Camio

Now:

Is it me, or doesn't this sound like some kind of statement of faith? If you can't prove something, shouldn't the default position from an honest person, and all the more from a professional historian, be agnosticism on the subject? Or has History become a battleground like fundies vs. atheists? I'm puzzled.

Steven Carr

She cannot prove there was an historical Jesus, although she is certain that there was. To me , that means she feels she has proof enough for herself, but does not want to say what it is.

It means the loss of a valuable resource to the Jesus Project, apparently because she does not want to bring her expertise to answering the types of questions the Jesus Project say they intend to raise.

I would have thought she would have lots to contribute.

dog-on

Contribute what, exactly?

FFS, can't at least one historicist present a reasonable argument for the existence of Jesus that doesn't devolve into apologetics.

What a joke...

Steven Carr

I keep posting obvious parallels that we can see happening today.

Take Benjamin Creme and the Maitreya - a non-existent person who is alleged to be living anonymously in the East End of London.

http://www.share-international.org/

'While the name Maitreya is used by others, their understanding of the World Teacher may not correspond to that presented on this site. Anyone presently promoting him- or herself as Maitreya or the World Teacher is definitely not the same individual we refer to.'

How does this differ from Paul's writings?

2 Corinthians 11
For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.

How does it differ from Paul's writings?

Both show the obvious difficulty of following a non-existent person. Groups then differ over the nature of this non-existent person.

It seems that historicists will never address the question of how Paul's pleas about different Jesus's are in any way different to Creme's complaints about people following a different Maitreya.

But why are such questions forbidden in Biblical studies?

dog-on

Wouldn't want to devolve Biblical Studies into the equivalent of Conan Studies, now would we?

Think of all the jobs...

Ted Hoffman

Like I said, "too far afield, brazen, insulated"

Clivedurdle

Sorry, that is already a subset of Biblical Studies

(You didn't mean Conan the destroyer?)

http://www.ash-tree.bc.ca/acdsbio.htm

Ben C Smith

You snipped the part that would have answered your question (emphasis added):

In fact, I think that Jesus did historically exist, although I cannot prove this anymore than the mythers can prove he didn't. I have reasons to think that he did exist....

Ben.

dog-on

Conan the destroyer, yea him...

dog-on

Scriptural or revelatory I wonder...