I have noticed that there has been much attention given to the Jesus Puzzle, and the Christology of the epistles of Paul, in this forum as of late. On the subject of the Christology of Paul, a better book has not been written than "Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free" by F.F. Bruce. I highly reccomend it to any interested in that topic. It is available at www.christianbook.com for $17.00.

I was actually reading this but I got sidetracked into reading Ghandi's autobiography. I also should have the infamous Jesus Puzzle in my hands soon (want to read it before Carrier reviews it, which I hope is coming soon). After that I should get back to Bruce. I'll try to remember to give an opinion after finishing.

It's a good one. I also recomend Raymond Brown's Death of the Messiah for Historical Jesus books. and For Paul An old book, probably have to find it on Inter library loan but a really good one by an Oxford Scholar who was tops in Pauline studies, D.E.H. Whiteley's Theology of St. Paul 1964.

Can you recommend a book on Paul that isn't influenced by Christian bias? F.F. Bruce does not qualify.

rodahi

Just so that everyone knows, F.F. Bruce may have a Christian "bias" as Rodahi states, but he is a good scholar. One would be wise to take his scholarship into account even if trying to find a scholar with non-Christian "bias".

Ish

_____________________________________________
Originally posted by rodahi:
Can you recommend a book on Paul that isn't influenced by Christian bias? F.F. Bruce does not qualify.

rodahi
_____________________________________________

Are you interested in a book that is bias-less, or just free of a CHRISTIAN bias? I have a sneaking suspicion that it is the former rather than the latter, but I certainly could be wrong--goodness knows I have been before.

Toto

It would be hard to write a secular biography of Paul. He left some letters, and the Book of Acts was written about him. There is no extra-biblical information about him. The letters and Acts differ considerably, and both are historically suspect. Acts appears to be largely legendary, written almost a century after he lived by someone with a political agenda. Paul's letters were probably edited and interpolated, so we really can't be that sure of much about him.

You make a good point here. I personally respect and appreciate the scholarship of those who wish to remain neutral. It is a waste of time to read the works of those who attempt to prove the JC Bible is somehow superior to any other collection of ancient religious literature.

In my opinion, the Zend Avesta, the JC Bible, the Koran, the Book of the Dead, the Illiad, etc., should be read and studied for what they are (ancient literature), not what people want any particular one of them to be (the word of some god).

rodahi

Boy, where have I seen this before....

Rodahi, there is no such thing as "neutral". We all come with our own set of biases. The way you read and interpret the Bible has just as much spin. It is just as easy for you to misunderstand the Bible due to your lack of belief in what it says. You may attempt to be "neutral", but you are not and I am not. I wish you luck if you only read like-minded scholars. BTW, I can pretty much guess from your responses here how I can expect your review of Meier's works to come out.

Ish

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ish:
Boy, where have I seen this before....

Rodahi, there is no such thing as "neutral".

You seem to think that just because Christian apologists are very biased, everyone else is as well. That simply is not the case. BTW, I never said that any particular scholar is "neutral." I said I appreciate those who wish or attempt to be neutral.

Ish: We all come with our own set of biases.

Is it a bias to want to find out what actually happened in history? Please point out how that is so.

Ish: The way you read and interpret the Bible has just as much spin. It is just as easy for you to misunderstand the Bible due to your lack of belief in what it says. You may attempt to be "neutral", but you are not and I am not.

A Christian has a vested interest in the JC Bible. A non-Christian does not.

Iss: I wish you luck if you only read like-minded scholars.

I don't really need luck. I only need scholars who aren't out to prove anything. Charles Guignebert comes to mind.

Ish: BTW, I can pretty much guess from your responses here how I can expect your review of Meier's works to come out.

It sounds like you are biased.

rodahi