Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
I am continuing here with another quick and easy response because real-life distractions prevent me at this time from addressing Hoffmann’s and Casey’s posts against mythicism. I will address both when work and family situations permit. Right now I am relaxing after sharing with family experiences in Kakadu — plan to return tomorrow some time. … Continue reading “Neil Godfrey’s response 2: @ Stephanie Fisher”
[This post concludes my review of “Mark’s Missing Ending: Clues from the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Peter,” by Dr. James F. McGrath. You may want to read Part 1 and Part 2 first.] Fish stories At the end of part 1, I mentioned that McGrath commits the fallacy of relying on other gospels to … Continue reading “McGrath’s “Missing Ending”: What Was Mark’s Story? — Part 3”
* Non-Pauline Epistles – Part One . Apostles with no connection to an historical Jesus Pilate in the 2nd century epistle 1 Timothy 1 Peter knows a suffering Christ through Isaiah 53 Christ “hung on a tree” The “flesh” and “body” of Christ and his “likeness” to men The epiphany of Jesus in 2 Peter … Continue reading “14. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt.14”
Three Voices on the Historical Jesus – No. 3: 1 Clement (with Addendum on the Epistle of Barnabas) Issue of the authenticity of 1 Clement Does 1 Clement know any Gospels? Christ speaking out of scripture Clement knows of the Passion through Isaiah 53 Christ’s sacrificial ‘blood’ and ‘flesh’ belong in the mythical dimension Prophecy … Continue reading “13. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt.13”
* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt. 12 Three Voices on the Historical Jesus – No. 2: Ignatius of Antioch . COVERED IN THIS POST: Are the Ignatian letters forgeries? What does “truly” mean for Ignatius: anti-docetism? historical fact? Ignatius knows no Gospels, even in 110 CE or later implications … Continue reading “12. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt. 12. Three Voices . . . Ignatius”
[This post continues my review of “Mark’s Missing Ending: Clues from the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Peter,” by Dr. James F. McGrath. You can find Part 1 here.] Why might Mark’s original audience not have thought the Short Ending was problematic? Last time we discussed why the Short Ending (SE) of Mark is considered … Continue reading “McGrath’s “Missing Ending”: What Was Mark’s Story? — Part 2”
* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt. 11 Three Voices on the Historical Jesus – No. 1: Papias . COVERED IN THIS POST: Papias’ Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord as revealed by Eusebius Papias’ uncertain chain of oral transmission Had Papias read any Gospels? Papias’ “Mark” and “Matthew”: … Continue reading “11. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Three Voices . . . Papias”
Bart Ehrman claims that the Gospel of John is testimony to the existence of traditions or sources about the life of Jesus that were independent of anything that was known to the other Gospels. Therefore, so it is implied, the Gospel of John is a witness to Jesus that stands independently of the other Gospels. … Continue reading “Ehrman: “It is simplest to assume”? How the Gospel of John IS Dependent Upon Gospel of Mark”
* 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”
* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt.8 The Existence of Non-Existent Sources for the Gospels . COVERED IN THIS POST: Those “sources” of the Gospels How obvious? Downplaying what scholarship knows Enter Q with a cardboard cutout Jesus Oral tradition hypothesis fails the prediction test How one story became four … Continue reading “8. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Existence of Non-Existent Sources for the Gospels”
Why is it that all the modern commentaries on the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (and to some extent John) include discussions of those works’ literary sources but scarcely any raise that question for the Gospel of Mark, the Gospel that supposedly started it all? Adam Winn (Mark and the Elijah-Elisha narrative : considering the … Continue reading “Discovering the Sources for the First Gospel, 1”
* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt.7 Telling the Gospels Like It Is . COVERED IN THIS POST: Should “faith documents” be treated as legitimate historical sources? Are the Gospels independently based on oral tradition? Matthew and Luke’s story is Mark’s story Hearing about Nazareth and Jesus Should we trust … Continue reading “7. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Telling the Gospels Like It Is”
* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Pt.6 What Did Jews Have to Say? . COVERED IN THIS POST: Philo of Alexandria Josephus the Testimonium: entirely interpolation or an authentic residue? is an authentic residue “neutral”? is the Testimonium intrusive or a digression? silence of Christian commentators on Testimonium before Eusebius … Continue reading “6. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Jewish Sources”
* Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism – Part 4 . In this post Doherty covers Ehrman’s arguments dealing with: Probability in history and the burden of proof Ideal evidence historians want against what they actually have Ehrman downplays the problems with the (lack of) evidence Unsuccessful comparison with Pontius Pilate Absence … Continue reading “4. Earl Doherty’s Response to Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Mythicism: Chapter 2 continued”