Questioning Paul’s Letters. Were they really “occasional”? Or rhetorical fictions?

Edited with a few minor additions and corrections of lots of typos at 16:16 pm CST (Australia) time, 21st Dec 2012. I don’t know the answer to those questions in the title. But I have been looking at scholarly arguments that maintain Paul’s letters were, indeed, carefully crafted works of theological instructions that were composed … Continue reading “Questioning Paul’s Letters. Were they really “occasional”? Or rhetorical fictions?”


What Did Luke’s Eyewitnesses See?

The Gospel of Luke begins with words that many have understood to be an assurance that its narrative is based on the firsthand eyewitness testimony of those who had seen Jesus for themselves. Here is Craig S. Keener‘s rendition of Luke 1:1-2 . . . many have sought to complete a narrative of the acts … Continue reading “What Did Luke’s Eyewitnesses See?”


Collapse of the Documentary Hypothesis (1) & Comparing the Bible with Classical Greek Literature

This post recapitulates earlier posts on the Documentary Hypothesis and introduces Philippe Wajdenbaum’s case for comparing the Bible with Classical Greek literature and finding the biblical author’s (sic) sources of inspiration there. Late last year I wrote Who Wrote the Bible? Rise of the Documentary Hypothesis. That post outlined the milestones towards the DH as … Continue reading “Collapse of the Documentary Hypothesis (1) & Comparing the Bible with Classical Greek Literature”


Did Jesus exist for minimalist and Jesus Process member Philip Davies?

Emeritus Professor Philip Davies has not been able to “resist making a contribution to the recent spate of exchanges between scholars about the existence of Jesus” in an opinion piece titled Did Jesus Exist? on The Bible and Interpretation website. It is a question that he says “has always been lurking within New Testament scholarship … Continue reading “Did Jesus exist for minimalist and Jesus Process member Philip Davies?”


Doherty’s chapter 7 (2): reviewing McGrath’s review

Continuing from the previous post, addressing McGrath’s comments on Doherty’s chapter 7. I have so often heard scholars repeat, as if it were a truism, that in pre-modern cultures that relied more on oral traditions and story-telling than on stick-it notes people had trained themselves to have remarkable memories. But I was obviously mistaken. McGrath … Continue reading “Doherty’s chapter 7 (2): reviewing McGrath’s review”


Response to McGrath’s circularity and avoidance of the methodological argument

In a “response” to a recent post of mine about historical method, James McGrath illustrates well the very problem and question-begging that my post was intended to highlight. McGrath’s opening statement affirms that he simply fails to grasp the argument I am presenting. [Neil Godfrey’s] post begins by stating and commenting on the principle which … Continue reading “Response to McGrath’s circularity and avoidance of the methodological argument”


The Elijah-Elisha narrative as a model for the Gospel of Mark

Thomas L. Brodie presents an argument that the Gospel of Mark was in its basic outline, plot and structure based on the Elijah-Elisha narrative in the Old Testament. I am not quite sure what to make of his case at times, but cannot deny its interest. I have no problem accepting that Mark used some … Continue reading “The Elijah-Elisha narrative as a model for the Gospel of Mark”