Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Steven Carr · 11-19-2007, 09:39 AM

Did anybody attend this session of SBL 2007, where Bauckham defended his 'evidence' that eyewitness testimony lay behind the Gospels. (Presumably an eyewitness saw the baby John the Baptist leap for joy in the womb)

Toto · 11-19-2007, 03:07 PM

There's a favorable (more like fawning) blog entry here

Quote:

Bauckham did a great job fending off the vultures. He had some great one-liners like, “Luke probably knew more about Q than any of us, or even John Kloppenborg for that matter.”

Mark Goodacre pats himself on the back for staying awake, and might post more.

christilling had coffee with Bauckham and will write more. He also plays fashion critic.

Toto · 11-20-2007, 04:37 PM

More biblioblogger comments:

Euangelizomai

The panel discussion on Bauckham's book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, was good, but Adela Yarbro Collins basically ripped into any historiographical perspective that includes faith or belief in the miraculous. James Crossley gave some arguments against miracles figuring in historical studies. As suspected, Bauckham's replies were both adequate and penetrating. Particularly in his call for "humility" and I wonder who he had in mind?

Upper-register

Judging by the laughter and the clapping, there was clearly a contingent of evangelicals or evangelical-sympathizers at the Bauckham discussion.

Steven Carr · 11-21-2007, 10:36 PM

Apparently there is a recording at http://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowel...from-a-fe.html

Zeichman · 11-22-2007, 04:55 PM

I was there for about 2/3 of it.

I think Chris Tilling is going to post the responses on his blog. If not, Crossley said that he would post his own on his... own.

Toto · 11-23-2007, 12:12 AM

Crossly posted on his blog Earliest Christian History for Thursday, November 22, 2007.

Quote:

The Bauckham session was particularly well attended. Now naughty Mike Bird is in for another telling off from me. Mike claimed that 'James Crossley gave some arguments against miracles figuring in historical studies.' That is not quite what I did. . . .

Then he says:

Quote:

When Bauckham asked for more humility when discussing the miraculous, someone clapped and 'whooped'!! This was also important (for me) because I had friends in the audience from HB/OT, including one who is a seriously good historian (the others are serious good but generally work in different areas to the traditional discipline of history). They were shocked at this kind of thing happening in an academic context (and glad they weren't involved in such debates) yet at the time it just seemed so normal to me given the kinds of debates I've been involved in over the past couple of years.

Am I reading this correctly? It takes an outsider to be shocked that academics seriously entertain the idea that miracles happen?

Steven Carr · 11-23-2007, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Am I reading this correctly? It takes an outsider to be shocked that academics seriously entertain the idea that miracles happen?

I'm sure people like Bauckham and The Bishop of Durham have no doubts that if Luke said the foetus John the Baptist leaped for joy in the womb when in the prescence of Mary, then it is a fact that the foetus John the Baptist knew Mary was there.

Zeichman · 11-23-2007, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Crossly posted on his blog Earliest Christian History for Thursday, November 22, 2007.

Quote:

The Bauckham session was particularly well attended. Now naughty Mike Bird is in for another telling off from me. Mike claimed that 'James Crossley gave some arguments against miracles figuring in historical studies.' That is not quite what I did. . . .

Then he says:

Quote:

When Bauckham asked for more humility when discussing the miraculous, someone clapped and 'whooped'!! This was also important (for me) because I had friends in the audience from HB/OT, including one who is a seriously good historian (the others are serious good but generally work in different areas to the traditional discipline of history). They were shocked at this kind of thing happening in an academic context (and glad they weren't involved in such debates) yet at the time it just seemed so normal to me given the kinds of debates I've been involved in over the past couple of years.

Am I reading this correctly? It takes an outsider to be shocked that academics seriously entertain the idea that miracles happen?

No, it does not "take an outsider." James himself was disappointed as was I. His post today about miracles was pretty good.

Toto · 11-26-2007, 11:34 PM

Matthrew Burgess

Quote:

Bauckham places the gospels within an innovative literary category—that of (eyewitness, or reliable) testimony—which presumably provides sufficient justification for readers’ acceptance of their claims.

Of the reviewers, Prof. Collins provided the most direct critiques of the book’s methods. (What would you expect me to say… I’m her student!) She spoke of the “elephant in the room,” which indeed remains very much in the room: the miracle stories, long a plague upon historical Jesus scholars. What are we to make of these stories? Are we to blithely accept them, simply because the supporting witnesses have been deemed “reliable”? Prof. Crossley delivered a number of interesting comments entitled “What if Richard Bauckham Is Right?”, but my personal pressing question in this category remained essentially unasked. Even if the gospels were based upon eyewitness testimony--that is, people who were active disciples of Jesus of Nazareth during his lifetime--how do we address the blatant discrepancies and obvious redactional material? Bauckham himself is forced to admit that several traditions were altered to various degrees by their final authors/editors; how does this admission affect the gospels’ reliability? Aren’t we right back where we started? But all in all, this is a book which will have the biblical studies world in a tither for quite some time.

Toto · 11-27-2007, 05:46 PM

Mark Goodacre's blog links to an interesting discussion (with some familiar names) on the ChristianOrigins yahoogroup on the role of evangelicals in the NT profession.

Start Here

Several posts down:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeba Crook

...

I gets even more depressing: I was at that session, sitting at the back which afforded me a view of the sea of young male (there were possibly 4 women in attendence) evangelicals in their ties. When Baukham replied to your blanket statement that "miracles just don't happen" (or something like that) with a claim that he cannot be so arrogant as to make such an all-knowing claim (or something to that effect) and by calling for more "humility" from academics, there was a collective sigh of adoration and murmuring and some clapping. It
was horrifying.

I am reading (very slowing since term is not over yet) Hector Avalos's The End of Biblical Studies (or via: amazon.co.uk) with great interest. He makes the same observation you make: WAY too much theological activity in an ostensibly academic society. Bet your bottom dollar: MOST of those adoring men in attendence are out there doing PhDs in biblical studies, and they're being taught that it's wrong (and arrogant, hubristic) to rule out God's working power in history. These people are the future of Biblical Scholarship and academic teaching.

11-19-2007, 09:39 AM	#1
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	Bauckham at SBL Did anybody attend this session of SBL 2007, where Bauckham defended his 'evidence' that eyewitness testimony lay behind the Gospels. (Presumably an eyewitness saw the baby John the Baptist leap for joy in the womb)

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

11-20-2007, 04:37 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	More biblioblogger comments: Euangelizomai The panel discussion on Bauckham's book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, was good, but Adela Yarbro Collins basically ripped into any historiographical perspective that includes faith or belief in the miraculous. James Crossley gave some arguments against miracles figuring in historical studies. As suspected, Bauckham's replies were both adequate and penetrating. Particularly in his call for "humility" and I wonder who he had in mind? Upper-register Judging by the laughter and the clapping, there was clearly a contingent of evangelicals or evangelical-sympathizers at the Bauckham discussion.

11-21-2007, 10:36 PM	#4
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	Apparently there is a recording at http://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowel...from-a-fe.html

11-22-2007, 04:55 PM	#5
Zeichman Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: USA Posts: 562	I was there for about 2/3 of it. I think Chris Tilling is going to post the responses on his blog. If not, Crossley said that he would post his own on his... own.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.