Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
First let it be clear where I am coming from. This is not an attack on any scholar or the scholarship of theologians in general. It is an attempt to address what strikes me as very muddled thinking in many works about the historical Jesus. That is not a denigration of the scholars in question … Continue reading “Historical Jesus Studies As Pseudo-History — Bart Ehrman As a Case-Study”
This is tiresome, but I forgot to mention one more tiresome detail in Dr McGrath’s “review” (isn’t a review supposed to inform readers of what the book being discussed actually says??) — McGrath compares Doherty’s use of the word “midrashic” with how a related word is apparently used by Barbara Thiering and John Shelby Spong. … Continue reading “Appendix to my “concluding response” — that ca.4 letter word MIDRASH”
In the next chapter of this series we read the view that John the Baptist was a key figure in sparking the movement that became Christianity. Couchoud takes the date for John from Josephus — that is, towards the end of Pilate’s office in 36 c.e. Couchoud believes strongly that there was a fervent expectation … Continue reading “John the Baptist and the Foundations of Christianity (Couchoud)”
It’s worth quoting a few passages from Thomas L. Thompson‘s The Mythic Past (aka The Bible in History). I believe they have a relevance that extends beyond the Old Testament. Naively realistic questions about historicity have always been most out of place when it has come to Israel’s origins — if only for the fact … Continue reading “Confusing stories with historical evidence”
Edited conclusion and added the last paragraph since first posting this. This is not about mythicism versus the historicity of Jesus. It makes no difference to me if Jesus was a revolutionary or a rabbi, lived 100 b.c.e., 30 c.e. or was philosophical-theological construct. All of that is completely irrelevant for assessing the validity of … Continue reading “Theologians Reject Basics of History: A Way Forward”
Recently a theologian kindly advised me to do a bit of background reading on how historians work (specifically to read chapter one of From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods by Martha Howell & Walter Prevenier) in order to come to see that historical Jesus scholars do work by the same principles that all … Continue reading “How Historians Work — Lessons for historical Jesus scholars”
A recent comment offered a serious response to my argument about the need for independent corroboration in order to have some degree of probability given in favour of the Gospel narratives reflecting some genuine historical events. The point of mine being addressed was this: Whether the central character itself originated as a fabrication can only … Continue reading “Maybe I’m wrong but maybe I’m right”
I have been attempting to engage a biblical scholar in a discussion on the theoretical underpinnings of how historians can know if an event or person in ancient times were truly historical or a mere fiction. Here was my initial proposition: The theoretical underpinning of the historicity or factness of the contents of any report, … Continue reading “A rational foundation for investigating the mythicist (and Christian origins) question”
The Jewish historian Josephus writes about both genuine historical persons and events and mythical characters and events as if they are all equally historical. Adam and Vespasian, the siege of Jerusalem and the last stand at Masada, are all documented in a single work of ancient historiography. Is there some method or rule that can … Continue reading “Sifting fact from fiction in Josephus: John the Baptist as a case study”
In Jesus Interrupted Bart Ehrman describes his first encounter with people who believed Jesus never existed. Some people from Sweden had emailed him to ask if it were true that he thought Jesus was a myth. Ehrman describes his reaction: I thought this was an odd question. (p. 140) Bart Ehrman then comes very close … Continue reading “Bart Ehrman’s failed attempt to address mythicism”
History as most generally practiced is about interpretation of the “facts” (or data or evidence — the distinction is important and was discussed at some length in comments here). Historians seek out evidence from sources of identifiable provenance: diaries, police records, government papers, newspapers, etc. The nature of the sources, the provenance of the sources, … Continue reading “Is history a trial?”
“This book is an essential guide to the life and thought of Jesus . . . “ That’s James H. Charlesworth’s opening line in the preface to The Historical Jesus: An Essential Guide, one title in Abingdon Press’s Essential Guide series. James H. Charlesworth is George L. Collord Professor of New Testament Language and Literature … Continue reading “Essential Guide to the Historical Jesus: Introduction (James H. Charlesworth)”
I have sometimes discussed how we know what happened in the past or who existed as historical persons. Most of what I have said is my own reflection and inference from what I understand of how “history works” beginning with my own studies in university history majors. Part of our required reading was What Is … Continue reading “Is it a “fact of history” that Jesus existed? Or is it only “public knowledge”?”
Literary allusions and influences are generally not about one-to-one correspondences of plot or character details. Authors are for most part motivated to write something new, something that interests them and their audiences, and that means drawing upon familiar written and oral words and weaving them into new creations. Perhaps a good comparison could be drawn … Continue reading “Acts, the Areopagus and the Introduction of New Gods”