Comments on Earliest Christian History: The welcome return of Danny Z

Something Like an Evangelical... Now your knowledg...

2008-01-03T13:43:00.000Z

Something Like an Evangelical... Now your knowledge of dark beer has got me wondering who you are... Ah, but if you've got good taste, does it really matter?

James, not that you need a pat on the back, but he...

2007-12-13T23:33:00.000Z

James, not that you need a pat on the back, but here's one "evangelical" that appreciates your work and perspective!

We need open dialogue, and hopefully said dialogue can occur in a format where participants are free to express their views without immediate condemnation. I do not hide my Christian beliefs. That being said, I am afraid we as Christians can/will retreat into an enclave in which our academic work refuses to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.

You do good work. Honestly, I think we could better deal with a lot of these issues if more of my kind would drink dark beer...

Well yes Jim, Mat.18.1-6, just about says it all a...

2007-12-04T14:24:00.000Z

Well yes Jim, Mat.18.1-6, just about says it all about the prophet. He wasn't interested in the kingdom of God but the Spirit of God. He was comparing the spontaneity of children with how one should obey the Spirit of God. It wasn’t a question of being ‘in the kingdom’ but of being in the Spirit. And ‘unless you become like little children, you will never’ receive the Spirit of God. Blasphemy against the Spirit could not be forgiven. Hence 'if anyone causes one of these little ones who are in' the Spirit to disobey, it would be better etc. ‘And whoever welcomes a child like this in the’ Spirit welcomes God. That’s how I see things. The children were no doubt raised to be prophets, as the Essenes raised children.

Is there a difference between Midrash and Haggadah...

2007-12-04T00:58:00.000Z

Is there a difference between Midrash and Haggadah? I am just curious.

Blake

Blake wrote:Either that or it is your incapability...

2007-12-03T20:25:00.000Z

Blake wrote:
Either that or it is your incapability of being open to the possibility of other viewpoints, which is just about as bad as any theistic dogmatists.

I don´t think the thing hinges on my "incapability of being open to the possibility of other viewpoints". It´s just that as long as Bauckham and other apologets masquerading as historians can only point to happenings in books 2000 years old as "evidence" for the probability of the most incredible events, then I don´t see much reason to take him seriously. Besides, when even gospel writers like "Mark" or "John" seem to have been aware themselves that they were composing haggadic midrash (and not actual historical happenings) on a symbolical level in miracles like the feeding of the 5000 or the Cana miracle, I see even less reason to follow Bauckham in these being "reasonably probable events". The clues are all over the text.

Antonio Jerez said:If Bauckham actually said the t...

2007-12-02T21:15:00.000Z

Antonio Jerez said:
If Bauckham actually said the thing at the seminar about the nature miracles being "reasonably probable events" then its another blatant example of what Steven Carr called the "incredible low standards of biblical scholarship".

You can hear a recording of Bauckham saying it here.

Blake said:
... your incapability of being open to the possibility of other viewpoints, which is just about as bad as any theistic dogmatists

And we must also bear in mind what Northrop Frye said about being "open":

"One should doubtless keep an open mind...though open at both ends, like the food pipe, and have a capacity for excretion as well as intake."

James, I don´t fathom were you get the patience to...

2007-12-02T00:32:00.000Z

James, I don´t fathom were you get the patience to argue with people like Bauckham. If Bauckham actually said the thing at the seminar about the nature miracles being "reasonably probable events" then its another blatant example of what Steven Carr called the "incredible low standards of biblical scholarship".

Either that or it is your incapability of being open to the possibility of other viewpoints, which is just about as bad as any theistic dogmatists.

Sincerly,

Blake

James, I don´t fathom were you get the patience to...

2007-12-01T22:00:00.000Z

Deane,According to the source I most trust, he wa...

2007-12-01T16:42:00.000Z

Deane,
According to the source I most trust, he was doing a laying-on of hands while teaching those around him that the children were his most attentive listeners and were active in learning knowledge and wisdom. Mt 18:2-3 deviates a bit less than than Mark from telling it right.

If it were to happen today, I don't think that Jesus would be recognized for who he was, or his teachings acceptable to Christians and atheists.

Jim:perhaps Jesus' spirit was exceptionally highly...

2007-12-01T02:26:00.000Z

Jim:
perhaps Jesus' spirit was exceptionally highly evolved, with the consequence that, with proper training, he could perform "miracles."

Perhaps. I wonder, then, about the scene where children are being brought to Jesus for him to "touch" them (Mark 10.13-15). Could this be the first example of the children's party magician?

Just imagine if this were to happen today. Jesus would probably be arrested for his kiddy-touching, and the children given counselling by social services.

I've studied up on a couple of modern "miraculous"...

2007-11-30T23:40:00.000Z

I've studied up on a couple of modern "miraculous" phenomena that have been so well documented by now that we can consider them just part of reality rather than miracles. Consider near-death experiences, in which the experiencer can recall "sseing" and "hearing" what went on while "he" hovered near the ceiling of the hospital room above his clinically dead body. Doctors and nurses are then flabbergasted, if they haven't come across the phenomenon before, when the revived patient describes what they did and said.

And then there are those children who could remember pieces of their most recent past life, before they were age 6 or so e.g., Tucker. In some 1500 such cases the child's utterances were so extensive that the past life could be identified beyond any doubt ( bibliography).

From such studies it is but a small step to find that one's spirit/consciousness evolves over countless lifetimes, and that perhaps Jesus' spirit was exceptionally highly evolved, with the consequence that, with proper training, he could perform "miracles." I should think that the well rounded NT scholar would find it essential to expand their horizons into these phenomena which by now have some 40 years of scientific data to back up their reality.

http://maverickphilosopher.powerblogs.com/posts/ch...

2007-11-30T22:46:00.000Z

http://maverickphilosopher.powerblogs.com/posts/chain_1180311317.shtml

I forgot to put the link from Maverick Philosopher.

I guess one of the great problems in scholarship c...

2007-11-30T22:45:00.000Z

I guess one of the great problems in scholarship concerning miracles is the fact that many people are not sure what a miracle is in the first place.

Aquinas distinguished between two types of "miracles":

The first was a miracle that appeared to us to be miraculous, but unbeknownst to us there is an explanation but it is out of the realm of our knowledge.

The second type, is the miracle that is a true miracle. But what, pray tell, consitutes miracles? If God is a being outside of the natural order, then how would we expect to test his actions? I am not saying that because we cannot explain an event it did not happen, as some are willing to do. I am only suggesting that a miracle may be outside of our methodological constraints. I, for one, would not expect a miracle to be verifeid by a method that is meant to examine natural occurences, would you?

You could also have a third distinction. Since James had a great thought experiment at SBL, I will try my hand at one. If you will excuse my blasphemy for a moment let us say that I am "a being greater than which cannot be conceieved":). I decide to ordain history in such a way that even x will happen at time y when people p are in time and place F, which would save them from threat t.

Example: If the Assyrian Army WAS killed, as the book of Kings indicates at the exact time, when YHWH told Isaiah and Hezekiah that he would save Jerusalem, but it was done by a plague, would this classify as a Miracle?

We have a case where everything could be accounted for form a Natrualistic standpoint, yet it was still ordained for that specific time when Judah needed intervention the most. It seems that the human mind can only theorize about certain things, and beyond that we cannot go.

Bill Valicella has some very good discussions on Miracles, whether they are logically possible, explainable and other topics of intrests.

Blake Reas

Danny:... I nowhere got the impression in Jesus an...

2007-11-30T21:17:00.000Z

Danny:
... I nowhere got the impression in Jesus and the Eyewitnesses that he is claiming miracles are real — only that we need to trust that this is what the eyewitnesses believe they saw happen.

James:
... And, of course, no such claims about the miraculous were made in the book. But it is still a big claim to imply eyewitnesses to miracles.

Incidentally, Bauckham went the additional step at the SBL, claiming that certain miracles were not only 'witnessed', but were historically probable:

“When I find, for example, that some of the nature miracles of Jesus seem as well evidenced as other events in the Gospels that are widely regarded as historical, I regard them as reasonably probable events.”
- Richard Bauckham, Panel Review of Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony, SBL Meeting, 17 November 2007