Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
A few months ago I posted about Michael Zolondek’s claims that historical Jesus scholarship uses the same historical methods as those used by other historians. Michael himself responded and I assured him and others that I would return to his book and compare his claims about his methods with the actual processes found in the … Continue reading “A Bedrock Assumption in Historical Jesus Studies”
This post continues my assessment of the claims made in a doctoral dissertation by Michael Zolondek (supervised by Larry Hurtado and Helen Bond of the University of Edinburgh) that Jesus scholars use the same methods as historians of other fields. The sorts of methods he is addressing are specifically the “criteria of authenticity”. Though challenged … Continue reading “Part 2 of Testing the Claim that Jesus Scholars Use the Methods of Other Historians”
Damn. I fell for it (again). A professor promoted a new book as “making the most sense of the crucifixion” and “making a fresh contribution to studies of the ‘historical Jesus’” so I made a rush purchase and read it the same day it arrived. Silly me, I should first have checked the University of … Continue reading “Testing the Claim that Jesus Scholars Use the Methods of Other Historians (Part 1)”