george murphy wrote:
snip.
>
>
> Very quickly -
> 1) There is little basis for Celsus 'claim but there's nothing implusible
> in Jesus quoting a Greek author: Paul did. Palestinian Judaism in Jesus' time
> was strongly influenced by Hellenism.
> 2) Historical research with the gospels & Genesis (& the OT in general) are
> not really comparable. There is no serious doubt about the existence of major
> NT figures - Jesus, John the Baptist, Pilate - in Palestine during the latter
> reign of Tiberius. The historical evidence for Methuselah, Noah, Abraham &c is
> considerably less compelling. In the NT case major questions have to do with
> specific saying attributed to a known historical figure. With Genesis there are
> questions about the existence of some of the characters. (By which I do not
> mean to deny that they _did_ exist.)
> 3) Having said that, it's clear that some of the material in the gospels is
> due to the reflections of the early church & the gospel writers, & this simply
> from the internal evidence. To take just one important example, the confession
> of Peter at Caesarea Phillippi. Mark's account gives the impression that Jesus
> rejected the title "Messiah" while in Matthew he praises Peter's attribution to
> him of this title as a gift of God. It can't be both ways. There are many
> other examples.
I am curious about the reference to Abraham. If he were not a historical figure,
would you consider writings the about him to be a continuation of Genesis 1-11 as a
"parable" or religious story? (I am fumbling for the correct words here.) Any
elaboration?
Thanks,
Walt
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 11 2002 - 10:41:26 EDT