Sheshbazzar

This dating is based solely on the notion that because someone predicted that the temple would be destroyed, that the prediction had to have been made after the fact?
I'll just note that innumerable predictions are being made and acted upon everyday, and no one even attempts to put forth claims that these predictions are being made after the fact, simply because in due time they prove accurate.
Our prognosticators look at which way the wind is blowing, and boldly say;
"Tomorrow we will have rain, but next week we will have sunshine." or
"This industry is in decline, and within a decade, or at most two, will become extinct."
or "Invest your money here, and at the age of 70 you will profit a thousandfold."
Seems to me no great stretch that any prophet or prognosticator worth his salt, on the ground and in tune with history and the cultural dynamics at work at that time, could hold up a finger and detect which way the wind was blowing.

Toto

The Jesus Seminar's web page is at www.westarinstitute.org/

There is also a webpage and description at http://virtualreligion.net/forum/

The Seminar was the brainchild of Robert Funk. Funk was concerned about fundamentalism, and wanted a vehicle to publicize modern Biblical scholarship, which has tended to be more liberal than the American churchgoer would like.

The Seminar was open to anyone with a PhD, and reached decisions on the historical accuracy of statements attributed to Jesus by voting - a red ball for something Jesus definitely said, a pink ball for something he probably said, a grey ball for something he probably didn't say, and a black ball for something he didn't say.

The whole method can be criticized and was in part a publicity stunt, but it worked to frame issues and gain publicity. It is easy to criticize the method and the results, but the exercise of voting was a valuable one for many of the participants.


At various points in the NT, the Jesus character appears to endorse the history of the world put forth in Genesis. That may be what you are talking about.

It depends on what you mean by corroborate. The DSS show that various parts of the Hebrew Scriptures can be dated to the first century BC. They say nothing about any part of the NT.

Julian

Because the writers of the NT wrote after the fact. They went back to the OT and found many quotes, taken out of context, that would fit Jesus. The Isaiah (7:14) quote that you refer to here has nothing to with Jesus, it has to do with Israel and its troubles. Even if Jesus had been named Immanuel it wouldn't have helped since the Immanuel referred to in Isaiah, is born in Isaiah and has to do with Isaiah.

Julian

Chili

<Off-topic>

RUmike

According to my professor (who acted as chairman of the JSeminar during the Acts portion), Funk's initial reason for starting the Jesus Seminar was that he wanted to know what all the historically reliable sayings and acts of Jesus were so as to come up with his own portrait of Jesus. So he convened a group to basically do it for him Funk, who headed the Society of Biblical Literature, proposed the idea to them first, on the condition that the results not be kept under wraps, but instead released to the public. They did not like the condition. But what's the point of Jesus research if only scholars can know about it? The JS has taken much unwarranted heat for this.

Ruhan

Just wanted to pop in and say it's been a great thread. Very refreshing from the usual debates that take place here. Keep it up.

Amaleq13

The digression into "Non-canonical sources of Catholic dogma" has been split into its own thread.

John Kesler

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain every OT book except Esther, and, although the DSS version of the O.T. varies at times with the Masoretic Text, thus allowing another for better textual criticism, there is also great agreement with the MT.

I assume that the clay tablets you refer to are the Ugaritic/Ras Shamra tablets discovered in the 1920s. They corroborate the Bible by validating the existence of some of the "Canaanite" deities polemicized against in the Bible. Also, some of the attributes of these gods were appropriated for Israel's god, Yahweh (Yahweh, for example, is described as riding the clouds like Baal--see Psalm 68:4, 33), and some passages in the Bible are better understood in light of the tablets.

cerad

Nit-picking perhaps but it's more accurate to say that the scrolls contained fragments of the various OT books. Some books(Isaiah for example) are mostly complete, others only have a few scraps. Still very remarkable. http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html

John Kesler

Here's what The Oxford Companion To The Bible says on page 159, article: Dead Sea Scrolls: