The Historical Jesus and the Demise of History, 1: What Has History To Do With The Facts?

There is something rotten in the state of historical Jesus studies. Ideology has long trumped inconvenient questioning. Postmodernist flim-flam has recently trumped any hope of sound methodology. Some on that side of New Testament studies have curiously accused me of being “a fact fundamentalist” or an antiquated positivist or one who has unrealistic demands for … Continue reading “The Historical Jesus and the Demise of History, 1: What Has History To Do With The Facts?”


Comments on Eric Zuesse’s Christ’s Ventriloquists: The Event that Created Christianity

I recently posted on Eric Zuesse’s Christ’s Ventriloquists: The Event that Created Christianity with a link to David Hamilton’s views of the book. The book also comes with nice endorsements from Richard Dawkins and James Crossley and others. The author had sought a similar endorsement from me and I sent him my conclusion of his … Continue reading “Comments on Eric Zuesse’s Christ’s Ventriloquists: The Event that Created Christianity”


Oral Tradition is Unfounded: from Kelber to Koester

My last post in this series ended with Thomas Brodie’s question: On what basis, then, is it possible to go on claiming oral tradition? Brodie asked this after surveying how Hermann Gunkel’s paradigm of oral tradition came to dominate biblical, and especially New Testament, studies, while at the same time pointing out the logical fallacies … Continue reading “Oral Tradition is Unfounded: from Kelber to Koester”


Historical Method Versus Jesus Research. Chapter 2 of Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity

I touched on one brief passage in the chapter by Jens Schröter in my recent post, Historical Jesus Studies ARE Different Methodologically from Other Historical Studies, and it’s now time to return to his chapter from Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity [JCDA] in more depth. Jens Schröter appears at several points to come … Continue reading “Historical Method Versus Jesus Research. Chapter 2 of Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity”


Paul: Oldest Witness to the Historical Jesus — ‘Is This Not the Carpenter?’

Chapter 7 of ‘Is This Not the Carpenter?’ presents what I understand are the arguments of mainstream New Testament scholarship that Paul’s epistles testify to the existence of an historical Jesus. Its author, Mogens Müller (MM), is responsible for what has been praised as the best work to date on the expression “Son of Man”. … Continue reading “Paul: Oldest Witness to the Historical Jesus — ‘Is This Not the Carpenter?’”


Where to restart blogging?

It’s great to have Tim as a co-blogger — as well as recent posts from Earl and Roger — so my occasional absences should scarcely be noticed. Since my last blogpost more books have come my way, and contrary to aspersions from Jesus Process ©™® intellects I really do read books, even whole ones, before … Continue reading “Where to restart blogging?”


9. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Form Criticism and the Sources of the Gospels

* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt.9 Form Criticism and the Sources of the Gospels . COVERED IN THIS POST: Form Criticism and Oral Traditions About Jesus The Fallacy of Form Criticism The Written Evidence of Common Patterns Versus the Oral Hypothesis Literary Construction out of Scripture, not Oral Traditions … Continue reading “9. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Form Criticism and the Sources of the Gospels”


Fight Club! Historical Jesus Scholars Take On the Christ Mythicists!

Here they come. The advance warning was R. Joseph Hoffmann‘s Mythtic Pizza and Cold-cocked Scholars. He promises that within a week (apocalypse coming!) we will see on his blog “three essay-length responses to Richard C. Carrier’s ideas: The first by [R. Joseph Hoffmann], the second by Professor Maurice Casey of the University of Nottingham, and … Continue reading “Fight Club! Historical Jesus Scholars Take On the Christ Mythicists!”


Bart Ehrman’s First Attempt to Grapple with Mythicism

This is a first on Vridar. I am repeating a post. The following I originally published 4th November 2011 under the title, Bart Ehrman’s Failed Attempt to Address Mythicism. But given that the hot topic of the moment is Bart Ehrman’s more dedicated attempt to discredit mythicism I beg for understanding and forgiveness. . In … Continue reading “Bart Ehrman’s First Attempt to Grapple with Mythicism”


Historical Jesus Studies As Pseudo-History — Bart Ehrman’s Jesus As a Case-Study

First let it be clear where I am coming from. This is not an attack on any scholar or the scholarship of theologians in general. It is an attempt to address what strikes me as very muddled thinking in many works about the historical Jesus. That is not a denigration of the scholars in question … Continue reading “Historical Jesus Studies As Pseudo-History — Bart Ehrman’s Jesus As a Case-Study”


Historical Jesus Studies As Pseudo-History — Bart Ehrman As a Case-Study

First let it be clear where I am coming from. This is not an attack on any scholar or the scholarship of theologians in general. It is an attempt to address what strikes me as very muddled thinking in many works about the historical Jesus. That is not a denigration of the scholars in question … Continue reading “Historical Jesus Studies As Pseudo-History — Bart Ehrman As a Case-Study”


Ouch! My own beliefs undermined by my own historical principles!

Well this is really quite embarrassing. I have never read more than snippets by a notorious right-wing Australian historian, Keith Windschuttle, and those I have read have been mostly quotations found in the works of his critics, but I know I have been strongly opposed to whatever Windschuttle has written about the history of the … Continue reading “Ouch! My own beliefs undermined by my own historical principles!”


Historical Jesus Scholarly Ignorance of Historical Methods

On 14th January I posted How Historians Work – Lessons for Historical Jesus Scholars in which I demonstrated that at least some biblical scholars are unaware of normal historical practices by quoting key sections from works recommended to me by Dr McGrath. On 16th January Dr. James F. McGrath, Clarence L. Goodwin Chair in New Testament … Continue reading “Historical Jesus Scholarly Ignorance of Historical Methods”


Theologians Reject Basics of History: A Way Forward

Edited conclusion and added the last paragraph since first posting this. This is not about mythicism versus the historicity of Jesus. It makes no difference to me if Jesus was a revolutionary or a rabbi, lived 100 b.c.e., 30 c.e. or was philosophical-theological construct. All of that is completely irrelevant for assessing the validity of … Continue reading “Theologians Reject Basics of History: A Way Forward”