Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Continuing the series archived at Couchoud: The Creation of Christ – – – (Couchoud argues that our “editor” – Clement? – compiled 28 books, one more than our current 27 that make up our New Testament and this post concludes the section where Couchoud discusses the origin of our New Testament books.) The perfect balance … Continue reading “2 Peters, 1 Jude and 2 Revelations: the first New Testament (Couchoud)”
David Fitzgerald‘s essay, Ten Beautiful Lies About Jesus, that received an Honorable Mention in the 2010 Mythicist Prize contest has been expanded into a book, Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Showed Jesus Never Existed At All. The book is clearly a hit: Nailed continues to garner more fans and accolades, and generate cranky hate mail. … Continue reading “David Fitzgerald responds to Tim O’Neill’s review of Nailed”
How old is the Gnosticism described in the first two posts? Schmithals holds that the Apophasis (c.f. Apophasis) attributed to Simon and from which (or from a summary or paraphrase of which) Hippolytus apparently drew his information was not itself written by Simon — at least according to what we can understand from the way … Continue reading “Pre-Christian Christ Gnosticism: 3 — the pre-christian date”
I was reminded of Luke’s prologue (again) when I recently read (again) the prologue of Roman historian Livy. Stream of consciousness takes me immediately to Loveday Alexander’s argument that Luke’s prologue is very “unlike” the prologues of ancient historians and to my own pet notion (anathema to most interested classicists, I am sure) that Luke’s … Continue reading “Luke’s Prologue — historical or historical illusion?”
This is a reasonable question that was unfortunately asked by one who is searching for the one question that mythicism cannot answer. (Earl Doherty responded in detail but this was simply ignored by the questioner who found another question to set up in its place in a game of cat and mouse. Or maybe Earl … Continue reading “Would a “mythicist Paul” need a lot of mythical story detail?”
This post continues from the previous two that argue for an unconventional understanding of Paul’s — and his contemporaries’ — understanding of what it meant to be an apostle and how this related to the truth of a gospel message being preached. This post examines an argument that Paul’s opponents in Galatia were Gnostic Jewish … Continue reading “The Circumcising Gnostic Opponents of Paul in Galatia”
Literary allusions and influences are generally not about one-to-one correspondences of plot or character details. Authors are for most part motivated to write something new, something that interests them and their audiences, and that means drawing upon familiar written and oral words and weaving them into new creations. Perhaps a good comparison could be drawn … Continue reading “Acts, the Areopagus and the Introduction of New Gods”
Not every scholar thinks it is silly to read Paul’s letters without bringing to them assumptions from later documents like the Gospels. Some think it is a sounder method to interpret the later literature in the light of what we can understand from what went before it — and not the reverse. Associate Professor William … Continue reading “A scholar reads Paul without Gospel presuppositions”
6th post in the series by Roger Parvus. The complete series is archived here. TDOP = The Death of Peregrinus by Lucian. Harmon’s translation here. II. THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTERS WAS AN APELLEAN CHRISTIAN In my previous posts I have presented my case for identifying Peregrinus as the real author of the so-called Ignatian … Continue reading “[6] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 6th post in the series”
5th post in the series by Roger Parvus. The complete series is archived here. TDOP = The Death of Peregrinus by Lucian. Harmon’s translation here. So far I have called attention to the many similarities between Peregrinus and the author of the so-called Ignatians. I have explained that, to account for the similarities, it is … Continue reading “[5] THE LETTERS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH: 5th post in the series”
Jewish scholars of midrash have recognized that “midrashic” techniques, methods of interpretation of texts in the Hebrew Bible, have been creatively woven into Christian Gospel narrative and teaching material as much as Jews worked creatively with midrash in their own literature. Jon D. Levenson Jon D. Levenson wrote The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved … Continue reading “Midrash and Gospels 3: What some Jewish scholars say (and continuing ‘Midrash Tales of the Messiah’)”
(Added a paragraph commentary in the “proves historicity” section about half an hour after original posting.) New Testament scholars do not speak with one voice when it comes to applying the word “midrash” to the Gospels. Some have resolutely opposed the idea; others take its justification in their stride. In this post I would like … Continue reading “Midrash and the Gospels 2: debates in the scholarly sphere”
This continues from Part 1 where I began discussing what Richard Horsley has to say about popular messianic movements in Israel up to the time of Jesus in Bandits, Prophets & Messiahs. Previous posts addressed the concept of a future messiah among the literate elites. This post considers what Horsley has to say about the … Continue reading “Popular Messianic(?) and Bandit Movements Up To The Time Of Jesus and Beyond – Part 2”
It might be interesting to see how the criteria used for the quest for the historical Jesus might work with another figure of comparable stature in the ancient world. A comparison like this might help us assess their real value as determinants of historicity. Multiple Attestation We have the writings of the philosopher Plato. These … Continue reading “Was Socrates man or myth? Applying historical Jesus criteria to Socrates”