Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 11:04 AM

From the Amazon review:

Father Brown analyzes each of the 27 books in the New Testament, devoting painstaking attention to sources, dates, and authorship, as well as commentary on the spiritual, historical, and thematic aspects. He believes that modern-day Bible readers can only interpret it within its historical context. An Introduction to the New Testament, read with a Bible in hand, can only enrich and deepen your understanding of that germinal religious text.

Looks good. Thanks for the reference, Jeffrey. I've already ordered the book. Although I'm starting to get backed-up in my reading.

Michael Dravis

TedM · 12-22-2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

No. Josephus commanded an army in Galilee.

Thanks for the correction. About.com says:

Quote:

Where did Josephus live?:
Josephus was leader of Jewish forces in Galilee, so it’s likely that he spent much of his early adult life there. As a teenager, he spent time living with the Essenes in the Judean wilderness, though.

No doubt he is one we should expect to have written of Jesus.

Quote:

Justus of Tiberias was raised in Galilee, a contemporary of Josephus, who also wrote a history. That history does not survive. However, we have this comment:

Quote:

'I have read the chronology of Justus of Tiberias ... and being under the Jewish prejudices, as indeed he was himself also a Jew by birth, he makes not one mention of Jesus, of what happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did.'

– Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, 9th Century

Which indicates that Justus was so impressed with his Galilean countryman that he did not make any mention of him whatsoever.

Odd, eh?

Very odd. Is there any debate about this quote from Photius? And, what do we know about the kinds of things Justus of Tiberias wrote? What kind of history? If we don't know or if he only wrote of ancient history the quote isn't odd at all.

ted

JoeWallack · 12-22-2007, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

JW:
I was kind of hoping someone would mention this. Before we even look at 1 Peter 2:24 I don't think the author knew Jesus. Do you?

I think it could go either way.

JW:
Do you think the author was "Mark's" Peter?

Quote:

Why do you think he didn't know Jesus?
ted

JW:
Critical Bible scholarship dates 1 Peter late 1st century. Uncritical Christianity dates Peter pre-late 1st century. Personally though I think even critical Christian Bible scholarship is like TV, it adds 20 years to your age. What may give some pause is 1 Peter reads like Paul and therefore seems blissfully unaware of "Mark". Not a problem for me though as I think it is just more evidence that "Mark" is second century.

Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

TedM · 12-22-2007, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

No. Josephus commanded an army in Galilee.

Thanks for the correction. About.com says:

Quote:

Where did Josephus live?:
Josephus was leader of Jewish forces in Galilee, so it’s likely that he spent much of his early adult life there. As a teenager, he spent time living with the Essenes in the Judean wilderness, though.

No doubt he is one we should expect to have written of Jesus.

Quote:

Justus of Tiberias was raised in Galilee, a contemporary of Josephus, who also wrote a history. That history does not survive. However, we have this comment:

Quote:

'I have read the chronology of Justus of Tiberias ... and being under the Jewish prejudices, as indeed he was himself also a Jew by birth, he makes not one mention of Jesus, of what happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did.'

– Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, 9th Century

Which indicates that Justus was so impressed with his Galilean countryman that he did not make any mention of him whatsoever.

Odd, eh?

Ok, I found the full quote, and it looks like he did cover the period in which Jesus is said to have lived.

Thanks for bringing this up. It is possible that he wrote unfavorably and later Christians removed what he wrote, but this of course is not provable.

ted

Toto · 12-22-2007, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

..

Quote:

Justus of Tiberias was raised in Galilee, a contemporary of Josephus, who also wrote a history. That history does not survive. However, we have this comment:

Which indicates that Justus was so impressed with his Galilean countryman that he did not make any mention of him whatsoever.

Odd, eh?

Ok, I found the full quote, and it looks like he did cover the period in which Jesus is said to have lived.

Thanks for bringing this up. It is possible that he wrote unfavorably and later Christians removed what he wrote, but this of course is not provable.

ted

That would be baseless speculation. Most scholars assume that, because he did not write anything about Jesus, Christians did not bother to preserve his work, as it was of no interest.

Toto · 12-22-2007, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

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

Father Raymond Brown's work bears the Imprimatur, does it not? Any deviation from Catholic doctrine is carefully phrased to preserve the authority of the Pope in doctrinal matters.

Brown's wiki page

Quote:

Much of Brown's work was given a Nihil obstat and an Imprimatur (the "nihil obstat" is a statement by an official reviewer, appointed by a bishop, that "nothing stands in the way" of a book being given an imprimatur; the "imprimatur," which must normally be issued by a bishop of the diocese of publication, is the official endorsement -- "let it be printed" -- that a book contains nothing damaging to Catholic faith and morals)[20]. ....

Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, who has written presenting the infancy narratives and John’s Gospel as historically reliable,[23] was personally complementary of Brown and his scholarship, and has been quoted as saying he "would be very happy if we had many exegetes like Father Brown".

...
Brown's work was controversial among traditionalists who objected to his position that the Bible, including the Gospels, contains historical errors, and the elements of his work that they regarded as casting doubt on the historical accuracy of numerous articles of the Catholic faith...

Other writers, on the other hand, have criticized Brown for excessive caution, for what they saw as his unwillingness to acknowledge the radical implications of the critical methods he was using. Frank Kermode, in his review of The Birth of the Messiah, accused Brown of being too eager to secure the imprimatur of the Catholic Church;[27] Geza Vermes has described Brown as "the primary example of the position of having your cake and eating it'."[28]

Brown is a poor example for your thesis. Surely you have a better example?

Mythra · 12-22-2007, 12:21 PM

Damn. Hope I didn't just spend $30 to learn about the virgin Mary :rolling:

Just kidding. I looked over the reviews pretty good before buying.

It looks like a good, moderate, comprehensive view of things.

Toto · 12-22-2007, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

...

My understanding is that "tree" and "cross" were used to mean the same thing. I don't think there were two traditions.

ted

The word for tree could be the word for stake, which is similar to a cross in its function. But there are two traditions. There is the Christian gospel tradition of Jesus tried before Pilate and crucified; and there are hints of another tradition in the Talmud, in which Yeshu was accused of heresy by Jewish leaders and stoned. (Google Yeshu Talmud and pick your favorite source.) There's a previous thread with some interesting links here.

There is an older book by G.R. Mead, Did Jesus Live 100 B.C., which explores this whole story.

TedM · 12-22-2007, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Most scholars assume that, because he did not write anything about Jesus, Christians did not bother to preserve his work, as it was of no interest.

That makes sense, but would scholars expect Christians to have preserved his work had he made an unflattering reference to Jesus which contradicted the "history" in the gospels?

Toto · 12-22-2007, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Most scholars assume that, because he did not write anything about Jesus, Christians did not bother to preserve his work, as it was of no interest.

That makes sense, but would scholars expect Christians to have preserved his work had he made an unflattering reference to Jesus which contradicted the "history" in the gospels?

In that case, you might have found Christian fathers condemning him, as they did the heretics and the unbelieving Jews, especially as he was a Jew.

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

12-22-2007, 11:04 AM	#31
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	From the Amazon review: Father Brown analyzes each of the 27 books in the New Testament, devoting painstaking attention to sources, dates, and authorship, as well as commentary on the spiritual, historical, and thematic aspects. He believes that modern-day Bible readers can only interpret it within its historical context. An Introduction to the New Testament, read with a Bible in hand, can only enrich and deepen your understanding of that germinal religious text. Looks good. Thanks for the reference, Jeffrey. I've already ordered the book. Although I'm starting to get backed-up in my reading. Michael Dravis

12-22-2007, 12:21 PM	#37
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	Damn. Hope I didn't just spend $30 to learn about the virgin Mary :rolling: Just kidding. I looked over the reviews pretty good before buying. It looks like a good, moderate, comprehensive view of things.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.