Cover Story Material

We have a new group of scholars who have embarked on the project of finding the true facts about the historical Jesus.  I'm sure they'll be featured soon on the cover of the newsweeklies for their holiday issues.  Just take note and remember when you read about their pronouncements that the Bible is unreliable because they've already signaled what those conclusions will be:

Several scholars have begun another quest for the historical Jesus. "The Jesus Project, "according to the Christian Post (http://www.christianpost.com/article/20081210/new-quest-for-historical-j...), has as its goal "to objectively determine what can be 'reliably recovered' about him, his life, his teachings, and his activities."  Scholars such as James Tabor, Paul Kurtz, Robert Price,  Robert Eisenman, and Bruce Chilton are part of the project. Tabor is author of The Jesus Dynasty; Kurtz is the  founder and chairman of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry; Price has argued in several publications that Jesus never existed; Eisenman has written some idiosyncratic, if not bizarre, theories about the Dead Sea Scrolls; he also is not sure that Jesus ever existed. Except for Chilton, one wonders how these men can truly be objective about recovering anything about Jesus--especially when they have published so much that is on the fringes of genuine scholarship.

Comments

[Aaron T. S.]

Hello Greg,

Off topic...

FYI: There’s a challenge from John Loftus (former Christian, now turned atheist/agnostic[?]) to Christian Apologists to debate him, and your name is on the list.

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2008/12/christian-apologists-i-challenge-all-of.html

Care to comment please.

Blessings,
Aaron

[Kalaudion]

^ ^
Off topic as well, but to comment on the above I saw that too! Lol,
And you know, I read that guys reasons why he doesnt believe,
I find it a bit curious that the Bible addresses pretty much every single thing he posted. I didnt find the reasons very significant either, or "game breaking" per say, but maybe it was for him i suppose.

If anything, the telegraphic nature of the Bible is too compelling to be rejected. It shifts my bones to their very core. Guess its just a reminder that thiers always work to do!

[Randall]

I want to know something, how do we deconstruct the argument "the bible cannot be trusted because it was written by men with an agenda and bias"

1. ask to have them point out the bias?
2. tell them that requiring supplemental other textual support might not always apply? example: does a math book teaching 1+1=2 require several other math books teaching this fact?
3. ask them what an objective book would look like?

or perhaps dig a bit deeper and ask them to define objectivity?

The fur stands up on my back whenever I hear anyone doing this "you cannot trust the Bible 'cause no one else backs it up" claim. This actually shows what a low negative opinion the person has of all humanity, very pessimistic and melancholic.

Arrgh!!!

[Louis Kuhelj]

"This actually shows what a low negative opinion the person has of all humanity, very pessimistic and melancholic."

Actually some degree of pessimism is not really a bad thing. However, it should be grounded in reliable evidence. Being pessimistic about the human condition might actually be realistic in a sense. Effectively tackling human problems requires that you consider the possibility of failure in the attempted fix and seek out the points of weakness where that failure might occur in the system implemented to remedy it. So, when it comes to actual problem solving, a level of pessimism is actually a good thing and may assist in bringing about positive results. However, if we only have a positive opinion of the human condition, we are unlikely to actually do anything to fixing some of it, because we are convinced no fix is needed in the first place.

[Haecceitas]

I suppose that the lineup of scholars (or, in some cases, "scholars" -- the list of participants seems to be under revision, but the original list included many people with no formal credentials in any relevant field of study) in the Jesus project is such that not many mainstream NT scholars are going to take them seriously. But we may expect certain level of media attention, and the group itself is probably going to be even more aggressive than the Jesus Seminar in trying to get that attention.