2009-05-04

dead links resurrected (in another body of course)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

my dodo site with all my vridar links is dead (i knew i should have taken more notice of that ‘dodo’ name)

have begun work on restoring these, one by one, to a new domain, http://vridar.info/

Bio
Latest Posts

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

How the Holy Spirit Replaced Jerusalem in a Power Game - 2021-11-05 07:56:55 GMT+0000
“The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels? - 2021-10-31 11:10:13 GMT+0000
Indigenous India-Australia Ties - 2021-10-28 10:00:10 GMT+0000

0 thoughts on “dead links resurrected (in another body of course)”

neilgodfrey says:

2009-05-05 07:43:20 GMT+0000 at 07:43

and i think and hope most of my vridar.info links within this blog are also finally restored — do let me know of any still broken, pls, though — neilgodfrey[AT]vridar{dot}info

Loading...

Reply

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

"I always enjoy reading Neil’s blog because I think that he is careful, thorough, intellectually fair, and honest."

— April DeConick, – November 2007
"I find your blog most interesting and appreciate your ongoing effort to keep to the evidence for the issues discussed!"

-- Thomas L. Thompson, - April 2020
"For an excellent example of generally high-quality scholarship by someone who isn’t a biblical studies professor, see Neil Godfrey’s work posted on the website vridar.org."

— Tom Dykstra, – JOCABS 2015
"Neil, this is actually rather useful. Good job."

— R. Joseph Hoffmann, – June 2014
"These reviews of yours are so bloody weird!"

— James Crossley, – April 2010
"I want to say here that this site is so resourceful and highly on top of the most modern scholarship in the areas discussed here. . . I know of no other site which offers a wide range of topics related to careful critical analysis of historically and scripturally related issues."

-- Martin Lewadny, - March 2009
"I still wonder at all the material you turn out for Vridar. The more I read your stuff (and I still do, of course), the more I realize how much we all owe you. Your voice is unique."

— Earl Doherty, November 2013 (personal email)
"By the way, my thanks to Neil for an ongoing superb job of exposing Jim’s review for what it is: a farcical and none too effective exercise in mythicism assassination, nothing to do with rational, let alone unbiased, scholarship. I’m also happy to see even Jim giving Neil credit where credit is due."

— Earl Doherty, June 2011
"Here I give an admittedly subjective short list, in random order, of useful, high level and regularly updated weblogs on the study of the Old Testament . . . ‘Vridar: Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science’ (http://vridar.org/) by Neil Godfrey"

-- Klaas Spronk, - Bibliotheca Orientalis LXXI, 3/4 (2014)
"I’d like to thank you for this very nice representation of what I was trying to show in the book. It’s always gratifying when a reader zeroes in on exactly those aspects I thought were most interesting and most central to my argument. Thank you for this careful and engaged reading of my work – much appreciated!"

— Eva Mroczek, – June 2017
"Neil, for what it is worth it is obvious to me that if you had earlier in life tracked into a graduate program at one of the world’s leading research universities you would be one of the world’s formidable ones. You are doing essentially the same quality now (apart from the philology and languages) except mostly sticking to commenting on others’ work as informed comment/discussion."

— Gregory Doudna, – January 2019
"I have found your website really valuable as an interpretive filter for Biblical scholarship, especially the origins of Christianity and historicity of Jesus issue. Your clarity of expression, fair comments and personal insights are much valued. I refer to your site frequently as yet more names and publications pop up requiring an academic critique and helpful recommendations for book purchases. So, please continue to delve deeply and share this intellectual sustenance with your grateful readers."

— Mary Booker, – February 2020 (personal email)
"Note that I do not use the term ‘amateur’ pejoratively. . . . In fact, Godfrey is extremely well read and his librarian skills have brought many important academic works to my attention."

Raphael Lataster - August 2019
"Thanks for your very elaborate review! I realized that I hadn’t added your blog to our blogroll. This oversight has been corrected. Looking forward to more segments."

— Anthony Le Donne, – September 2009
"Vridar is consistently thought-provoking, well-informed, and asking the right questions. There are intelligent, thoughtful comments and commenters regularly offering productive discussion. Books and publications are covered with a range of perspectives with attempts at fair and accurate representation of others’ arguments and content (where there are occasional and inevitable missteps on that I notice Neil making corrections and apologies where warranted, which wins points with me). Please carry on."

— Gregory Doudna, – January 2019
"I’ve even been cited by atheists with approval (which I really don’t know how to take, so thanks, I think, but I’m not sure, Vrider (even though I feel like I need to take a shower now))."

-- Jim West, – September 2010
"Thanks much for this book review. I think it expands, and contributes to, the effort in honouring Thomas that we with Lukasz originally had in mind with this volume. Best, Emanuel"

-- Emanuel Pfoh - August 2020
"Very good. This post is going straight to the March 2016 Biblical Studies Carnival."

—N.T. Wrong, – March 2016
"Neil Godfrey and Tim Widowfield, who both write at Vridar . . . happen to be some of the most astute and well-read amateurs you can read on the internet on the subject of biblical historicity. I call them amateurs only for the reason that they don’t have, so far as I know, advanced degrees in the subject. But I have often been impressed with their grasp of logic and analysis of scholarship. I don’t always agree with them, but I respect their work."

— Richard Carrier, – March 2014
"Neil, You’ve done a clean job in your posting on ‘Jesus the Healer’. It reflects well on you. Best, John"

— John Moles, September 2011 (personal email)
"Thanks for this detailed interaction! I’ll try to offer something more substantial than 'Thank you' in response at some point, but I didn’t want to wait . . . to express appreciation for your detailed interaction with what I’ve written!"

— James McGrath, – June 2009
"Fantastic. I’m so glad you’re helping to spread these ideas!"

Nancy Fraser - June 2019 (personal email)
"Many thanks for this post, and for the quality of your blog."

— Philippe Wajdenbaum, – November 2018
"I think you have a high quality blog that provides a positive public service by discussing academic topics within a wider audience."

— Russell Gmirkin, – October 2016

Attila Csanyi on Mark: The First Biography of Jesus? (Part 1): “I think that MARK is a pseudo biography, written to bring to life and give a story for the Gentile…” Nov 26, 19:53
Steve Ruis on Mark: The First Biography of Jesus? (Part 1): “Wow, an entire academic pursuit built upon wishful thinking. It seems they all get their exercise from jumping to conclusions.” Nov 26, 18:55
Neil Godfrey on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “A special thank you to Russell and Greg for setting out some of those thoughts on Revelation and the relevance…” Nov 26, 08:24
Mark Topliss on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “Josephus consistently degrades the rebels as reckless criminals in his histories. Thus it is strange to find Josephus appointed the…” Nov 22, 22:13
Russell Gmirkin on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “Revelation 11 took what, maybe an hour to write? But you make a valid point, there was a relatively small…” Nov 22, 18:29
Neil Godfrey on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “What would you say in response to one who said: But by the time John wrote the vision of Rev.…” Nov 22, 13:52
James on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “Sounds great; I encourage you to write it. In the meantime, hopefully this note will stand. I hope Neil and…” Nov 22, 10:36
Russell Gmirkin on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “I was thinking about the weird specificity of Rev. 11:2: (11:1) I was given a reed like a measuring rod…” Nov 22, 05:48
James on “The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels?: “Great discussion by everyone here; including notable published scholars. Anyone interested in the ending/The End of Mark, might consult specifically…” Nov 19, 07:07

Recent Posts

Mark: The First Biography of Jesus? (Part 1) 2021-11-26 18:44:13 GMT+0000

How the Holy Spirit Replaced Jerusalem in a Power Game 2021-11-05 07:56:55 GMT+0000

“The war of 70 is not a major issue” in the Gospels? 2021-10-31 11:10:13 GMT+0000

Indigenous India-Australia Ties 2021-10-28 10:00:10 GMT+0000

Update on Julian Assange 2021-10-27 07:07:18 GMT+0000

Sad farewell to a pioneering colleague 2021-10-25 08:00:39 GMT+0000

When a Priest Loses His Faith 2021-10-17 17:58:04 GMT+0000

A Few Memories from the visiting Met 2021-10-15 14:56:24 GMT+0000

Finding Jesus in (or through) Josephus 2021-10-13 08:22:19 GMT+0000

Mary, Mary, who are you? – part 2 2021-10-11 13:09:37 GMT+0000

Miriam stood afar off 2021-10-09 23:48:38 GMT+0000

Mary, Mary, where did you come from? 2021-10-08 22:07:44 GMT+0000

Mary, Mary, who are you? – part 1 2021-10-07 10:31:41 GMT+0000

Be Optimistic — Or Doomed 2021-10-05 10:58:36 GMT+0000

Reading the Gospel of Mark as Midrash 2021-10-04 07:49:36 GMT+0000

Why We Stopped Flogging 2021-10-01 22:51:46 GMT+0000

Once more on Nazareth, Relevance and Salm versus Carrier 2021-10-01 21:01:48 GMT+0000

Still the Same after 162 years: Our attitude towards other races looking to us for refuge 2021-09-30 10:01:45 GMT+0000

Is the Nazareth Question Important? A Response to Richard Carrier 2021-09-29 14:28:37 GMT+0000

New Page added to the blog 2021-09-28 05:52:00 GMT+0000

Most-Used Tags

Acts of the Apostles

Australia

Bart Ehrman

Bauckham: Jesus and the Eyewitnesses

Biblical Scholarship

Charbonnel: Jesus Christ sublime figure de papier

Christianity

Christian Origins

Christ Myth Debate

Christ Myth Debate: Doherty

Criteria of Authenticity

Doherty: Jesus Neither God Nor Man

Earl Doherty

Epistles

Exchanges with McGrath

Fundamentalism

God and Other Deities

Gospel of John

Gospel of Luke

Gospel of Mark

Gospel of Matthew

Gospels

Gospels and Acts (Canonical)

Historical Jesus

Historical Method

Intertextuality

Islam

Israel-Palestine

James McGrath

John the Baptist

Josephus

Marcion

Maurice Casey

Midrash

Paul

Paul and his letters

Richard Bauckham

Richard Carrier

Robert M. Price

Roger Parvus

Terrorism

Thomas Brodie

Trump

USA

Vridar blog

Archives
Archives
Calendar
May 2009

S M T W T F S

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20 21 22 23

24 25 26 27 28 29 30

31

« Apr Jun »
Meta

Log in

Entries feed

Comments feed

WordPress.org

2009-05-04

dead links resurrected (in another body of course)

by Neil Godfrey

Neil Godfrey

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

Like this:

Related Posts on Vridar

0 thoughts on “dead links resurrected (in another body of course)”

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Neil Godfrey

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)

Share this:

Like this:

Related Posts on Vridar

0 thoughts on “dead links resurrected (in another body of course)”

Leave a Comment Cancel reply