Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
This post continues directly on from Ehrman Hides the Facts About Doherty’s Argument, Part 1. Here I show that Ehrman has suppressed the facts about what his own peers think in order to falsely accuse Doherty of arguing without scholarly merit. First, the passage in question, 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16 13 For this reason we also … Continue reading “Ehrman suppresses the facts while falsely accusing Doherty: Part 2”
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”
All posts in this series are collated here. Chapter three of Derek Murphy’s book, Jesus Potter Harry Christ, discusses the evidence commonly cited for the historical existence of Jesus. In his view the arguments used to support the historicity of Jesus are often a mixture of inferences, deductions and references to common knowledge and unfounded … Continue reading ““Jesus Potter Harry Christ” review, part 3: Where’s the Proof?”
Much ado is made of this phrase about “Jesus who is called Christ” — that second reference in Josephus to Jesus. Many hang a lot of weight on it and even say it is the clinching evidence that proves Josephus knew of and spoke about Jesus in more detail elsewhere. By identifying James here as … Continue reading “That ‘brother of Jesus who is called Christ’ storm in Josephus’s teacup”
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”
Eddy and Boyd are often touted as having written some sort of authoritative rebuttal of arguments sceptical of “the historical reliability of the Synoptic Jesus tradition”, but as I began to show in my earlier part 1 post, and will continue here, their work misrepresents specific arguments they claim to refute; demonstrates a shoddiness, sometimes … Continue reading “Taking Eddy & Boyd Seriously (2)”
A popular book cited by lay readers and scholars alike as presenting “a case for the historical reliability of the synoptic Jesus tradition” is The Jesus Legend by Eddy and Boyd. Richard Bauckham calls it “one of the most important books on methodological issues in the study of Jesus and the Gospels to have appeared … Continue reading “Taking Eddy and Boyd seriously (1)”
The passage in Galatians (2:7-8) that civilly explains how Paul and Peter were each separate but equal apostles, the former preaching the gospel to the gentiles and the latter to the Jews, is evidently a second century catholicizing attempt to re-write history and bring the two apostles into the same “orthodox” fold. The idea of … Continue reading “The anti-marcionite, catholicizing Peter-Paul equivalence in Galatians”
5. The Twelve The role of named individuals in the formulation and transmission of traditions of Jesus’ words and deeds largely disappeared from the normal awareness of New Testament scholars as a result of the form-critical movement in Gospels scholarship in the early twentieth century. (p.93) Bauckham continues with Birger Gerhardsson’s dismissive tone of critics … Continue reading “Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Chapter 5a”