Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
A Defense of Richard Bauckham’s Philosophy of Testimony, Part 2
In this series of posts I am addressing the criticisms levelled by Neil Godfrey at Richard Bauckham’s philosophy of testimony, as outlined in ch.18 of Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Here I am responding to the observations found in this post: Continue reading “Bauckham: reply 2 to JD Walters”
JD Walters in his Cadre website has begun a lengthy series of responses to my responses to Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses.
JD’s words are in black and indented.
Mine are in blue. (I hope there are not too many people who feel they have nothing better to do than to read this exchange, by the way. And why do so many Christians like martial images, like ‘cadre‘?) Continue reading “Bauckham: reply to JD Walters”
Weeden has presented reasons for thinking the story of Jesus, the son of Ananus, that has come to us through Josephus, played a significant part in customizing details of Mark’s gospel of Jesus. Indeed, this entire section of Josephus‘s Wars that cites 8 warning signs of the imminent fall of Jerusalem has several intriguing overlaps with not only Mark’s gospel, but also with distinctive passages in Matthew, Luke and Acts also.
What follows is only for those already willing to be persuaded that Luke-Acts is in part dependent upon the writings of Josephus. I’m not arguing the case in this post, but jotting down first-thoughts on the signs, two in particular, in Josephus and what seems like it might be their resonance in Acts. Notes for casual discussion or later consideration, nothing more yet. The Josephan passages are copied from Chapter 6 of Wars on the ccel site. Continue reading “Signs in Josephus, Signs in Gospels and Acts”
Following is an attempt to explain the mixed messages given the role of Peter in the post-resurrection narratives of the canonical gospels. It argues that Peter first met the resurrected Jesus, as per 1 Corinthians 15:5, some time after the writing of the gospels of Mark and Matthew but just prior to Luke’s gospel — or more likely as late as that redaction of Luke by the author of Acts (Tyson) and around the time of the Pastorals. Continue reading “When did Peter first see the resurrected Jesus?”
Evolving as we did in small close-knit bands, evolution appears to have failed to equip us with an instinctive universal moral compass when it comes to the fates of masses of foreigners. It seems only the more enlightened about the true nature of “masses of foreigners” can summon some level of outrage. Continue reading “Doing body counts: limited by our evolutionary inheritance”
The following hyperlinked notes (continued from Tyson) outline evidence from Knox, O’Neill, Enslin, Walker, Leppa, Aejmelaeus, Goulder and Pervo for collectively “mounting a serious counterargument” that the author of Acts knew and used Paul’s letters. Continue reading “Dating the Book of Acts: 6, the late date reconsidered (5. Paul’s letters)”
Continuing notes from Tyson’s Marcion and Luke-Acts: A Defining Struggle (2006) pp. 14ff . . . . .
Pervo writes that Luke would have used Josephus as a source quite differently from his other sources such as Mark, Q, Paul and the LXX. He did not quote Josephus or imitate his style. But there are good economic arguments for believing Luke used Josephus as a source and if so, that would mean that he must have written after 93-94 c.e.
Evidence for Luke’s use of Josephus (Pervo): Continue reading “Dating the Book of Acts: 5, the late date reconsidered (4. Josephus)”
Tyson has presented the selective summary of views on the date of Acts (outlined in previous 3 posts) to bring to readers’ attention the fact that the current majority view for the intermediate date for Acts (80-100 c.e.) has not always held the floor. He believes recent scholarship in a number of fields invites us to re-open the question of the second-century date for Acts, even though it has not been widely entertained now for 100 years. Tyson sees five issues as significant for this reconsideration of a late date for Acts:
Again, the notes here are from Marcion and Luke-Acts: A Defining Struggle (2006) pp. 10-23 . . . . . Continue reading “Dating the Book of Acts: 4, the late date reconsidered (1-3)”
Baur argued that Acts was written in the mid second century, around 140-150 C.E.
Baur saw Acts as an attempt to heal a rift in Christianity between two factions originally led by Peter and Paul. Christianity in Baur’s view had been divided between Jewish Christians who saw Jesus as the hope of their historical expectations, who held to the Torah and allowed gentiles into their ranks if they adhered to the Torah too, on the one hand, and gentile Christians on the other, who taught salvation by faith in Jesus only, and dismissed the Torah as ineffective for salvation.
Baur was influenced by the work of his student, Schneckenburger, who demonstrated extensive parallels between Peter and Paul in Acts. They both: Continue reading “Dating the Book of Acts: 3, Evidence for the late date (Baur)”
In 1897 Harnack’s Chronologie was published. This raised, with respect to the date of Acts, the issues still addressed today:
The evidence of the conclusion of Acts (Chronologie) Continue reading “Dating the Book of Acts: 2, Evidence for an intermediate date (80-100 c.e.)”
Emperor Justinian needed historical precedents for his new codification of law to command the respect of both his citizenry at large and the legal profession in particular.
Sometimes controversy rages over the question of whether biblical works have been rewritten, interpolated, redacted, forged . . . In this context it is interesting to observe what happened — and why — in a well known case “by law”. Understanding the culture of ancient minds can often add enlightenment in many directions. Continue reading “Ancient forgeries — by lawful decree”
This is a short list points I have distilled from Tyson’s Marcion and Luke-Acts . This section will summarize the evidence adduced for an early date for the composition of Acts (pre-70 C.E. — before or around the trial and execution of Paul and the fall of Jerusalem) and the arguments against the interpretation of this evidence.
Future posts will look at evidence for:
In France new mothers can request the State public institutions for a free nanny to assist them with all the things that new mothers face — the need for someone to babysit, to do the cooking, buy the groceries, clean the house and do the washing, to give them time for needed breaks from the pressures that inevitably arise in modern environments when extended family assistance is not always easy to come by.
While I was in Singapore I read a horrific tragic news story of a stepfather who was to hang for drowning a baby that drove him mad with its incessant crying.
In France people get out into the streets to demand their rights and force the government to behave in the public interest. It is, after all, a publicly elected public body for the public interest. In Singapore and an many other places it works the other way around — governments keep themselves in power and free to do their own factional will by fanning fear among large sections of their citizenry or inculcating wherever possible a public fear of their governing power itself. And as Michael Moore points out in his new documentary, Sicko, no wonder some of those governments are happy to see a public suspicion of anything French. 🙂
How much more inspiring and hopeful for all is the story of Dr Caitlin McOmish recovery than being told, “It was a miracle”.
Armed with nothing but knowledge of the plasticity of the human brain Caitlan’s schoolteacher and science graduate parents worked to heal her brain through an intensive physical and mental exercise and stimulation program. When a baby, Caitlan contracted mumps and was diagnosed with irreversible brain damage as a result. She has now just completed a PhD in neuroscience at the Howard Florey Institute in Melbourne. Who would want to swap the thrilling details — the human passion and the marvels of the brain — by hiding all that in the opaque lump of the copout line, “God did it”?
How much more useful for humanity that Caitlan used her recovery experience to generate an interest in finding a potential cure for mental illnesses such as schizophrenia than promoting prayer and faith.
Check out the story on the here.