Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Decypher · 10-02-2013, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Ive found no apologetic bias in Crossan, Reed, Meyers, Sanders, Martin, Borg.

I think the list of apologetic scholars that are seriously biased is rather small, once we get beyond personal interpretation which they all hold.

They may not be cases of "apologetic bias", but Crossan:

Quote:

Crossan joined the Servites, a Catholic religious order, and moved to the United States. He was trained at Stonebridge Seminary, Lake Bluff, Illinois, then ordained a priest in 1957. Crossan returned to Ireland, where he earned his Doctor of Divinity in 1959 at St. Patrick's College Maynooth, the Irish national seminary. He then completed two more years of study in biblical languages at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome. In 1965 Crossan began two additional years of study (in archaeology) at the Ecole Biblique in Jordanian East Jerusalem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dominic_Crossan

It mentions he studied archaeology, but Crossan appears to be a qualified theologian rather than a historian.

And looking at Borg:

Quote:

He later changed his major to political science and philosophy. Though plagued by doubt as a young adult, after his undergraduate studies Borg decided to study at Union Seminary in New York City, where he became familiarized with liberal theology. One of the profound influences on Borg during his seminary years was his professor and the noted theologian W. D. Davies. After graduating from Union he then matriculated at Mansfield College, Oxford University, where he earned his D. Phil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Borg

Which again, doesn't look like the guy has a historian background.

You may be aware of plenty of others with a historian background?

angelo · 10-02-2013, 11:25 PM

Robert Price comes to mind as a non chistian trained historian.

aa5874 · 10-02-2013, 11:59 PM

In "Did Jesus Exist?" chapter 8 page 267 Ehrman admitted that almost all his students are Bible believing Christians.

Such an admission must mean that most Scholars will be Bible believing Christians.

This is precisely why scholarship is inundated with those who argue that Jesus existed.

Bible believing Christians must maintain Jesus existed even without any actual evidence.

Toto · 10-03-2013, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angelo atheist

Robert Price comes to mind as a non chistian trained historian.

Price was trained as a Christian. He has a PhD in systematic theology and another in New Testament studies.

Toto · 10-03-2013, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

In "Did Jesus Exist?" chapter 8 page 267 Ehrman admitted that almost all his students are Bible believing Christians.

Such an admission must mean that most Scholars will be Bible believing Christians.

...

Ehrman teaches large classes of undergraduates in a southern state. Most of them will not go on to become Biblical scholars.

aa5874 · 10-03-2013, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

In "Did Jesus Exist?" chapter 8 page 267 Ehrman admitted that almost all his students are Bible believing Christians.

Such an admission must mean that most Scholars will be Bible believing Christians.

...

Ehrman teaches large classes of undergraduates in a southern state. Most of them will not go on to become Biblical scholars.

Logically, if most students are Bible believing Christians then it is still most probable that those who go on to be Bible Scholars would most likely be Bible Believing Christians if you apply Bayesian Law or any applicable Law of probability.

Toto · 10-03-2013, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Ehrman teaches large classes of undergraduates in a southern state. Most of them will not go on to become Biblical scholars.

Logically, if most students are Bible believing Christians then it is still most probable that those who go on to be Bible Scholars would most likely be Bible Believing Christians if you apply Bayesian Law or any applicable Law of probability.

That's only true if all students had a equal probability of going on to become Biblical scholars, and also if the act of becoming a Biblical scholar did not change the Bible believing Christian undergraduate into a Bible skeptic.

Robert Tulip · 10-03-2013, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hjalti

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Verenna

The answer is about 50-50.

Where did you get that figure?

Posterior Analytic Derivation

aa5874 · 10-03-2013, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Ehrman teaches large classes of undergraduates in a southern state. Most of them will not go on to become Biblical scholars.

Logically, if most students are Bible believing Christians then it is still most probable that those who go on to be Bible Scholars would most likely be Bible Believing Christians if you apply Bayesian Law or any applicable Law of probability.

That's only true if all students had a equal probability of going on to become Biblical scholars, and also if the act of becoming a Biblical scholar did not change the Bible believing Christian undergraduate into a Bible skeptic.

You don't know what you are talking about. You have already shown that you have very little understanding on the application of the Laws of Probability.

Once most students are Bible believing Christians then it is most probable that Bible Scholars are Bible believers.

This is basic.

PhilosopherJay · 10-03-2013, 10:40 AM

Hi all,

I tend to agree with the lopsided (90%+) voters.
People tend to pursue subjects they really love. Those who study astro-physics are people who love astro-physics. The people who become Bible scholars are generally those who love the Bible.

In most fields this isn't a problem. I may love mollusks shells and become a conchologist, but I'm not going to say that mollusks are a special creation that defies evolution and try to prove that mollusks come from a Mollusk-God.

In Bible Scholarship, the fact that many scholars start with a deep belief or desire to believe in the supernatural uniqueness of the text seriously distorts the field. They often start out seeing themselves as sacred intellectual soldiers on a supernatural battlefield between good and evil. While most may lose this fantastic idea as they learn more over time, their original ideology still affects their judgement.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-02-2013, 11:25 PM	#12
angelo Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 5,706	Robert Price comes to mind as a non chistian trained historian.

10-02-2013, 11:59 PM	#13
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	In "Did Jesus Exist?" chapter 8 page 267 Ehrman admitted that almost all his students are Bible believing Christians. Such an admission must mean that most Scholars will be Bible believing Christians. This is precisely why scholarship is inundated with those who argue that Jesus existed. Bible believing Christians must maintain Jesus existed even without any actual evidence.

10-03-2013, 10:40 AM	#20
PhilosopherJay Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Orlando Posts: 2,014	Hi all, I tend to agree with the lopsided (90%+) voters. People tend to pursue subjects they really love. Those who study astro-physics are people who love astro-physics. The people who become Bible scholars are generally those who love the Bible. In most fields this isn't a problem. I may love mollusks shells and become a conchologist, but I'm not going to say that mollusks are a special creation that defies evolution and try to prove that mollusks come from a Mollusk-God. In Bible Scholarship, the fact that many scholars start with a deep belief or desire to believe in the supernatural uniqueness of the text seriously distorts the field. They often start out seeing themselves as sacred intellectual soldiers on a supernatural battlefield between good and evil. While most may lose this fantastic idea as they learn more over time, their original ideology still affects their judgement. Warmly, Jay Raskin

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.