From Wright’s Jesus and the Victory of God:
To the agonized phenomenalist, agreeing in principle [that Jesus was a creative and original theologian] but worried that we can never know for sure that we are dealing with Jesus and not with the evangelists’ theologies, I recommend a good brisk walk, a Brandenburg Concerto, and NTPG Part II.
Beer bottle shards – from 120 PSI to 0 PSI in 1.9 seconds
I’ve been working through Duncan’s A History of the Synoptic Problem and decided to post a few of thoughts as I go through. I don’t know, the internet and the Synoptic problem just naturally seem to go together.
HT: xkcd
No Line on the Horizon – $4 at Amazon today.
As a follow up to his previous post, Reno comes out swinging again at biblical scholars and historical criticism. An excerpt…
One would think that historical criticism is primarily concerned with, well, history. It isn’t. As Collins makes his case for the continuing central, authoritative role for the historical–critical tradition, writes Legaspi, “What was once an intellectual project for making sense of the Bible appears to have become a sociopolitical proposal for regulating dialogue.” Biblical scholars are important primarily as gatekeepers. They are academic officials who designate what does and does not count as “responsible” interpretation of the Bible.
In other words, the academy is a church, the historical-critical method its dogma, and biblical scholars its priests. Of course, Bultmann said as much years ago.
Read the article. And then get Reno’s must-read intro to interpretation in the early church, Sanctified Vision.
