Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
I argue that the interpretation of Bayesianism that I present here is the best explanation of the actual practices of historians. — Tucker, Aviezer. 2009. Our Knowledge of the Past: A Philosophy of Historiography. Reissue edition. Cambridge University Press. p. 134 I have posted aspects of Aviezer Tucker’s discussion of how Bayesian reasoning best represents … Continue reading “Even a Bayesian Historian Can Slip Up! (once)”
I would like to thank Larry Hurtado for his recent post Anonymous Gospels. Hurtado draws attention to a feature of our four canonical gospels that he believes is too often overlooked: the fact that they originally were anonymous and even the titles they later acquired are not declarations of authorship but rather statements about whose … Continue reading “Anonymous Gospels”
In the previous post, I promised to discuss a group of scholars who changed the perspective of biblical scholarship. I was referring to those whom we commonly group into the religionsgeschichtliche Schule. In English we call this the History of Religions School. The German term, religionsgeschichtliche, implies a secular, critical-historical approach toward religion. The reputation … Continue reading “The Memory Mavens, Part 11: Origins of the Criteria of Authenticity (3)”
In an earlier post, I wrote: Seen from the perspective of believers, the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John are disconcertingly different. On the other hand, if we clear our minds of the anxiety of historicity, we see that Mark and John resemble one another much more than they do any “other” Greco-Roman … Continue reading “The Enigma of Genre and The Gospel of John”
The previous post on this topic ended with the following: The first genuinely biographical detail of Jesus arrives when Jesus is twelve years old facing the wise men in the Temple. We learn about the parents’ very natural and everyday concerns and the “adolescent arrogance” of Jesus, his separation from this world, his first signs … Continue reading “Evolution of the Gospels as Biographies, 2”
Short answer, the one I would give if I had to bet my house on being right: I don’t know. Short answer, but one I would offer at no risk of damages to myself if I am wrong: Probably. In two recent posts I was commenting on thoughts arising as I was reading about the … Continue reading “Did Aesop Exist?”
Continuing from part 1….. Expanding the Foundation Story Notice how the author of Luke-Acts prepares for his second volume (Acts) from the outset of his new gospel: Luke extends the genealogy of Jesus back to Adam and God themselves. Jesus no longer (as in Matthew) is contextualized within the Abrahamic family but comes with more … Continue reading “Acts as a Rewriting of Gospels and Paul’s Letters, part 2”
The following is adapted from a 1975 article by Morton S. Enslin, John and Jesus. Enslin argues that the evidence in the gospels does not support the common view that Jesus began his career as a disciple of John the Baptist. In fact Enslin argues that when we examine the gospel narratives in sequence it … Continue reading “How John the Baptist Was Reshaped by Each Gospel”
This post concludes my notes on the Milwaukee Mythicist sponsored debate between Bart Ehrman and Robert M Price. It is based on notes I took as I listened, and since I have not listened to this part of the debate since, I cannot check my notes for accuracy or to add any completeness. Perhaps some … Continue reading “Conclusion: Ehrman-Price Debate #3”
The following is a write up from notes I took at the time of my first listening to the debate. I have not been able to access the online debate since to check the details of the following. I think most listeners on the mythicist side would have been disappointed because this was an opportunity … Continue reading “The Ehrman-Price Debate: Ehrman’s Opening Address”
Jonathan Bernier noted in a recent post “the special pleading involved in rejecting a consensus position adopted by virtually every New Testament scholar (that Jesus existed) while accepting without reflection a consensus position [on the dates of the gospels] adopted by most but hardly all such scholars. If we are all mistaken on something so … Continue reading “Shooting Blanks at Mythicism – & Why That’s the Necessary Point”
I skip ahead to the fourth paper of the first day of the Memory and the Reception of Jesus in Early Christianity Conference (10th-11th June 2016, St Mary’s University): “The Reception of Jesus in the Gospel of John” by Helen Bond I will return in the next post to the third and the discussion following. … Continue reading “How the Gospel of John Uses and Completes the Gospel of Mark”
For all posts in this series: Roger Parvus: A Simonian Origin for Christianity One problem with accepting Mark as a Simonian/Pauline allegory (see the previous post) is the role it gives to John the Baptist. As it stands canonical Mark seems intent on presenting John as the foreshadower of Jesus. His preaching of repentance foreshadows the … Continue reading “A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 17: Mark and Proto-Mark”
Once again we see evidence of the ad hoc nature of arguments built upon the assumption of the historicity of Jesus. After a closer look at Romans 1:3-4 in Ehrman’s case for the earliest Christians thinking of Jesus as a “mere man” who only became a Son of God at his resurrection, I had to try … Continue reading “Another Flip Flop Argument: Ehrman again on early Low Christology”