Stronger evidence for Publius Vinicius the Stammerer 2000 years ago than for Jesus

Publius who? That is the point of this post. Assertions that there is as much evidence for Jesus as for any other person in ancient times, or that if we reject the historicity of Jesus then we must reject the existence of everyone else in ancient history, are based on ignorance of how we really do know about … Continue reading “Stronger evidence for Publius Vinicius the Stammerer 2000 years ago than for Jesus”


Historical facts and the nature of history — exchange with Rick Sumner

Rick has posted an interesting discussion titled What is History? The Nature of “Facts” in response to my Historicist Hocus Pocus post. This follows a short exchange between us in the comments beneath my own post, and is an extension of earlier blog posts of his own on the same theme. I appreciate Rick’s response … Continue reading “Historical facts and the nature of history — exchange with Rick Sumner”


The Old Testament – A Hellenistic Book? (and other digressions)

Niels Peter Lemche has a chapter in Lester Grabbe’s Did Moses Speak Attic titled, “The Old Testament – A Hellenistic Book?” Here are a few highlights from it. The first point here should stand out as equally relevant for New Testament studies. NT studies digression Historical Jesus/Christian origin scholars should have this framed and displayed … Continue reading “The Old Testament – A Hellenistic Book? (and other digressions)”


“Minimalist” Thomas Thompson’s take on The Messiah Myth

Thomas L. Thompson’s The Messiah Myth can be a somewhat mystifying read for anyone looking for an engagement with conventional historical Jesus studies. It can leave a reader who is looking for a repeat of this scholar’s demolition of the historicity of the biblical Patriarchs and Kingdom of Israel even more flummoxed. In his first … Continue reading ““Minimalist” Thomas Thompson’s take on The Messiah Myth”


The Bible says it, biblical historians believe it

Well, they don’t believe all of it, of course, but they do believe enough of it (they would deny faith is involved) to use as a skeletal framework in their various reconstructions of Christian origins. Mainstream biblical scholarship (both Christian and secular) for most part bases its reconstructions of Christian origins on methods that would … Continue reading “The Bible says it, biblical historians believe it”


Biblical history, literary criticism and logical method

The comments originally sent to my previous post, and my replies to them, were lost. I have retrieved the comments of others but my own are lost (unless someone reading this did catch them in an email — if you can forward them to me that would be great, thanks — my address is in … Continue reading “Biblical history, literary criticism and logical method”


How Luke Timothy Johnson Stumbles Over the Mythical Jesus

In my previous post I presented Luke Timothy Johnson‘s case against to the opening arguments of Robert M. Price in The Historical Jesus: Five Views. Price gives reasons for suspecting there never was a historical Jesus. In this post I am giving both my own views and some of Price’s own “responses” to Johnson’s criticisms. … Continue reading “How Luke Timothy Johnson Stumbles Over the Mythical Jesus”


Luke Timothy Johnson’s Response to Robert Price

In The Historical Jesus: Five Views, Luke Timothy Johnson responds to the 5 principles for historical enquiry as laid out by Robert M. Price in his opening chapter of that book. I discussed these in overview in my recent 5 more commandments post. The five are: 1. The Principle of Analogy 2. The Criterion of … Continue reading “Luke Timothy Johnson’s Response to Robert Price”


Historicist Misunderstanding : a reply to James McGrath and others

James McGrath has expressed his concerns about apparent misunderstandings of the historical process on the part of those who argue that Jesus was probably not an historical figure in his blog post: Mythicist Misunderstanding I wish to address his post in some detail, because he brings together the sorts of objections one regularly sees raised … Continue reading “Historicist Misunderstanding : a reply to James McGrath and others”


Resurrection reversal

For the sake of completion to my recent posts on empty tombs and crucifixions being popular stuff of ancient fiction I should add the most well-known one here, the section from the first century Satyricon by Petronius. (Those recent posts are Popular novels and the gospel narratives and Another Empty Tomb Tale.) The date Michael … Continue reading “Resurrection reversal”


Resurrection Appearances and Ancient Myths

  Revised: added Self-Opening Doors and P.S. In the following I am not suggesting that the gospel resurrection appearance scenes were directly borrowed from ancient sources. Rather, that when we read of similar scenes in pagan literature we can recognize them as patently mythical. This is Robert M. Price‘s argument (Deconstructing Jesus, p.39), although Charles … Continue reading “Resurrection Appearances and Ancient Myths”


The Bible’s “Historical” Writings: Histories or Historical Novels or . . .?

Comparing Modern and Biblical “Histories” The idea of history as a scholarly attempt to explain “what really happened in the past” is a relatively young European invention. The “first modern historian” is said to be Edward Gibbon (his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was published 1770’s-1780’s); the acknowledged founder of … Continue reading “The Bible’s “Historical” Writings: Histories or Historical Novels or . . .?”


Forgery in the ancient world

Anyone who suspects graphic details in a narrative are a sign of authenticity of a text or eye-witness source needs to read Anthony Grafton’s Forgers and Critics : Creativity and Duplicity in Western Scholarship (1990). In this blog post I’m sharing my notes from his first chapter. According to Anthony Grafton, there are two claims … Continue reading “Forgery in the ancient world”


Marcion and Luke-Acts: The Preface of Luke

Continuing notes from Tyson’s Marcion and Luke-Acts — the previous post (on Luke 24) is here, the lot archived here — Previously I discussed Ancient Prologues in detail, but that was with particular reference to the Book of Acts. Nonbiblical examples of split prefaces, such as we find in Luke-Acts, were part of that discussion, … Continue reading “Marcion and Luke-Acts: The Preface of Luke”