Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2007, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

He's a fringe scholar.

He certainly has credentials that are not "fringe".

And perhaps original thinking (or at least unorthodox thinking) is exactly what is needed in order to ever ascertain the truth about the origins of christianity. Not to mention he is an engaging author.

Not too many of us can slog through a 1,000 page treatise on some vague theological concept or provide an english translation from Sumerian cuneiform.

Michael

And no one asked you to. So why the equivocation when the issue is how well Price's work stacks up against that of others who write on the same topics as Price does and how well Price represents the positions of others that he criticizes or deals with the data that he adduces in support of his claims?

Jeffrey

Zeichman · 11-26-2007, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

If you had, you'd have seen how Price skews data to support some apriori conclusions about the forms and functions of NT writings.

Jeffrey: have you read Price's books "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man" and "Deconstructing Jesus"? If so, I'd be interested to see you provide specific examples in which Price has skewed the data. (without simply providing references to other works)

Another plug: I wrote an essay against Price's and Doherty's uses of Q which will hopefully be published soon in Price's own Journal of Higher Criticism. Oddly enough, he was at the Q section of SBL on Monday and got there almost right after Jeffrey left, but I didn't get a chance to talk to him.

dog-on · 11-26-2007, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Finally, P. follows Earl Doherty in holding that the stories about Jesus are midrashic creations from OT precedents rather than actual events of Jesus' life that evoked the OT parallels.

...and this is a problem, why exactly?

Mythra · 11-26-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

And no one asked you to. So why the equivocation when the issue is how well Price's work stacks up against that of others who write on the same topics as Price does and how well Price represents the positions of others that he criticizes or deals with the data that he adduces in support of his claims?

You're right, of course. It probably wasn't warranted. I just perceived the term "fringe scholar" to be one step above "crackpot". And Robert Price is an author who has made a positive impact on my life, giving me a new way to think about these issues. Particularly his book "The Reason Driven Life" helped me a great deal.

Michael Dravis

squiz · 11-26-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by squiz

Ok, so next time I'm turned down for that big promotion, I'll sue them for discrimination based on the fact that they theoretically might have read something on the internet.

No. Only if that actually were the basis for it. I suspect however that your being turned down would have more to do with job performance than what you do on the internet.

And since you seem to think that your employers reading what you post on the internet is unlikely, why the fuss? More importantly, why the paranoia?

As to joining the real world, you're the one who expressed concern that real or potential employers might read what you write here, not me.

Anyway, I won't be replying to any more of your posts. I do not care to converse with anyone who hides behind a moniker and won't take personal responsibility for what he/she writes.

Jeffrey

The point is obviously whether you can prove such discrimination, not as to whether it exists. Of course you can only prove it if is expressed as such, which it never is.

It is not paranoia, simply normal common carefulness regarding privacy. You can look up people's names and find things that they wrote 10 years ago. Employers look up people on the internet as a matter of course. I know this from experience and have no problem with it. I know of forums where they were publishing pictures of people drunk at Oktoberfest, with names attached. Personally, I wouldn't let such things worry me, but in this world of having to undergo psychological evaluations before getting a leading position, others do.

I try to be careful what I post and was not inappropriate. Nevertheless, you have singled me out to be ignored, even though I was just defending another's use of a pseudonym. There are many who use a pseudonym on this forum, for valid reasons. If you can't handle it, then perhaps you belong somewhere a bit more insular.

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2007, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Finally, P. follows Earl Doherty in holding that the stories about Jesus are midrashic creations from OT precedents rather than actual events of Jesus' life that evoked the OT parallels.

...and this is a problem, why exactly?

Have you ever read actual midrash?

And do you have a real name?

Jeffrey

Casper · 11-26-2007, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azidhak

Robert M. Price is a thrustworthy Lovecraft Scholar. (Sorry I just had to...

)

And a very interesting one too.

dog-on · 11-26-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

...and this is a problem, why exactly?

Have you ever read actual midrash?

And do you have a real name?

Jeffrey

Midrash, yup...

So JC really was the really product of a virgin birth as prophesied in Isaiah and in your opinion, Mathew simply tied this miraculous birth back to the Septuagint translation?

Wow! :angel:

My name is Robert, but I've told you that before, (though I understand that you may have forgotten).

youngalexander · 11-26-2007, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

You might want to have a look at what is said about Price's scholarship in the recently published The Jesus Legend (or via: amazon.co.uk) by P.R. Eddy and G.A. Boyd -- of which Price himself has said "I am gratified that my friends and colleagues Paul Eddy and Greg Boyd have taken my work as seriously as they have in this comprehensively researched work [which, BTW, also reviews Earl's writings]. I urge any reader of my books to read this one alongside them".

Jeffrey

Since P. himself recommends it, I have had it dispatched forthwith. Seems just the job since (according to reviewer Lamont S) it deals with the

formation of a "Jewish legend of Yahweh embodied" ... the ever-present issue of "parallel legends and/or heroes", ... discussions of the extra-biblical sources of Jesus ..., and the alleged problem of Paul's silence in regards to details of Jesus' life ... the reliability of oral tradition and the role of memory and eyewitness testimony as it relates to New Testament studies ... "the Gospels as fiction" and "the Gospels as ancient romance novels", etc

all recently discussed here at BC&H.

I am particularly anticipating Ch1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamont S

Perhaps more helpful than any chapter was that of the very first in which the authors argue for an approach to historicity that does not rule out, a priori, the possibility of supernatural explanations for historical events (e.g. Jesus' alleged resurrection) when all naturalistic alternatives fail to explain the scope of the data. This is extremely crucial, as it is this very issue that most often separates those willing to believe that the Jesus of the Gospels could exist from those that do not. I thought that the authors' established quite successfully their case in this regard.

Wot fun!

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2007, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Have you ever read actual midrash?

And do you have a real name?

Jeffrey

Midrash, yup...

And this Midrash would be what exactly?

Quote:

So JC really was the really product of a virgin birth as prophesied in Isaiah and in your opinion, Mathew simply tied this miraculous birth back to the Septuagint translation?

Is that what Matthew says? Is that really what his emphasis is in his birth story?

Quote:

My name is Robert, but I've told you that before, (though I understand that you may have forgotten).

Robert what?

Jeffrey

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.