Joan of Bark

Christian leaders will refer to scholars if it helps them reconcile a contradiction or make their particular theological views more legitimate. However, I doubt if the vast majority of believers give a hoot about scholarship -- they just want their views verified with a few biblical quotes. The average believer does not get his or her religious views from the Bible -- believers use the Bible to support their already existing views.

mountainman

Sorry if I was not clear. My comment was specifically
directed to scholars in the field of ancient history, as
distinct from any other academic endeavour, inclusive
of this self-defined "Biblical History" arena.

If Jesus was not an historical figure and, according to
my thesis, was inserted into the history of the Roman
Empire in the fourth century under instruction of the
emperor Constantine, then the field in which this question
may be answered is well beyond "Biblical History".

Rather the invention of "Biblical History" (as it relates to
New Testament studies) needs to be outlined within
the general field of ancient history, as a political theory
of history which explicates the invention, the implementation
and the evolution of christianity from a fixed starting point
of chronology --- in the fourth century and no earlier.



So to be clear then, I do not consider "Biblical scholars" to be
adding anything to the resolution of the ancient history, since
in my opinion, they are swimming around ad nauseum in a set
of fiction writings assembled in the fourth century, unable to
perceive of that possibility, due to their postulates.

Hard scientific and archaeological data might change people's
minds, and quite quickly, if the critical data were to surface
by which "Biblical History" and "Ancient History" may be once
and for all separated.


Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Buck Laser

I think you're assuming a faster rate of change than I've observed. The scholars I read in the early 60s, when I was in seminary, took a much different view of the Xn faith than I see being espoused now. That's one of the reasons I no longer associate myself with mainstream OR evangelical Xty.

I came out of seminary in 1963 ready to fight for social justice, believing that Xns HAD to be involved in political affairs if they were to be true to the gospel. The civil rights movement was coming to its climax, the Vietnam war was becoming a major moral issue, and it was looking as if we could really change the world.

The world changed all right--back to mere devotional religion--back to the church as a defender of victorian values--into shoddy pop culture music and ritual. I can see Amos the OT prophet calling down the wrath of God on today's version of Xty. I'm too depressed about it to bother quoting Amos right now, but you could look it up.