Truthdig - Jesus: The�Man, The�Myth

Truthdig - Jesus: The�Man, The�Myth

This is a link to a very interesting and well-written article about Jesus. I don't really have any comments to offer off the top of my head, but if you get a chance, read the article. It is thought provoking.

Comments

Sean Meade said…
ahh! no offense, but that's crap! if you're going to take the Bible as remotely true, everything this guy says is baloney. some recent (last 200 years) 'scholars' have wanted to 'demythologize' the Bible, but their methods are totally bogus.

+ Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit.
+ 'Son of Man' was an apocalyptic title akin to Son of God.
+ On this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
+ Before Abraham was, I AM.
+ Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man and drink of His blood you shall not have life within you.

- 'The Quest for the Historical Jesus' is bogus.
- the Jesus Seminar is bogus. they vote on whether or not they think Jesus said the words attributed to Him in the Bible and print a 4-color version. talk about bad methodology.
- NO ONE in the early church thought 'the Gospel of Thomas' was authoritative (we know b/c no one quotes it).
+ the 'Q' idea is actually probably right. whoa, i'm stunned ;-)

don't make me come over there and haul you into your priest! ;-)

i'm not going on past the first page and not taking the time right now to reference my sources. email me if you want to talk about this more, ok?
11:05 AM
Eric said…
Thanks for the feedback, Sean. And, of course, no offense taken.

I don't necessarily endorse The Jesus Seminar, or its conclusions, but I am intrigued with its stated mission of "determining what Jesus, as a historical figure, may or may not have said or done." Understanding Jesus in a historical context only helps to strengthen my faith. Thus, I don't believe that the "quest for a historical Jesus" is "bogus." Furthermore, I don't consider such a quest to be inconsistent with my faith in Jesus as the Son of God. Indeed, I think my ability to ask such questions is a gift from God.

Now, I definitely take the Bible to be at least "remotely" true. However, my understanding is that the Bible is a compilation of many writings that were compiled for religious, practical and political purposes. I do take the Bible writings to be the inspired Word of God, written by human authors over a long time span, using historically consistent literary techniques.

As for methodology, I agree that voting to determine the likelihood of historical reality is not authoritative. I did a little bit (very little) of reading on the Jesus Seminar, and they readily admit that voting does not determine the truth. However, it is a good way to reach a consensus among a multitude of biblical scholars. Glancing through the list of Fellows and reading some of their qualifications, it doesn't seem like they are the type to have pre-set agendas. However, I'd obviously have to look deeper to form a more confident opinion. As they note, their "voting" methodology is consistent with the methodology of historical translation committees (including those that assembled the KJV of the Bible) in which members of a committee would review proposed translations, and vote on which was most authentic.

In summary, I don't feel "threatened", for lack of a better term, about most of the conclusions of The Jesus Seminar.
12:59 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The agony of victory....a.k.a. picking my jaw up off the floor

Allright. I've now had nearly 24 hours (although its taken me a couple of days to complete this post) to calm down, reflect upon and digest the improbable gut wrenching game yesterday in which the heavily favored Colts lost to the Steelers 21-18. I wrote last year of not being as emotionally attached to the Steelers as I have been in the past. I wrote last week of how I thought that I might be spending too much valuable time following the Steelers, especially since I have absolutely no control over the outcome of their games. Let me just say this: yesterday's game was probably in the top five emotionally draining, and ultimately gratifying, experiences of my life. Ouside of my wedding and the birth of my two sons, I can't remember being as nervous, deflated, joyful, stunned and exhilirated as I was yesterday----all withing about a ten minute stretch of seemingly neverending time! What could have been a devestating loss to live with in the offseason (and, forever, for Jerome...
Read more

"The Axis of Evil and the Doctrine of Preemption Three Years On"

Jerod and I attended a lecture by Brookings Institution fellow Michael O'Hanlon last night at Park University in Parkville, MO. The lecture was part of the Jerzy Hauptmann Distinguished Guest Lecture series. As a Park University M.B.A. alum, I received an invitation to the 13th annual lecture in the series. I like going to events like this, especially since I was interested in the content of this particular lecture, of which the title was the title of this post. Dr. O'Hanlon described himself as a Sam Nunn Democrat at the beginning of the lecture. It's always difficult to prevent political feeling from entering into objective analysis, and I don't know how you measure the "objectiveness" of analysis, but I feel that most Brookings scholars are at least "fair", and Dr. O'Hanlon was no exception. His analysis of the doctrine of preemption was focused on the effectiveness of the doctrine, as opposed to any moral righteousness or implications of the...
Read more

Removing a password that was created in a previous version from an Access 2007 database

Earlier this week I was banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how to remove a password from an Access 2007 database (file extension .accdb). The database was created in a previous version of access and subsequently "upgraded" to the Access 2007 format. I believe some type of a wizard was used to perform the "upgrade." The security model is evidently different in Access 2007 than in previous versions. It doesn't appear that you can set/unset database passwords. Instead, in Access 2007, there is an option to Encrypt with Password. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be logically similar to the earlier version password architecture, but there was no way that I could find to easily remove the password that had been created in the earlier version when using the Access 2007 interface. Access security has always been confusing to me, and I need to take the time someday to understand how the security model is supposed to work in Access 2007. An...
Read more