Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Malachi151 · 02-20-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

"Demanded that they never investigate Jesus's actual existence"??? Sheer paranoia! It's like creationists who lose their teaching jobs questioning evolution, and put it down to them questioning evolution rather than them promoting sloppy ideas in the first place.

May I direct you to:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0607.htm

Quote:

Twelve Topics on the Faith

Wherein is Given Also the Formula of Excommunication, and an Explication is Subjoined to Each.

Topic 1:
If any one says that the body of Christ is uncreated, and refuses to acknowledge that He, being the uncreated Word (God) of God, took the flesh of created humanity and appeared incarnate, even as it is written, let him be anathema.

Explication

How could the body be said to be uncreated? For the uncreated is the passionless, invulnerable, intangible. But Christ, on rising from the dead, showed His disciples the print of the nails and the wound made by the spear, and a body that could be handled, although He also had entered among them when the doors were shut, with the view of showing them at once the energy of the divinity and the reality of the body.

Yet, while being God, He was recognised as man in a natural manner; and while subsisting truly as man, He was also manifested as God by His works.

Zeichman · 06-20-2007, 06:28 AM

The Jesus Project has uploaded a page. However, it sounds like the "Fellows" list is more than a bit dubious.

http://www.jesus-project.com/intro.htm

April DeConick wrote about it at her blog (http://forbiddengospels.blogspot.com...g-to-cser.html),

"I have had some initial involvement in this since I presented a paper on "Apocryphal Christianity" at the Scripture and Skepticism conference that launched this Project, but I must admit I have mixed feelings about the Project even though I am listed as a "Fellow." First it is a question that has aired before, and I'm not sure what "new" can be contributed to its rehearsal. Second, even though I am in favor of writing a history of early Christianity without a theological agenda or apologetic frames, I wonder if we are going to end up again with nothing more than a tradition so deconstructed as to be meaningless, like the 20 or so sayings the Jesus Seminar left us with. Can this Project become something more than just another exercise in our own skepticism?"

John Kloppenborg has told me that no one has contacted him about the project, even though he is listed as a fellow.

I hardly need to mention the ostensible "credentials" that they are asking for, since many of the fellows certainly lack them.

Roger Pearse · 06-20-2007, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeichman

The Jesus Project has uploaded a page. However, it sounds like the "Fellows" list is more than a bit dubious.

http://www.jesus-project.com/intro.htm

April DeConick wrote about it at her blog (http://forbiddengospels.blogspot.com...-to-cser.html),

"I have had some initial involvement in this since I presented a paper on "Apocryphal Christianity" at the Scripture and Skepticism conference that launched this Project, but I must admit I have mixed feelings about the Project even though I am listed as a "Fellow." First it is a question that has aired before, and I'm not sure what "new" can be contributed to its rehearsal. Second, even though I am in favor of writing a history of early Christianity without a theological agenda or apologetic frames, I wonder if we are going to end up again with nothing more than a tradition so deconstructed as to be meaningless, like the 20 or so sayings the Jesus Seminar left us with. Can this Project become something more than just another exercise in our own skepticism?"

John Kloppenborg has told me that no one has contacted him about the project, even though he is listed as a fellow.

I hardly need to mention the ostensible "credentials" that they are asking for, since many of the fellows certainly lack them.

I wonder if James M. Robinson really is involved in this?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Riverwind · 06-20-2007, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I attended the meeting. As I suspected, its purpose was at least in part fundraising.

....

On the other hand, Hoffman made it clear that the committee is not being stacked in favor of mythicism, and he didn't think that mythicism was required to criticize religion.

And the real reasons come out. There is no serious inquiry, only a religion bashing session.

markfiend · 06-20-2007, 07:21 AM

criticism is not the same as bashing

lpetrich · 06-20-2007, 12:45 PM

April DeConick also notes:

Quote:

In one of the articles in CSER, James Robinson says, "The Jesus Project is not to launch into endless new, but ultimately unconvincing, arguments that Jesus never lived, but to understand better that oldest layer of tradition and how it can be made into a more influential force in our society today."

I wonder how that's supposed to work. Is he really that confident that Jesus Christ can be shown to be historical and that that "oldest layer of tradition" can be reliably identified? And that it is worth following?

It seems almost like Mr. Robinson is yet another liberal Xian who wants to remake Jesus Christ in his moral likeness and then use that Jesus Christ as a moral authority.

Riverwind · 06-21-2007, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markfiend

criticism is not the same as bashing

Oh, that's better then... They just begin their unbiased skeptical inquiry with the notion of criticizing religion.

Please...this "Jesus Project, like the Jesus Seminar, is a total farce.

I mean, what scholars are going to want to sit side by side with Freak and Candy?

markfiend · 06-21-2007, 07:21 AM

I don't understand your problem with the notion of criticism. The word doesn't have the negative connotations you seem to be assuming. Textual criticism is a valid approach to the study of any literature.

ETA: Who mentioned Freke and Gandy?

Zeichman · 06-21-2007, 10:20 AM

Freke and Gandy are both listed as fellows.

andrewcriddle · 06-21-2007, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markfiend

I don't understand your problem with the notion of criticism. The word doesn't have the negative connotations you seem to be assuming. Textual criticism is a valid approach to the study of any literature.

I think the issue is that the mention of criticism of religion does suggest that the committee is concerned with challenging modern mainstream Christianity as much as with the objective study of the past.

Andrew Criddle

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

06-20-2007, 06:28 AM	#22
Zeichman Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: USA Posts: 562	The Jesus Project has uploaded a page. However, it sounds like the "Fellows" list is more than a bit dubious. http://www.jesus-project.com/intro.htm April DeConick wrote about it at her blog (http://forbiddengospels.blogspot.com...g-to-cser.html), "I have had some initial involvement in this since I presented a paper on "Apocryphal Christianity" at the Scripture and Skepticism conference that launched this Project, but I must admit I have mixed feelings about the Project even though I am listed as a "Fellow." First it is a question that has aired before, and I'm not sure what "new" can be contributed to its rehearsal. Second, even though I am in favor of writing a history of early Christianity without a theological agenda or apologetic frames, I wonder if we are going to end up again with nothing more than a tradition so deconstructed as to be meaningless, like the 20 or so sayings the Jesus Seminar left us with. Can this Project become something more than just another exercise in our own skepticism?" John Kloppenborg has told me that no one has contacted him about the project, even though he is listed as a fellow. I hardly need to mention the ostensible "credentials" that they are asking for, since many of the fellows certainly lack them.

06-20-2007, 07:21 AM	#25
markfiend Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: The People's Republic of West Yorkshire Posts: 498	criticism is not the same as bashing

06-21-2007, 07:21 AM	#28
markfiend Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: The People's Republic of West Yorkshire Posts: 498	I don't understand your problem with the notion of criticism. The word doesn't have the negative connotations you seem to be assuming. Textual criticism is a valid approach to the study of any literature. ETA: Who mentioned Freke and Gandy?

06-21-2007, 10:20 AM	#29
Zeichman Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: USA Posts: 562	Freke and Gandy are both listed as fellows.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.