Toto

You would think that people would have run out of things to say on this topic, but no . .

Finding the Historical Jesus: Rules of Evidence Bernard Brandon Scott , Editor, with contributions by Robert W. Funk, Robert T. Fortna, Lane C. McGaughy, Robert J. Miller, Stephen J. Patterson, Joseph B. Tyson.

You can get an idea of the flavor of the book from the study questions.

mrunicycler

I find a deeper meaning in the fact that, when I clicked on the link, the website could not be found.:Cheeky:

There's something very profound in that for me...

I'll try again later.

Toto

There you go, fixed the link. A simple typo. How many typo's in the gospels?

Joan of Bark

Hey, the book looks interesting. I think there is a dearth of good material on how history is conducted. We need more books like this.

2-J

Isn't this on the same theme as the one on which Richard Carrier will soon be writing?

Can anyone recommend this book? It looks highly interesting.

DCHindley

No it is not fixed.

http://www.westarinstitute.org/Poleb...dingjesus.html

BTW, it was not clear from the one of your post ... were you for it or against it?

DCH

Toto

OK - I fixed the link in the quote as well as the OP.

This book can't be previewed, so I have no idea whether it is worthwhile. Most of it appears to be by the late Robert Funk, so I expect it is recycled material and nothing new.

Yes, this is the same subject matter that Richard Carrier will be addressing in his book, but he is a trained historian interested in understanding and interpreting the past, and these authors are Biblical scholars whose main objective is to combat fundamentalism and make the world a better place by promoting peace and love (at least that's what they appear to be about.)

I expect the two approaches will be like the difference between homeopathy and cutting edge modern medicine.

mrunicycler

One complaint.

The word scholar, when following the word biblical, should include quotes, or enclosing apostrophes (for those, like me, who can't be bothered with pushing the shift key).

So, it should read, biblical 'scholars'. :Cheeky:

Anything else makes kooks and apologeticists believe that free thinking people are giving them more credit than they deserve.

As much as I want to be able to criticize the book, there isn't enough in either link for me to form an opinion. I'm inclined to think it's just more of the same crap excreted by religious 'scholars' for millenia now, but I'd have to thumb through a few pages, at least, to feel that opinion is supported.

DCHindley

Veddy good.

The study questions seem to suggest the book is dealing with the realm of history as practiced by bona-fide historians. However, what they DO with the theoretical basis may be another thing.

Unfortunately, like many interested in early Christian history (both "for and against"), I think many of the JS fellows already know what they want to find, and true to the Pygmalion effect, they find what they look for.

I found this kind of selective use of sources rampant in J. D. Crossan's Birth of Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk), particularly his use of the works of Gerhard E. Lenski (Power and Privilege (or via: amazon.co.uk), 1984 [1966]) and John H. Kautsky (The Politics of Aristocratic Empires (or via: amazon.co.uk), 1982).*

Crossan may not be a real good example of JS mentality (while a JS fellow, I believe, he does have his own agenda and likes to work independently of the other Seminar fellows), but IMO the JS definitely has an idea of what Jesus *should* have been like. Like Crosan's Jesus, it resembles a 1960's era hippie (god bless their hearts) practicing eastern religion more than what other sources suggest we might expect of a 1st century Jew of the region.

DCH

* See question 18, and JDC's response, at
http://www.ntgateway.com/Jesus/crossan.htm

spamandham

Assuming the questions relate to the content of the book, it's pretty obvious that HJ is taken as a given.