Search Results for: crossley prayer open

Can Biblical Scholarship Free itself from Confessional and Evangelical Interests?

The goal of Biblical Studies Online is to provide both biblical scholars and the interested wider public with ease of access to quality biblical scholarship, as it comes available online. . . . . Unfortunately, it is often difficult to locate these resources on the internet, and sometimes difficult for those less experienced with biblical … Continue reading “Can Biblical Scholarship Free itself from Confessional and Evangelical Interests?”

Unrecognized Bias in New Testament Scholarship over Christian Origins

From time to time someone – lay person or New Testament scholar – publicly insists that there is no more bias among the professional scholars of the Bible than there is among any other academic guild. The question arose recently on the Bible Criticism and History forum and I found myself scrambling quotations from members … Continue reading “Unrecognized Bias in New Testament Scholarship over Christian Origins”

Was Jesus Another Charismatic Holy Man? The Evidence according to Geza Vermes

Some scholars today say a major work of Geza Vermes first published in 1973, Jesus the Jew: a historian’s reading of the Gospels, has “stood the test of time”. From my own recollection of Vermes’ book I don’t think that is necessarily a good thing. Here are some of the more recent accolades: Indeed, some of … Continue reading “Was Jesus Another Charismatic Holy Man? The Evidence according to Geza Vermes”

Good Bias, Hidden Bias and the Phantom of Jesus in Christian Origin Studies

This post continues on from The Secular Approach to Christian Origins, #3 (Bias) and addresses the next stage of Professor James Crossley’s discussion on what he believes is necessary to move Christian origins studies out from the domination of religious bias and into the light of secular approaches. In the previous post we covered Crossley’s dismay that scholarly conferences … Continue reading “Good Bias, Hidden Bias and the Phantom of Jesus in Christian Origin Studies”

The Secular Approach to Christian Origins, #3 (Bias)

The previous two posts in this series: Why Christianity Happened — Toward a Secular Approach to Christian Origins Why Christianity Happened – The Secular Approach, 2 The Necessity and Problem of Bias in Christian Origins Studies James Crossley (Why Christianity Happened: A Sociological Account of Christian Origins (26-50 CE)) examines the role of bias in … Continue reading “The Secular Approach to Christian Origins, #3 (Bias)”

O’Neill-Fitzgerald Debate #3, Are Most Biblical Historians Christian Preachers?

–o0o– All posts in this series are archived in the O’Neill-Fitzgerald Debate. –o0o– In Nailed David Fitzgerald (DF) wrote: It’s true enough that the majority of Biblical historians do not question the historicity of Jesus – but then again, the majority of Biblical historians have always been Christian preachers, so what else could we expect … Continue reading “O’Neill-Fitzgerald Debate #3, Are Most Biblical Historians Christian Preachers?”

Hypocritical Christ-mythers: Cameron’s response to Neil Godfrey at Vridar — & my response back

Cameron, a critic of Dave Fitzgerald’s Nailed, has responded to my remarks (Are Mythicist Sceptics Hypocritical for Attacking Creationists) about his accusation that those who reject the historicity of Jesus are hypocritical if they also criticize Creationists for rejecting an academic consensus. As seems to be par for the course with these sorts of attacks, … Continue reading “Hypocritical Christ-mythers: Cameron’s response to Neil Godfrey at Vridar — & my response back”

The Bible says it, biblical historians believe it

Well, they don’t believe all of it, of course, but they do believe enough of it (they would deny faith is involved) to use as a skeletal framework in their various reconstructions of Christian origins. Mainstream biblical scholarship (both Christian and secular) for most part bases its reconstructions of Christian origins on methods that would … Continue reading “The Bible says it, biblical historians believe it”

“Partisanship” in New Testament Scholarship

In 2006 James Crossley‘s Why Christianity Happened was published. (James G. Crossley belongs to the University of Sheffield, the same whose Biblical Studies program was the subject of international controversy late last year, and with which a recent commenter on this blog was heatedly involved.) As “a sociohistorical account of Christian origins (26-50 CE)” (the … Continue reading ““Partisanship” in New Testament Scholarship”

“Most critical scholars” confusing plot setting and character constructs with historical fact

When discussing the evidence for the historical Jesus in Honest to Jesus Robert Funk writes What do we know about this shadowy figure who is depicted in snapshots in more than twenty gospels and gospel fragments that have survived from antiquity? The short answer is that we don’t know a great deal. But there are … Continue reading ““Most critical scholars” confusing plot setting and character constructs with historical fact”