 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
n/a
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 218
| Posted 10/31/2002 6:18 AM (GMT -6) |   | ...interviewed somebody like--lets say--Burton (Bernie?)L. Mack (the mac!)? I noticed an article on infidels.org, where the author mentions his disappointment towards Lee Strobel for not interviewing a jesus seminar scholar. Here is the link www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/strobel.html. Isn't there something wrong with this picture? It is called Case for Christ not against him! It sounds like they want an un-biased account, but asking for that--in my opinion--is absurd. Can anyone enlighten me on this topic? Also, these objections have all been treated by proponents who are trying to recover the "real jesus," correct? www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=t_h_mitchell&itemid=8679 He borrewed his arguments from a book called The Jesus Mysteries. Has anyone heard of this book? I know that i am probably reiterating things that have been discussed on the board, but any help would be great!
Agape,
Paul
"The Creator's power (by which I mean the capacity to influence the world) is made manifest paradoxically in the vulnerable defenselessness of crucified man."
-John F. Haught
Edited by - faithfullservent on 10/31/2002 11:35:51 AM | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 10/31/2002 8:47 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Isn't there something wrong with this picture?
Yeah, I know what you're saying, but I think the author was wanting to hear the opinions of these scholars despite the different theological base. And I wouldn't say that the Jesus seminar scholars are against Christ, they do believe in the historical Jesus, but some (not all) do not believe in the miraculous accounts of the Gospels and believe a lot of the sayings attributed to Jesus are inauthentic.
My main critique of Strobel's book is that the issues he dealt with aren't really the ones most skeptics struggle with...it was a "preaching to the choir" type of book.
Take care,
~E
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Alan Rhoda
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
| Posted 10/31/2002 10:14 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
My main critique of Strobel's book is that the issues he dealt with aren't really the ones most skeptics struggle with...it was a "preaching to the choir" type of book.
That's true to some extent, but "The Case for Christ" is specifically focused on the case for Christ--his historicity, his resurrection, etc. Strobel's sequel, "The Case for Faith", tackles objections that skeptics are more likely to raise--the problem of evil, jesus is the only way, etc. That being said, however, Strobel's discussions take place on a largely "popular" level and don't go too deep.
God bless,
Alan
Edited by - Alan Rhoda on 10/31/2002 6:07:04 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 10/31/2002 10:24 AM (GMT -6) | | If a person doesn't believe Jesus is God, then they are against Christ. That is basically what the Jesus Seminiar is. If they aren't enemies of the gospel, I don't know who is...on the other hand, there really is little reason to interview anyone in the JS. Most scholars have little respect for their views...
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 10/31/2002 10:45 AM (GMT -6) | | For clarification, it may be helpful for people to realize that the Jesus Seminar is composed of theologians from a WIDE variety of theological positions. What has been popularized in the media are the extreme claims of some (not all) of the JS scholars. Some orthodox scholars are members of the JS and maintain their voice in contradiction to some of the more extreme votes of the JS.
I agree that most of the JS scholars are rather second rate, but again, not all. JD Crossan is well respected in the scholarly realm for instance. More importantly however is the fact that the JS have gained attention among the general public through the media and that makes their views relevant to any discussion about Jesus among the general public nowadays.
As to honorman's claim that anyone who does not see Jesus as God is against Christ or against the Gospel is problematic: that can be the case, but it is not necessarily the case. Many of the JS scholars consider themselves devout Christians and proponents of the Christian faith from a rationalistic perspective, even though some of their views would not line up with traditional understanding. I don't think the sweeping claim that the JS are enemies of the Gospel is either helpful or correct. (However, I'd rather not get into some kind of lengthy and irrelevant argument over that point.)
Personally I have little respect for the JS's conclusions and find their methods of determining historicity to be entirely unscholarly, biased, and flawed. I don't care for their propensity to play to the media either. I do have respect for many of the JS scholars as people however.
Thanks,
~E
Edited by - Empiress on 10/31/2002 3:51:55 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
n/a
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 218
| Posted 10/31/2002 11:06 AM (GMT -6) | | I personally am not a fan of the book, but it is people like mitchell that allow their skeptical (atheistic) fires to be fueled by books like Strobel's.
And I wouldn't say that the Jesus seminar scholars are against Christ, they do believe in the historical Jesus, but some (not all) do not believe in the miraculous accounts of the Gospels and believe a lot of the sayings attributed to Jesus are inauthentic.
When I say case against christ, I am basically saying that I don't believe you can have Christ without the "miracles" and the "teachings," these are the definitive hallmarks that distinguish him from an ordinary man, and to posit scholarly reductionism onto him, is--in my opinion--just as bad as saying there is no Christ. However, granted there are are NT Scholars on the Jesus Seminar (I think N.T. Wright might be one [no, yes?]) I automatically think of JDC, BLM, MB, etc..., because these are the main focus in the only books I have read dealing with a defense of "The Real Jesus." I need to be more lucid in the future, eh?
Agape,
Paul
P.S. it was a "preaching to the choir" type of book.
I don't know if that was meant to be funny, but it was. 
"The Creator's power (by which I mean the capacity to influence the world) is made manifest paradoxically in the vulnerable defenselessness of crucified man."
-John F. Haught
Edited by - faithfullservent on 10/31/2002 4:13:37 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 11/1/2002 6:38 AM (GMT -6) | | The media has not played up the more extreme views of the JS. Those within it have. I would say, though, that any orthodox Christian who stays within such an organization is stained by it. Those in the "extreme" part (and I would doubt if there is anything within that organization) are not scholars, but people with a certain agenda.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 11/1/2002 6:40 AM (GMT -6) | | E: Crossan? Respected by who? I would suggest you read his debate with William Lane Craig. Poor guy. Craig torchs his "views."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
n/a
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 218
| Posted 11/1/2002 6:49 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/1/2002 5:53 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
That's true to some extent, but "The Case for Christ" is specifically focused on the case for Christ--his historicity, his resurrection, etc. Strobel's sequel, "The Case for Faith", tackles objections that skeptics are more likely to raise--the problem of evil, jesus is the only way, etc.
God bless,
Alan
Hi Alan-
I really enjoyed Strobel's first book, but the second, The Case for Faith, was disappointing. Everything (as I remember) came out of the classical, blueprint worldview. The weakest interview was with Calvin Miller (who I like) about evil and suffering.
Hey, perhaps one of the next steps for open theism ought to be a series of popular issues/interview type books where openness folks are interviewed. It's more personal, relevant, and accessible.
Tom
"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde
Edited by - TGB on 11/01/2002 10:55:17 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
kerygma
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2002
Total Posts : 45
| Posted 11/5/2002 2:43 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
We have noted above numerous ways in which the Jesus Seminar reflects the “radical fringe” of critical scholarship and generally does not include the most established scholars of a more moderate perspective. Once it is admitted that evangelical scholars can also be “critical” and not allow their beliefs to predetermine their historical conclusions (an admission the JS is unwilling to make), it becomes clear that the JS’s claims to represent consensus views on more than a small percentage of the issues they address are simply false.
So concludes Craig Blomberg, after painstakingly going through the detail to back this up.
http://www.equip.org/free/DJ032.htm
Talk about Spiritual Warfare, I believe the main work of the Jesus Seminar is fueled by none other than Satan. These "scholars" are condemning unbelievers to hell by giving them fuel for their anti-Christ views, and thus pushing them away from ever accepting the Jesus that was and is.
Scott
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. Isaiah 53:5
| | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 3:04 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|