jgibson000

And you know this how? And haven't you begged the question and engaged in equivocation by assuming that for HJ scholarship to be scholarship, it must continuously re-invent the wheel?

Can you tell me how you know this? You yourself have admitted that you are not up on -- indeed, are barely acquainted with -- the literature in which Biblical scholars make their views and beliefs known. Nor to my knowledge have you ever been in the presence of a gathering of Biblical scholars -- such as occurs at SBL or CBA or SNTS --to hear what they say about what they believe. Nor, so far as I can tell, have you ever taken a survey to determine what any, let alone all, of the biblical scholars who assert the existence of Jesus believe and/or "take on faith". So how can you speak as globally and confidently as you do?

Again, since you have admitted that you don't know what Biblical scholars in the main say since you haven't read what they say, how on earth do you know this, even assuming that you haven't skewed the evidence with an equivocation on the meaning of "critical"?.

He did? Could you please tell me what the name of this seminary was?

JG

John Kesler

Darwin attended Christ's College, University of Cambridge:

See also here:

jgibson000

Christ's College is not a seminary, though, is it -- any more than my college at Oxford (Trinity) was/is.

One wonders, then, where "Malachi151" got his "information"?

JG

Ted Hoffman

I dont know what criteria you use to determine which ones are worthy of a response but so far, I have only seen two or three. But I am aware that Bernard Muller, Bede (Richard Hammond?), Christopher Price, J P Holding, Ted, Metacrock, Kevin Rosero have written reviews of TJP. Those are just the ones I know so I am sure there are more.

I was talking about Sanders reviewing Doherty's book.

Malachi151

This is just more of the typical nonsense from you.

Is Christ's College a theological seminary? I don't know, I assumed it was since it's called Christ's College and Darwin attended there to get his degree in theology in order to become a clergyman for the Church of England.

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

This is what Darwin was doing. Is or was Christ's College self identified as a seminary? I don't know, but at any rate, it makes little difference. The point was that "biology" was under the purview of theology prior to Darwin's theory of evolution. Darwin received his biology training from clergymen, while attending school for his theology degree.

Edit:

http://osp.stanford.edu/seminars/uk_darwin.html

If it is a misconception, it's a widespread one.

jgibson000

Nonsense??? You are admitting here that your bold assertion about what kind of educational institution Darwin attended when he was at Cambridge was based not on any real knowledge of, or research into, the nature of the College at Cambridge Darwin attended, but an assumption based wholly on what you thought the import of that College's name was! So who is really the one spouting nonsense?

Well, the assumption is wholly incorrect and spectacularly ill founded, just as would be the assumption that Christ's Church or Corpus Christy, Trinity, St. John's, or Jesus Colleges at either Oxford or Cambridge were/are seminaries.

No.

And yet you spoke as if you did! One wonders what other of your claims have a similar grounding in such absence of knowledge.

It was? At Cambridge? Or is this just another assumption on your part?

Would you care to name the people who "trained" Darwin in biology at Christ's College? What makes you sure that he was formally instructed in it by anyone when he was there, let alone that those who reputedly did were clergymen?

Do you have any real acquaintance with the structure of education at Cambridge? Is it as well grounded as are your claims about what 90-98% of NT scholars believe?

JG

jgibson000

Widespread? Really? So far as I can see the notion doesn't appear online anywhere except in the one (hardly definitive) source you cited. This is "widespread"?

And even if it widespread, so what? it's still not true. And how many times have you excoriated people for accepting as true and/or falling for a falsity because it is "widespread"?

JG

Chris Weimer

Metacrock? That counts as a real review?

jgibson000

And 7 to ten people count as "dozens"?

JG

Zeichman

Without naming names, for civility's sake, I think its safe to say that some of those are not worth reading because they are not particularly instructive, or the clearly agenda-based approach is hinders one's ability to seriously consider the arguments therein. Some, though, (e.g., GDon, Ted M) Nonetheless, this is a far cry from the "dozens" you claimed earlier, my number of a half-dozen seems to be relatively accurate. That said, I confess that I was unaware of a number of these until just now.

Here's what I've found, specifically regarding Doherty, with no order or indication of quality of response:
JP Holding (one of many): http://www.tektonics.org/JPH_D01_FYCBS.html
Richard Carrier: http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...uspuzzle.shtml
Mike Licona: http://www.answeringinfidels.com/ind...ask=view&id=87
GakuseiDon: http://members.optusnet.com.au/gakus...ndC_Review.htm
Christopher Price: http://christiancadre.org/cpricevirt.html
Bernard Muller:http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/djp1.html
Paula Fredriksen: http://home.ca.inter.net/~oblio/ChallengingDoherty.htm
Ted M: http://mypeoplepc.com/members/tedrik...p20/index.html
Kevin Rosero: http://christiancadre.org/member_contrib/rosero1.html
Metacrock: http://www.doxa.ws/other/Mythological_Jesus.html
Acharya S: http://www.truthbeknown.com/jesuspuzzle.htm
Frank Zindler: http://www.americanatheist.org/win00-01/T2/zindler.html
James Hannam: http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusindex.htm
Lastly, Chris Zeichman: http://neonostalgia.com/resources/bi...dloathing.html

That's all that I'm aware of.