I'm glad to hear that you are not a fundamentalist. I too appreciate the work of Raymond Brown. I highly respect him. If he believed that the evidence for a biblical story was weak, he said so (the Virgin Birth). If he believed that the story was probably fictional/legendary he said so (Luke's account of a resurrected Jesus eating broiled fish). However, he still believed in the Virgin Birth, miracles, and the bodily resurrection of Jesus! How did he do that? Answer: His faith was not in the inerrancy of the Scriptures or in their eyewitness status. His faith was in the testimony of the Church (the Magisterium: the Church Councils, popes, etc.). I can respect someone who admits that their supernatural belief system is based on blind faith. I appreciate the honesty even though I do not believe it to be rational. Modern Protestants and evangelicals, on the other hand, want to appeal to historical evidence as the basis for their belief, but good historical evidence is just not there.

Here is a quote by Brown from one of his books regarding the oral traditions in the Gospels:

Raymond Brown: "I have already said that I do not think of the evangelists themselves as eyewitnesses of the passion; nor do I think that eyewitness memories of Jesus came down to the evangelists without considerable reshaping and development."

Source: The Death of the Messiah, p. 14

Sounds like a lot of legendary material to me. The subject of a legend can be a real historical figure, but the supernatural deeds attributed to that historical figure, are embellished tall tales (legends).

I have more quotes from Brown here:

https://lutherwasnotbornagaincom.wordpress.com/2016/11/08/majority-of-scholars-agree-the-gospels-were-not-written-by-eyewitnesses/

I see from your blog that you are widely read, so just to let you know where I'm coming from, if I want to read a "believing" biblical scholar, I would read someone like Raymond E. Brown (whom I see you are familiar with), and for a nonbeliever I would read someone like Bart Ehrman. So I have no interest in arguing in favor of things like a three-hour eclipse of the sun at the time of the crucifixion. However, if there is an omnipotent God, and if an omnipotent God wanted the sun to refuse to shine—as it says in the old hymn—certainly he could make it appear to happen without an eclipse visible to the whole world.

I don't believe it is accurate to classify even the most fantastical gospel stories about Jesus as "legends." The consensus is that they arose from oral tradition circulated for some decades and finally written down. I think that would be acceptable to believers like Brown and nonbelievers like Ehrman.

There were the historians of the first century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:1st-century_historians

Yes, a couple of them (Josephus and Tacitus) made VERY brief mention of Jesus, but no mention of him raising numerous people from the dead, the three hour eclipse at his death, a great earthquake that shook dozens of not hundreds of people out of their graves to roam the streets of a major city in the empire, post-crucifixion sightings of a man personally tried, convicted, and sentenced to death by the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, by hundreds of devout Jews of a walking, talking corpse appearing to them out of thin air. If Jesus really did all the fantastical feats attributed to him by the Gospels, you would think that at least one first century historian would give him a little more print that the one or two sentences by Josephus and Tacitus. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". True. But good ol' common sense tells you that these stories are legends. The King of Kings comes back from the grave and neither Jews, Romans, or Christians record it?? Not probable.

-Philo of Alexandria

Philo was a true contemporary of Jesus. He was not an historian per se. He was a thinker, writer, philosopher. But he did at times write about historical events. He wrote extensively about Pontius Pilate...but not one word of the messiah pretender whom Pilate tried, condemned and executed...and three days later allegedly started appearing to large crowds all over Judea and Galilee. Jesus allegedly performed more miracles and raised more people from the dead than ALL the OT prophets combined! Yet, Philo says not one word about him... Common sense tells you: Jesus was not the big deal the Gospels make him out to be.

--Christian authors

If the Gospels were written by associates and close associates of eyewitnesses, why did not one of them record the date of birth, death, or miraculous resurrection of the Messiah, the King of Kings, the Creator of the Universe, the Lord and Judge of all humankind?? Common sense tells us that the fantastical stories about Jesus are legends.

--Jews

Even if Jews did not believe that Jesus was the messiah, if he really did perform so many fantastical miracles and raised so many people from the dead, wouldn't you think at least one Jewish historian would have recorded this event? But no; None did. There is no undisputed mention of Jesus in the Talmud. Christians will say that this lack of mention in the Talmud or other Jewish writings was intentional to eliminate the influence of Christianity, but they have no proof of this other than their own prejudices against "hard-hearted Jews".

Jesus allegedly performed some of the greatest feats known to humankind, but no contemporary Jew, Roman, or pagan recorded these earth-shattering events.

-the Chinese

The Chinese were excellent record keepers. If there had been a three hour eclipse, they would have recorded it.

--the Mayans

No mention in Mayan records of a three day eclipse.

--the Persians, Parthians, etc.

No literate culture of the first century recorded a three hour eclipse. This story is a legend.

SOMEONE would have recorded the dates of these events. . . .

Where, exactly, would you expect to find contemporaneous accounts of such events recorded, along with their dates? In old newspapers?

If God the Creator came to earth in human form, performed numerous fantastical miracles including raising people from the dead; was publicly tried, convicted, and executed by a governor of the Roman Empire; but three days later, rose from the dead and appeared in "heavenly form" to multiple groups of eyewitnesses, including one crowd of over 500 people, SOMEONE would have recorded the dates of these events. But no one did. These stories are legends, folks. If these extraordinary, fantastical, but undated claims were made by any other religion you would laugh and not give it another second of your time. Jesus may have existed, but the fantastical tales about him are clearly legends. Period.

https://lutherwasnotbornagaincom.wordpress.com/2022/12/10/gary-i-doubt-you-could-go-toe-to-toe-with-a-knowledgeable-christian-apologist/

Some scholars have estimated that less than 1,000 Jews converted to Christianity in the first few centuries of the Common Era. If true, that is stunning. And think about this: If Jesus fulfilled ALL the OT messianic prophecies as Christians claim, how is it possible that so few Jews saw in Jesus the fulfillment of God's promises to them? Are the world's Jews that dense? Are the world's Jews so "hard-hearted" (an unprovable, bigoted, conspiracy theory) that they are unwilling to recognize the "strong" evidence staring them in the face??

And how is it possible that with only one or two exceptions, every Jewish Bible scholar who has ever lived has rejected the evidence presented to them by Christians that Jesus was the Jewish messiah or that God raised him from the dead?

Either the world's Jews are stubborn fools or Christians have overestimated the strength of their evidence for this very extra-ordinary claim.

Part 6 - (Coming soon!)

Never mind, I found it.
https://strangenotions.com/answering-5-more-common-objections-to-the-resurrection/

If you’re unwilling to question you’re unable to think.

Mike

Disqus is incurably broken. Join the glorious campaign to transition to a forum! :-)

OK, good luck with the exam. I think that personal experience may be playing a role here. I have lived about as miracle-free, supernatural-free life as a person could possibly imagine. I have never seen anything in my life to indicate the supernatural exists.

Personally, I do dismiss divinely performed miracles out-of-hand. I will certainly admit that strange things happen, of course, unexplained things. I'm waiting to be convinced otherwise.

Some folks do get surprisingly healed, but there are no documented cases that are utterly convincing...and until god starts helping the thousands of third world children who die every day instead of curing Aunt Betty's cancer...Seriously, why bother praying for old Aunt Betty's miracle cure if those thousands of children aren't getting help? It almost seems selfish.

Or until we get amputees growing back limbs overnight, I'll be scratching my head.