Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Were the first books of the “Old Testament” composed by “redactors” piecing together stories from different sources (that has long been the predominant view) or is it possible that they were composed by a single author or “school of authors”? The former is the documentary hypothesis. For a background on the documentary hypothesis refer to … Continue reading “Another look at the Documentary Hypothesis. An alternative proposal.”
I am copying here a comment that Philippe Wajdenbaum made in relation to another post. (I have reformatted the original.) Many thanks for this post, and for the quality of your blog. Russell Gmirkin’s “Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible” is a most important book that will elicit a paradigm shift in biblical … Continue reading “Genesis to Kings, the work of a single authorship?”
. Type 1: Scholarly The authors engage with not only the source documents of early Christianity but they also address the scholarship that has been written about those documents. The arguments are structured around engagement with the scholarship of biblical studies, ancient history (including judaica), the classics and other related fields such as archaeology, religion, … Continue reading “There are two types of Jesus mythicism. Here’s how to tell them apart.”
Last weekend I watched Tim O’Neill present his arguments against the idea that there was no historical Jesus. I said I would respond in a post to his points and expected to cover it all in one or two sessions. But time is getting away from me this evening so here I will address just … Continue reading “Response #1 to the Non Sequitur program with Tim O’Neill: MOTIVES”
Tim O’Neill has given up much of his time to write a detailed post (over 8,700 words) as a guide for non-historians to find their way through the mass of nonsense on the web about Jesus never having existed. Tim is responding to posts by biologist PZ Myers who is asking questions of a “professional … Continue reading “A constructive exchange with Tim O’Neill on the question of the historicity of Jesus”
PZ Myers: A consensus doesn’t necessarily mean anything. 200 years ago there was a consensus phlogiston existed. The key thing is: show me the chain of evidence and the logic that you use to derive this. (From video discussion with Eddie Marcus; see also transcript/paraphrase.) …. Tim O’Neill: If we look at relevant non-Christian scholars, … Continue reading “The Phlogiston Jesus”
I’ve been thinking through how best to complete the second part of my post, Atheists Do Not Understand Religion, trying to figure out the clearest way to present the results of the anthropological research which means trying to get them ever more clear in my own mind first. At the same time I have found myself … Continue reading “Atheist Hostility to Jesus Mythicism … making sense of it”
Previous posts: PZ Myers interviews a historian about Jesus mythicism (2018-09-05) How do historians decide who was historical, who fictional? (2018-09-06) How do we approach the question of Jesus being historical or mythical? (2018-09-07) I have as a rule paraphrased main points that each person spoke in their exchange. –o– PZ: You (Eddie) say it is unlikely … Continue reading “How a historian approaches the question of the historical Jesus: concluding the PZ and Eddie Marcus discussion”
… Continuing from PZ Myers interviews a historian about Jesus mythicism and How do historians decide who was historical, who fictional? –o– PZ Myers asks: How do we approach this kind of topic? Eddie Marcus, introduced as a professional historian, responds: Eddie Marcus informs listeners that his expertise is in Australian culture and history, not … Continue reading “How do we approach the question of Jesus being historical or mythical?”
PZ Myers is a biologist with a curiosity about how historians determine whether a person appearing in ancient records is considered historical or otherwise. He asks: How does one assess people and events that are contradictory, vague or preserved only in stories passed on by word of mouth? As for figures about whom we have … Continue reading “How do historians decide who was historical, who fictional?”
Finally I have been able to catch up with the answer to one particular small question that arose for me when I first read Daniel Gullotta’s review of Richard Carrier’s On the Historicity of Jesus. In the first pages of his review Gullotta directs readers to numerous works that are said to offer a detailed … Continue reading “Just a small point”
Here is an annotated list of Vridar posts addressing the famous passage in Josephus’s Jewish Antiquities, commonly known as the Testimonium Flavianum (TF). –o0o– The Jesus reference in Josephus: its ad hoc doctoring and various manuscript lines (2009-03-06) From various sources I have set out chronologically the earliest evidence we have for knowledge of the … Continue reading “Jesus in Josephus: Testimonium Flavianum“
For an annotated list of previous posts in this series see the archived page: Daniel Gullotta’s Review of Richard Carrier’s On the Historicity of Jesus For other Archives by Topic, Annotated see the right margin. In the previous post we began to look at Daniel Gullotta’s treatment of Richard Carrier’s argument that the gospels are … Continue reading “Gullotta’s Misleading Portrayal of Carrier’s claims…. Part 2”
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 Misleading Portrayal of Carrier’s Argument (Gospels Myth or Remembered History? – Part 1)”