New Testament

2007-04-28

Stephen, Philip and Barnabas (link fixed)

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

by Neil Godfrey

I’ve just begun to catch up with “Parallel Lives: The Relation of Paul to the Apostles in the Lucan Perspective” by Andrew C. Clark and, well, I’m biased since I love almost any book helping me explore how texts work. The work is mainly about how and why the author has set up Peter and Paul as parallel lives, but the discussion begins with comparisons of Jesus and John the Baptist in the first few chapters of Luke, and also has a closer look at Plutarch’s Parallel Lives.

But one set of details I was not expecting to see discussed here was the function performed by the characters of Stephen, Philip and Barnabas. I had seen at least the first two as something of transition figures to advance the plot of Acts, but Clark has helpfully filled in the mass of detail needed to explain exactly how they work as such. Continue reading “Stephen, Philip and Barnabas (link fixed)”

2007-04-26

A Ship of Adramyttium

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

by Neil Godfrey

Paul leaves for Rome initially in a ship from Adramyttium — a port city in the Troad, at the base Mount Ida, the gods’ grandstand from where they viewed the action of the Trojan war. This means that every “we” passage in Acts begins with a sea voyage associated with Troy. Continue reading “A Ship of Adramyttium”

2007-04-25

The shipwrecks of Josephus and Paul (Part 3)

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

by Neil Godfrey

Let’s get some Jewish and historical balance to my notes on Paul’s shipwreck. Paul was not the only Jew sailing to Rome who suffered shipwreck. Compare historian Josephus’s description of his own voyage, from his Vita (Life): Continue reading “The shipwrecks of Josephus and Paul (Part 3)”

Acts 27-28 an eyewitness account? (Part 2)

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

by Neil Godfrey

Why does the Christian author of Acts bother to tell readers (in 28.11) that Paul’s ship had the figurehead of two pagan gods?

Why does the author of Acts use words that are only elsewhere found in fictional shipwreck stories in Homer?

Is there anything truly distinctive about Paul’s shipwreck to set it apart from fiction? Is Paul’s adventure at sea anything other than stereotypical? Continue reading “Acts 27-28 an eyewitness account? (Part 2)”

2007-04-24

Would it really be a problem if there were no historical Jesus?

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

by Neil Godfrey

Some years ago (around the time I seized the opportunity to personally thank Bishop Spong for helping me on my way to atheism 😉 ) I asked a well respected anglican cleric what his response would be if it could be reasonably established that Christianity did not begin with a real historical Jesus. My query was via email so he had a little time to think before responding. His words in effect were: Continue reading “Would it really be a problem if there were no historical Jesus?”

2007-04-23

The sea adventure of Acts 27 an eyewitness account?

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

by Neil Godfrey

This post is in response to a lengthy citation from a work by Loveday Alexander arguing reasons for believing that the sea travel story of Acts 27 was an eyewitness account. Against that one point the following demonstrates that Alexander’s reason is relatively weak when balanced against the weight of other literary factors worthy of consideration in this chapter. Continue reading “The sea adventure of Acts 27 an eyewitness account?”

messy gospel births

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

by Neil Godfrey

Births can be messy things and it appears to have been no different with the gospels.

One speculation to suggest why the authors of the canonical gospels did not attach their names to them is that the gospel story was so commonly well known at the time that there was no need for such authentication.

To take just one facet of this argument here: Continue reading “messy gospel births”

2007-04-22

Comparing the sources for Alexander and Jesus

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

by Neil Godfrey

We have 5 literary sources for the life of Alexander the Great (late 4th century bce):

Diodorus Siculus (1st century bce): 17th book of Universal History
Quintus Curtius Rufus (1st century ce): History of Alexander
Plutarch (2nd century ce): Life of Alexander
Flavius Arrianus Xenophon (Arrian) (2nd century ce): Campaigns of Alexander
M. Junianus Justinus (Justin) (3rd century ce): epitomized the work of Pompeius Trogus (Augustan age)

Is it fair to accept these as evidence for an historical Alexander while not accepting the canonical gospels as sources for an historical Jesus? I think so for three reasons: Continue reading “Comparing the sources for Alexander and Jesus”

2007-04-19

On an early date for Acts — and its problems

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

by Neil Godfrey

One of the historical giants of biblical scholarship, Adolf von Harnack, from 1908 argued for the Book of Acts being composed possibly as early as the 60s ce, in the lifetime of the apostle Paul. His reasons: Continue reading “On an early date for Acts — and its problems”

2007-04-18

The Jesus Tomb Part 1 — interview with Simcha Jacobovici

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

by Neil Godfrey

Never suspected I’d be putting up a link to this but here we are (only because I have some respect for interviewer Rachel Kohn’s judgment on what’s intellectual and fair despite/beneath marketing requirements) . . . .

Check out ABC Radio National’s The Ark, a 15 minute podcast — but it’s only in podcast and online for 4 weeks. More parts to follow — check the website to see the more critical interviewees in store. . . . Continue reading “The Jesus Tomb Part 1 — interview with Simcha Jacobovici”

2007-04-16

What if Jesus intentionally acted out the OT “prophecies”?

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

by Neil Godfrey

This question keeps popping up all over the place. I’d like to kill it. Continue reading “What if Jesus intentionally acted out the OT “prophecies”?”

2007-04-15

A Literary Culture of Interpolations

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

by Neil Godfrey

In response to those who dismiss a priori the likelihood of interpolations in the letters of Paul, Walker lists the following: Continue reading “A Literary Culture of Interpolations”

2007-04-14

A gnostic mind game with Paul and Mark

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

by Neil Godfrey

Elaine Pagel’s The Gnostic Paul cites the many gnostic interpretations of Paul’s letters. The point is well made that our interpretation of Paul is inherited from the founders of the orthodox church today. Yet this interpretation was not so universal in the second century. Irenaeus took issue with the gnostics for claiming to have secret traditions that they claimed had been handed down from Paul in order to explain the spiritual (“pneumatic”) understanding of his letters. Continue reading “A gnostic mind game with Paul and Mark”

Gospel of Mark — modern meets gnostic interpretation?

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

by Neil Godfrey

The Gospel of Mark is a parable or largely allegorical according to scholars such as Kelber, Tolbert, Weeden, and others Thus Galilee and Jerusalem have theological meanings, the former representing the Kingdom of God and the latter, opposition to that kingdom. The twelve disciples led by Peter are the seed found in rocky soil that sprouts quickly with promise but just as quickly whithers into failure. And so forth.

Such modern interpretations of Mark sit in remarkably close conjunction with the (second century) Valentinian allegorical interpretations of Paul’s letters as explained by Elaine Pagels in her The Gnostic Paul: Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters. And is it significant that the Gospel of Mark is sometimes argued to be embedded in Pauline theology? Continue reading “Gospel of Mark — modern meets gnostic interpretation?”

"Very good. This post is going straight to the March 2016 Biblical Studies Carnival."

—N.T. Wrong, – March 2016
Congratulations, Vridar, . . . I declare, Vridar, your own hard work translating Bruno Bauer will make a major difference in future studies of Bruno Bauer and the evolution of Hegel’s philosophy of religion.

-- Paul Trejo, - April 2023
"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
"I always enjoy reading Neil’s blog because I think that he is careful, thorough, intellectually fair, and honest."

— April DeConick, – November 2007
https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=145080#p145080
Neil made a good synthesis of the work without being an “expert” of the field.

-- Enrico Tuccinardi, - October 2022
"Neil, this is actually rather useful. Good job."

— R. Joseph Hoffmann, – June 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
"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)
"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
"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
"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
"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
It is worth saying another word of appreciation here for Neil Godfrey's effort to make Bruno Bauer accessible in English.

-- Peter Kirby, - May 2023
"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
"Fantastic. I’m so glad you’re helping to spread these ideas!"

Nancy Fraser - June 2019 (personal email)
"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
"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)
"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
"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
"These reviews of yours are so bloody weird!"

— James Crossley, – April 2010
"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
"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
"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)
"Neil, in my mature judgement (I am now an old man), this fine 4-part study is a brilliant reworking, an instructive restatement of Hayden White’s Metahistory (and his subsequent writings). Your critique of certain historiographic representations as imbedded in the case study of the “scientistic”, “empirical” Richard Carrier provides a solid starting point for the more honest “fictive” reading of the New Testament that you encourage. Your last paragraph is a very intelligent call to sensitive readers of these texts. I suspect a whole generation of biblical students has been educated without the insights provided by the incomparable White. Bravo!"

-- Timothy Bagley, - November 2024
"Many thanks for this post, and for the quality of your blog."

— Philippe Wajdenbaum, – November 2018
"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)
"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
"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
This is superb work, Neil, and reminds me of Albert Schweitzer’s work from a century ago. . . . .

I commend you for being the first to even TRY to translate Bruno Bauer’s brilliant Kritik der Evangelien und Geschichte ihres Ursprungs, which is now more than 150 years old.

. . . . .Thank you for your historic effort.

-- Paul Trejo, M.A., - November 2022
Editor, An English Edition of Bruno Bauer’s 1843 Christianity Exposed

Petr Jancar on The Folly of Bayesian Probability in “Doing History”: “Thank you for your clear answer “No”. Hence my confidence that any further discussion here makes no sense has reached…” Jan 31, 07:10
Neil Godfrey on The Folly of Bayesian Probability in “Doing History”: “So can we at least agree that this difference in our mental models is nothing crucial in practice, and it…” Jan 31, 02:15
Neil Godfrey on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “If the temple was long gone generations earlier, the moment of its destruction was itself lost from view and would…” Jan 31, 01:42
ABuddhist on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “>But from where does the Cerdo Christ originate? The account in Irenaeus is surely not based on a real human.…” Jan 31, 00:31
ABuddhist on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “With all due respect, I (and others) have dated Hebrews to pre-70 CE because even though citing the earthly temple’s…” Jan 31, 00:25
Andrew Dabrowski on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “Fascinating, thank you Neil.” Jan 30, 23:03
Neil Godfrey on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “There is nothing single and simple-minded about the Paulines. They contain a mysticism that is way over Marcion’s head. Ooh…” Jan 30, 21:31
Neil Godfrey on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “The only discussion NL has of Justin that is related to your question is a comparison of Justin’s methods (in…” Jan 30, 21:12
Neil Godfrey on Paul’s Letters as Products of Marcion’s School: “1 Clement, because of some kind of intertextuality with Hebrews, has been the primary source by which Hebrews has been…” Jan 30, 20:46

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: