Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
A question that for many years sat half-hidden, rarely if ever articulated, in the back of my mind — and no doubt in the minds of many readers with some awareness of ancient history: When did any culture in the ancient Levant start writing “books” as we would recognize them in, say, the first five … Continue reading “Another (major) pointer to a late date for the Pentateuch”
Of making many posts about John the Baptist there is no end, and much discussion may weary, or stimulate, the flesh. Here’s another one. This post is the first in a series of perhaps three that intends to raise awareness of Rivka Nir‘s case for the passage about John the Baptist in Josephus being a … Continue reading “John the Baptist: Another Case for Forgery in Josephus”
Speaking of Steve Mason’s historical inquiry into what we can reconstruct of the origins of the Jewish War from Josephus, here are some quotations I marked as I read his second chapter. I hope to post one more time on this book, sharing some specifics of how he approached Josephus’s writings as historical sources. I … Continue reading “Understanding Historical Evidence”
(updated 2 hours after first posting) This post is a distillation of the chapter “Why Ignatius Invented Judaism” by Daniel Boyarin in The Ways That Often Parted: Essays in Honor of Joel Marcus. It covers the same questions addressed by Roger Parvus (see sidebox) but with a different hypothesis. Roger Parvus posted a series on … Continue reading “How Ignatius Cut Christianity Off From its Jewish Roots”
[I have copied the following comment by Greg Doudna to a post here so the thoughts do not get lost in the comments section and are easier to read and engage with. Format slightly changed — Neil] –o– The argument that the “we” passages of Acts are an origin story of the church at Rome … Continue reading “Guest Post: Further Thoughts on the “We Passages” in Acts”
Chapter 11 of How the Gospels Became History again makes for fascinating reading as M. David Litwa explores in some depth the idea of the scapegoat in Greek myth as one part of the cultural and mythical context in which the gospels were written. The technical (Greek) term is pharmakos [link is to a brief … Continue reading “Review, part 11. Comparing the Lives and Deaths of Aesop and Jesus (Litwa: How the Gospels Became History)”
Recently James McGrath has addressed a point I have regularly made about a key difference between the canonical gospels and historical and biographical narratives by ancient authors: the latter generally attempt to assure readers of the validity of their accounts by mentioning their sources; the former generally do not. McGrath has put an anachronistic slant … Continue reading “Answering James McGrath’s Questions for Mythicists”
Do ancient historiographers sometimes say things they know to be factually untrue? Emphatically, yes. The accusation of deliberate fabrication is made repeatedly. — John Moles Herodotus is dubbed the father, not only of history, but of lies; Polybius castigates historians not only for incompetence, but falsehood; Lucian tells of historians who claimed to be eye-witnesses … Continue reading “Two (More) Reasons Ancient Historians Fabricated History”
There are other types of Greco-Roman historical works that have received less attention in M. David Litwa’s introductory chapter but that may yet be closer to the gospel narratives. Litwa did refer to these but with less elaboration in his introduction so I’ll address them here. Overall, we will see that these types of historical … Continue reading “Review, pt 1e (e for Exceptions!) : How the Gospels Became History / Litwa”
141. The comparison concludes with the following exchange between Cicero and his brother Quintus (1.5): Q. ‘I understand that in your opinion different laws obtain in historiography and poetry’. M. ‘Yes. In history most things have their basis in veritas, whereas in poetry they have it in pleasure, although in both Herodotus, the father of … Continue reading “Two Ways of Defining Greco-Roman Historiography”
Some interesting points I came across while reading A. J. Woodman’s Rhetoric in Classical Historiography and some of his references: Initial eyewitness claims not followed up Earlier in this same chapter Thucydides drew a distinction between events which he experienced himself and those which were reported to him by others (22.2). Although he never gives … Continue reading “Three Lessons from Classics for Biblical Studies?”
Though we today see poetry, oratory and historiography as three separate genres, the ancients saw them as three different species of the same genus — rhetoric. All three types of activity aimed to elaborate certain data in such a way as to affect or persuade an audience or readership. — Woodman, p. 100 We often … Continue reading “How Historiography Began, and What History Meant in the Greco-Roman World”
I know some readers find it difficult to accept that our canonical gospels and Acts were seriously influenced by the epics of Homer, the Iliad and Odyssey. Here is something (two things, actually) to think about. We think of “history” as a genre of literature that is meant to convey the idea of facts, truth, … Continue reading “Once More — Homer, History and the Gospels-Acts”
Continuing from part 1b … M. David Litwa’s opening chapter of How the Gospels Became History is an overview of ancient history-writing looked like, including its frequent allowance of myth, and how the canonical gospels fit in with this type of literature. So far we have been moving slowly as we take note of what ancient … Continue reading “Review, pt 1c: How the Gospels Became History / Litwa (Looking like history?)”