Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
On History for Atheists Tim O’Neill has set out the standard reasons for the view that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. He concludes that this particular portrayal of Jesus stands against what conservative and liberal Christians, and even “fringe Jesus Mythicists”, and “many people” generally “would like Jesus to be.” Put that way, one wonders why anyone … Continue reading “Examining the Evidence for Jesus as an Apocalyptic Prophet”
Some readers will be interested in what Martin Goodman had to say about Jewish concepts of the Messiah in the Second Temple era. As much as I’m tempted to add my own comments I will restrain myself. I have written enough of my own perspective on this question other times I have addressed “messianic expecations” … Continue reading “Messiahs and Eschatology in Second Temple Judaism”
Dr Sarah of FreethoughtBlogs.com Geeky Humanist has posted two interesting posts in favour of the historicity of Jesus. It makes a wonderful change to read arguments on this topic that are expressed in a civil and calmly reasoned tone. Her first post is Jesus mythicism vs. Jesus historicity: an argument in favour of the latter; her … Continue reading “A Response to Dr Sarah, Geeky Humanist, on the Jesus Question”
This post is long and technical and only for those who are serious about what we can learn from the Ascension of Isaiah about early beliefs about Jesus. Richard Carrier and before him Earl Doherty drew upon scholarship about the different manuscripts to conclude that the original text had Jesus crucified in the lower heaven … Continue reading “Crucified on Earth? — What Did the “Ascension of Isaiah” Originally Say?”
The focus of my response will center on Carrier’s claim that a pre-Christian angel named Jesus existed, his understanding of Jesus as a non-human and celestial figure within the Pauline corpus, his argument that Paul understood Jesus to be crucified by demons and not by earthly forces, his claim that James, the brother of the … Continue reading “Gullotta’s review of Carrier’s argument #2: relating to Jesus’ birth and humanity”
The following is a write up from notes I took at the time of my first listening to the debate supplemented by a second listening earlier today. So there will be more detail than in with my summary of Ehrman’s opener. If anyone thinks I have been unfair to Ehrman then let me know and … Continue reading “Ehrman-Price Debate #2: Price’s Opening Address”
Recently Bart Ehrman debated Michael Bird the question of how Jesus became God. Just as he had written in his book How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee Erhman argued that the earliest devotees of Jesus viewed him as a normal man, a human messiah, who had been exalted to become God’s … Continue reading “Is Ehrman’s Pre-Pauline Quotation an Anti-Marcionite Interpolation?”
Bart Ehrman continues to address the conventional explanation for why Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah in Another Problem with Calling Jesus the Messiah. That explanation tells us that the Jewish idea of a Messiah or Christ was that he was to be a conquering Davidic King who would overthrow Israel’s enemies and usher in … Continue reading “The Flaw in Bart’s Argument for the Jewish Rejection of Jesus”
For all posts in this series: Roger Parvus: A Simonian Origin for Christianity Previous post in this series: A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 14: Simon/Paul and the Law of Moses (continued) . The Apostle, in Gal. 3:7, asserted that “It is men of faith who are the sons of Abraham.” In Galatians the Apostle apparently viewed … Continue reading “A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 15: Simon/Paul and the Law of Moses (continued)”
As a follow up to my previous post here is more detail of Michael Goulder’s argument that the Lord’s Prayer was originally composed by the author of the Gospel of Matthew. I am referring to Goulder’s “The Composition of the Lord’s Prayer” as published 1963 in The Journal of Theological Studies. Goulder begins by setting out the five propositions generally … Continue reading “The Composition of the Lord’s Prayer”
Good old reliable Professor James McGrath and a few of his peers*, blissfully unaware of some of the highly respected names both within and outside New Testament scholarship who have happened to be bold enough to declare their maverick suspicions that there was no historical Jesus, make it clear that if you come out as … Continue reading ““It is absurd to suggest. . . . ” (A rare bird among the anti-mythicists)”
. In the previous post of the series I proposed that the Vision of Isaiah was the source of Simon/Paul’s gospel. This post will look at the place in the Vision that contains the major difference between the two branches of its textual tradition. Obviously, at least one of the readings is not authentic. But, … Continue reading “A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 8: The Source of Simon/Paul’s Gospel (continued)”
I have devoted my two previous posts to the part of my hypothesis that concerns the Pauline letters: The earliest parts of the original collection of Pauline letters were written between CE 50 and 130 by Simon of Samaria and his successor, Menander. Simonians were secretive, so the collection was likely intended for their use … Continue reading “A Simonian Origin for Christianity, Part 4: Excursus on Marcion, Valentinians, and the Pauline Letters”
Recently I was playing with the time capsule button of WordPress and managed to accidentally relocate an old July 2010 post to today. Since trying to undo and relocate events in time is forbidden by the Time Lords of the universe I quickly deleted it. But a few quick ones did see it and commented … Continue reading “Tom Verenna Debates James McGrath”