Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

And I ask again, does the fact that a tradition stems from believers' testimony about the way a messianic figure died automatically render that testimony historically unreliable?

Now you're making me think. And, my answer here is "no". Of course not. It doesn't become automatically unreliable just because it came from a believer.

Quote:

And if it does, must we not then, if we assume (since there's no reason to think otherwise) that Josephus got his information about "Messianic" figures other than Jesus from those figures' "believers", throw out as historically unreliable what Josephus says about them, too?

Oh, okay. I see what you're saying. But, since I said "no" to the first question, the second doesn't apply.

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-22-2007, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Jeffrey: I understand that you have a thing for people coming in here and making statements that are above their pay-grade.

And for thinking that conclusions drawn from false and or question begging are valid.

Quote:

But I try hard to not do that. Although (as you may recall) I am a big fan of Robert Price, I'm currently reading Burton Mack, and at the suggestion of someone here (I think it was Solitary Man) the next thing I plan on working my way through is "The New Testament, a Student’s Introduction", by Stephen Harris.

Good. But please recognize that Harris is not a biblical scholar. You'd be better off reading Bart Ehrman's or (even better) Ray Brown's NT introduction.

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-22-2007, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

And I ask again, does the fact that a tradition stems from believers' testimony about the way a messianic figure died automatically render that testimony historically unreliable?

Now you're making me think. And, my answer here is "no". Of course not. It doesn't become automatically unreliable just because it came from a believer.

Quote:

And if it does, must we not then, if we assume (since there's no reason to think otherwise) that Josephus got his information about "Messianic" figures other than Jesus from those figures' "believers", throw out as historically unreliable what Josephus says about them, too?

Oh, okay. I see what you're saying. But, since I said "no" to the first question, the second doesn't apply.

Excellent! So why the double standard in the case of what Josephus says about Jesus? Why only in this instance and not with what he says about Theudas, etc.?

Jeffrey

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Excellent! So why the double standard in the case of what Josephus says about Jesus? Why only in this instance and not with what he says about Theudas, etc.?

Hmm. I didn't know I had a position on the historicity of Theudas!

Michael Dravis

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 10:28 AM

I may think about the Ehrman book. I have "Misquoting Jesus".

Although I would imagine his book on the intro to the NT is quite different in scope.

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 10:30 AM

I've never even heard of Ray Brown. I'll have to check him out at Amazon.

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 10:37 AM

Hmm. I only came up with one book:here (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-22-2007, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

I've never even heard of Ray Brown. I'll have to check him out at Amazon.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown which puts paid to the idea that biblical scholars are afraid to challenge traditional Christian beliefs (i.e., that the NT declares Jesus to be God) for fear of their jobs.

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson · 12-22-2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Hmm. I only came up with one book...

My fault, I fear. You need to look under Raymond Brown.

Introduction (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Jeffrey

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 10:47 AM

So, lets talk about a hypothetical "Theudas" for a second.

And there is an account of him. And he has followers, who are causing a certain amount of trouble for the Romans.

So, far, so good. I'll accept that he may be historical.

Then, during one of the skirmishes, our hypothetical "Theudas" calls down lightning from a clear blue sky, which strikes down the Roman soldiers, securing a victory for our hypothetical "Theudas" and his boys.

Now, I have to say whoa. I don't think so.

So, I suppose it's the inability to believe the incredible that I use to filter what "could be" historical and what cannot be.

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

12-22-2007, 10:28 AM	#25
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	I may think about the Ehrman book. I have "Misquoting Jesus". Although I would imagine his book on the intro to the NT is quite different in scope.

12-22-2007, 10:30 AM	#26
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	I've never even heard of Ray Brown. I'll have to check him out at Amazon.

12-22-2007, 10:37 AM	#27
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	Hmm. I only came up with one book:here (or via: amazon.co.uk)

12-22-2007, 10:47 AM	#30
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	So, lets talk about a hypothetical "Theudas" for a second. And there is an account of him. And he has followers, who are causing a certain amount of trouble for the Romans. So, far, so good. I'll accept that he may be historical. Then, during one of the skirmishes, our hypothetical "Theudas" calls down lightning from a clear blue sky, which strikes down the Roman soldiers, securing a victory for our hypothetical "Theudas" and his boys. Now, I have to say whoa. I don't think so. So, I suppose it's the inability to believe the incredible that I use to filter what "could be" historical and what cannot be.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.