Search Results for: criterion of embarrassment

Honest to Jesus: Robert Funk’s mix of good, contradictory and overlooked “rules of evidence”

Jesus Seminar co-founder Robert Funk has a lot of interesting insights into the gospel texts. But he (along with probably a vast majority of his biblical studies colleagues) also carries a few assumptions that set his historical studies a world apart from the methods of historians of nonbiblical themes. But first the good rule that … Continue reading “Honest to Jesus: Robert Funk’s mix of good, contradictory and overlooked “rules of evidence””

Manufacturing “evidence” for the historicity of 12 apostles

An illustration of how evidence is manufactured to support historicity in biblical studies:  the twelve disciples (The following criteria are taken from John Meier’s defence of the historicity of the Twelve, JBL, 116/4 (1997) 635-672 that promises to apply “with rigor” “the criteria of historicity” (636). This post is also in one sense a complement … Continue reading “Manufacturing “evidence” for the historicity of 12 apostles”

Embarrassing or stereotypical narrative details? (Eddy and Boyd, The Jesus Legend)

I had been assured by a number of fundamentalists and book reviews that the Eddy and Boyd book (The Jesus Legend) was a cut above the rest of apologetics in its scholarly critique of sceptical arguments and buttressing of the veracity of the gospel text as it is. So far I have been disappointed in … Continue reading “Embarrassing or stereotypical narrative details? (Eddy and Boyd, The Jesus Legend)”

3 ‘criteria for authenticity’ (“Fabricating Jesus” / Craig Evans contd)

In Fabricating Jesus Craig Evans writes: Some of the criteria used for supporting the authenticity of Jesus’ sayings apply in the case of his mighty deeds. (p.140) The criteria for authenticity that he cites in this context are: Multiple Attestation, Dissimilarity and Embarrassment. Elsewhere he lists additional criteria that he says are also useful for … Continue reading “3 ‘criteria for authenticity’ (“Fabricating Jesus” / Craig Evans contd)”

Spong on Jesus’ historicity: The Nazareth connection

I am not sure if Bishop John Shelby Spong believes in god (he speaks of a “god experience”, and of atheism as being defined as not believing in a “theistic definition of god”, which definition he also rejects) but he does believe in Jesus. This, according to his new book, Jesus for the Non-Religious: Recovering … Continue reading “Spong on Jesus’ historicity: The Nazareth connection”

Mark, The Embarrassing Gospel

The criterion of embarrassment is a “rule” commonly appealed to by scholars to argue that certain events must be historical because they were so well-known and undeniable that, although gospel authors were clearly embarrassed by them, they nevertheless could not avoid addressing them. One example is the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist. Why … Continue reading “Mark, The Embarrassing Gospel”

Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Chapter 5a

5. The Twelve The role of named individuals in the formulation and transmission of traditions of Jesus’ words and deeds largely disappeared from the normal awareness of New Testament scholars as a result of the form-critical movement in Gospels scholarship in the early twentieth century. (p.93) Bauckham continues with Birger Gerhardsson’s dismissive tone of critics … Continue reading “Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Chapter 5a”

Where does John the Baptist fit in History? (Or, the Place of Fact and Opinion in History)

Until a few days ago it seems that I had either missed or forgotten about a 23,256 word essay from 2015 that rebuts the arguments of some works that I had posted about setting out a case for the inauthenticity of the John the Baptist passage in Josephus’s Antiquities. Not to worry, since it has now … Continue reading “Where does John the Baptist fit in History? (Or, the Place of Fact and Opinion in History)”

Final (#3) post responding to O’Neill’s Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet

Three posts will be enough. The first one responding to Tim O’Neill’s Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet on his History for Atheists site is Examining the Evidence for Jesus as an Apocalyptic Prophet The second is Response #2 to History for Atheists’ “JESUS THE APOCALYPTIC PROPHET” In the first post we presented a case that there is no evidence to … Continue reading “Final (#3) post responding to O’Neill’s Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet“

Part 2 of Testing the Claim that Jesus Scholars Use the Methods of Other Historians

This post continues my assessment of the claims made in a doctoral dissertation by Michael Zolondek (supervised by Larry Hurtado and Helen Bond of the University of Edinburgh) that Jesus scholars use the same methods as historians of other fields. The sorts of methods he is addressing are specifically the “criteria of authenticity”. Though challenged … Continue reading “Part 2 of Testing the Claim that Jesus Scholars Use the Methods of Other Historians”

Tom Holland: Still Wrong About Christianity

Historian Tom Holland has made a public confession that when it comes to his morals and ethics he is “thoroughly and proudly Christian”. (Tom Holland is a very talented writer and historian whose study of the rise of the Arab empire and birth of Islam I have discussed here. I was also fascinated by another … Continue reading “Tom Holland: Still Wrong About Christianity”

Tom Dykstra on Mythicism: Erhman, Brodie and Scholarly Conduct

Tom Dykstra writes “a cautionary tale” concerning the unpleasant rift between mythicists (those who dispute the historicity of Jesus) and historicists (those who defend the historicity of Jesus). His primary exemplars are “historicist” Bart Ehrman and “mythicist” Thomas Brodie, Ehrman and Brodie on Whether Jesus Existed: A Cautionary Tale about the State of Biblical Scholarship. His first warning is … Continue reading “Tom Dykstra on Mythicism: Erhman, Brodie and Scholarly Conduct”

The Memory Mavens, Part 8: Chris Keith, Post-Criteria Scholar? (2)

Today’s text comes from Molière’s play, Le Médecin malgré lui (The Doctor in Spite of Himself). We join in as Sganarelle, a poor, drunken woodcutter, posing as an eccentric but brilliant physician, pretends to diagnose Lucinde, the daughter of a wealthy couple. Her parents, Géronte and Jacqueline, along with their servant, Lucas, watch and comment as Sganarelle bamboozles them with a stream of … Continue reading “The Memory Mavens, Part 8: Chris Keith, Post-Criteria Scholar? (2)”

How Can We Know If the Jesus Narratives Are Memories Or Inventions? (Revised)

Anthony Le Donne has written a book that I find is both chock-full of many fascinating nuggets in the Gospel narratives and riddled with startling revelations (if only discerned between the lines) about the foundations of “Gospel Narrative Origins” studies, The Historiographical Jesus: Memory, Typology, and the Son of David. (This post does not address … Continue reading “How Can We Know If the Jesus Narratives Are Memories Or Inventions? (Revised)”