Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
11-22-2007, 08:10 PM | #111 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
Again, if an HJ is considered, then this Jesus of the NT merely vanished without a trace after his crucifixion since there are no accounts of his natural death after his recovery from the cross. According to gJohn, Jesus gave his disciples fishing lessons and used to eat fish with them after he was crucified. |
||
12-19-2007, 07:14 AM | #112 | |||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
Bend It Like Bauckham
JW:
I just Received Bauckham's Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (or via: amazon.co.uk) and fully intended to Bury it rather than Praise it. But than I had a Revelation that instead of acting like a Fundamentalist and starting with the Conclusion that the book is Theology and not Science and than constructing an Argument to support this Conclusion, I would instead Act The Way I think my Enemies should act, with Logic, Reason and a purely Scientific approach. Along those lines I've decided to first state a Hypothesis and than gather, test and evaluate the evidence in order to consider the validity of my Hypothesis. First, my Hypothesis: Richard Bauckham is a Theologian masquerading as a Bible scholar and his book, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, is twice as Biased as Jeffrey Gibson thinks Mr. Doherty is and deserves three times as much Contempt as Chris Weimer thinks the average poster at II deserves. Now, to test this Hypothesis. P. 2 Quote:
I note that Bauckham does not even identify the Impossible/Possible issue for a Historian in his opening chapter p. 4 Quote:
A strange combination of words. Still waiting for those with contempt for MJ to demonstrate it Likely that Jesus was crucified. p. 4 Quote:
Nice shifting of the burden of Proof from the Gospel Jesus to HJ. p. 4 Quote:
So is Bauckham an Advocate or Judge of Gospel Jesus? p. 5 Quote:
Now he has to reach up to touch False Diechotomy p. 7 Quote:
Except for Peter, per Christian sources, and the others look to be Edited/Reactions to "Mark". The other problems being lack of extant Manuscripts, Early Church knowledge, familiarity with Josephus, anachronisms, familiarity with Greek translations of Jewish Bible. p. 10 Quote:
A real Historian like Josephus would beg to differ but in any case the question should be why did Christians prefer the oral to the written? Joseph FAITH, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page |
|||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|