This will be a fascinating debate if it takes place. I guess I'll have to give my real name too. No, I'm not Earl Doherty, and no I'm not some crazy fan who uses his name. I find his views very interesting, and Doherty a compelling writer who poses difficult questions, but I haven't made up my mind as to whether Jesus is purely mythological. Price's position that agnosticism is required regarding Jesus' historicity certainly seems the easier view to defend.

I'm Philip Kuchar, and I live in Toronto, Canada. By way of confirming Nomad's real name, for what it's worth I can say that he used that name and address in an earlier email correspondence with me.

I would like to emphasize the need for an absence of ad hominem and hostility on all sides should Doherty find the time to defend his views here. I hope everyone will stick to discussing calmly the issues rather than attacking anyone's character or taking a childish tone.

These supporting scholars seem to have a vested interest due to their connections: Drew University and The Journal of Higher Criticism. Robert Eisenman is on the Board of Advisors for JHC and it seems as if the supporter from Australia would most likely be Barbara Thiering of the Jesus Seminar (also a contributor to JHC).

The JHC specifically looks for controversial material as per the Subscription section of their homepage which reads: "In the field of Biblical Studies the student as well as the professional must keep abreast of what scholars are saying-but especially if what they say promises to disturb and redefine the terms of scholarly debate. This is why The Journal of Higher Criticism is an absolute must for libraries and individuals. Many journals of Biblical Studies are redundant. This one is distinctive!"

Out of curiosity, are there supporters without connections to the JHC and Drew University?

Regardless, I very much look forward to this possible debate. I hope that it will take place and that we can all learn something new. Since he admits that many scholars have not taken the time for a rebuttal of his work, I think he will welcome this chance to debate his theories.

By the way, I'm very curious about Doherty's credentials. He is listed under the JHC Board of Advisors as connected with the Institute for Higher Critical Studies. What exactly is this? What specific degrees does he have? Is he a professor? Does he work for Drew University? Hopefully these can be answered.

I would also enjoy knowing others' credentials here. I am a layman with a BS in Computer Systems Engineering working in Dallas, Texas as a software engineer. I have been studying the languages and history behind the Bible (and a few other major religions) off and on for 5 or 6 years now.

I suggest that a new thread be created for the debate if it takes place. Thanks! I'm anxious to listen in and possibly contribute.

Ish

[This message has been edited by Ish (edited April 20, 2001).]

Speaking of a debate. If there is to be one I think both sides shoud limit the number of participants.

Hi Brian,

I'm Ethan Blansett, currently in Eugene, Oregon. I just sent a message to Earl Doherty which included your post, along with the following posts of Bede and Earl.

Why? This forum is clearly a hangout for amateurs who can be simply distinguished by the amount of knowledge gained through reading. Clearly Earl Doherty has spent a great deal of time on Biblical issues as has Nomad and many others here, regardless of their professions. So how about we drop the credentials issue and just hope for an insightful debate?

As far as my credentials, I am finishing a Ph.D. in physics which certainly seem irrelevant. More relevant is that I have not done extensive research in Biblical studies though I am certainly interested and have done some basic reading. However, with people more knowledgable like Nomad and Earl Doherty debating, I will quickly disappear and enjoy the debate from the sidelines.

These are just suggestions.

But if Mr. D is going to grace us himself, I think that settles your side, unless you want Mr. D would like some assistance.

I'm happy to let Nomad, Bede, or Meta, or a panel of them, take the other side.

Perhaps a one day relay in responses to permit adequate research, and if necessary, consulting with others?

I have no credentials.

Does that make me the weakest link?

Layman,

I agree. How many participants should there be, and who should decide who participates, though? Perhaps the Secweb moderator should take charge and become an official host?

Certainly Nomad and Earl Doherty, at least, given that Earl Doherty is expecting to debate Nomad since I referred him to this thread. I suggest that others should respond if they feel they can add additional insights and to continue to do so until someone, probably Doherty, complains that there is too much to respond to. There could also be a parallel thread going in which others post replies that Nomad or Earl Doherty could read if they desired.

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend with the credentials question. I am merely curious. It does matter. Those studying for a PhD in a relevant field have possibly done much more book reading than others of us. It's the engineer in me, I guess, to know all the underlying details.

I think a person's credentials can say a lot about them (kinda the point of having them), but it's up to you...

Ish