tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post112835660611009120..comments2023-10-16T04:58:53.689-04:00Comments on Verily Verily: My last 'last words' on authenticityRafaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14471888340005683193noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post-1128545744383789912005-10-05T16:55:00.000-04:002005-10-05T16:55:00.000-04:00...To continueAnd given this conclusion, we can as......To continue<BR/><BR/>And given this conclusion, we can assume a position of general trust towards a source, rather than skepticism. Beyond this, I doubt we can be sure of establshing what Jesus did and did not say and do. The evangelists were in a far better position to do so than we are.<BR/><BR/>We can establish what is plausible given Jesus' context within Judaism(s), and what is probable given the movement that continued after his death. But we cannot determine with any certainty whether this or that saying was made up.Eddiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00236115781570052603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post-1128505742336307132005-10-05T05:49:00.000-04:002005-10-05T05:49:00.000-04:00A very good point Steph.Now Rafael, you don't even...A very good point Steph.<BR/><BR/>Now Rafael, you don't even want to know what I think of people who tell me I'm wrong without reason. But you'll soon find out...<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure if meat sacrificed to an idol is 100% relevant here. It is still possible that observant Jews could have reasoned like Paul did when it came to idol meat. But I digress...James Crossleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10661575117163837659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post-1128458044610087122005-10-04T16:34:00.000-04:002005-10-04T16:34:00.000-04:00I think you have slightly misunderstood my proposa...I think you have slightly misunderstood my proposal. The first step, as you say, is to assess the relationship between the primary sources and the actual flow of history. But I dont envision this assessment as divulging a judgement on the "reliability" of a source, but as leading to an understanding of the "nature" of a source and its <I>function within its social world</I>. So, if we find that a source (e.g. Matthew's gospel) belongs within the broad literary genre of <I>bio</I>, that its social world valued and sought to follow Jesus' teachings, then we can say that we have a source which wishes to put people in touch with the Jesus of history (and i dont mean this in an existential fashion).Eddiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00236115781570052603noreply@blogger.com