona's scholarly engagement with the debate over historical criteria

Advice to those influenced by Richard Carrier: read other skeptical scholars — Ehrman, Lüdemann, Casey — who have proper training in historical Jesus scholarship

Practical guidance for those following Carrier's mythicist arguments

Religion as social control: a compliment, not a refutation

Summer Monsoon asked how to respond to the claim that religion is just a mechanism for social control and helps people cope with death.

The claim that Jesus was based on Jesus ben Ananias (from Josephus) is historically untenable given the robust bedrock consensus of historical facts about Jesus.

Q16 from Aaron Rampersad: what do you think about the claim that Jesus Christ was based on Jesus ben Ananias in Josephus's Jewish War?

Natasha's journey: started a devotional blog in 2011 with three kids under 3. Skeptics began challenging her on her blog — she couldn't answer questions about biblical errors, Jesus's historical existence, science disproving God. Realized her kids would face these challenges and she needed to equip them. Discovered the world of apologetics.

Natasha's journey into apologetics

Richard Carrier's mythicist theory (Jesus in outer space, apostles were schizotypal): Carrier is credentialed but widely disrespected in his field, on the fringe of scholarship. His strength is recall of sources; his weakness is unjustified connections between data points. His scholarly language ("perhaps," "what if") masks the extreme nature of his claims. Put the burden of proof on him to defend his theory.

Richard Carrier mythicism — fringe scholarship

Historical Jesus & Manuscripts: How can we believe in a historical Jesus if the oldest manuscripts we have are from the second or third century?

Q&A question: Historical Jesus & Manuscripts