absence of proof is not proof of absence
Posted on 01/29/2007 10:02:46 AM PST by presidio9
An Amherst-based group will lead a new effort to examine whether Jesus of Nazareth existed in history. The Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion is billing its scholarly investigation the "Jesus Project," and it plans to take the work of the controversial "Jesus Seminar" a step further.
The "Jesus Seminar," which formed in 1985, focused on what sayings in the New Testament were truly spoken by Jesus and what deeds he actually performed, but in the end it didn't question his existence.
Amid much fractious debate - as well as dismissive criticism from many Christians - the group of seminar scholars concluded that fewer than one-fifth of the statements attributed to Jesus in the four Gospels were actually made by him and also agreed that he did not rise from the dead.
The "Jesus Seminar" still exists, but interest in its work has faded, and its founder, Robert Funk, died in 2005.
Members of the Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion, which is based at the secularist Center for Inquiry, near the University at Buffalo North Campus, want to reignite the debate with a different emphasis.
Many of the scholars involved with the "Jesus Seminar" examined the question primarily from a theological perspective, said R. Joseph Hoffman, who heads the committee and will organize regular meetings of historians, classicists and other scholars for the "Jesus Project."
Others involved at this point include Robert M. Price, a former "Jesus Seminar" participant, and Gerd Ludemann, a history professor in Germany, Hoffman said.
The new investigation will differ from the "Jesus Seminar" because it won't be hamstrung by theology, he said.
The committee regards the belief that Jesus was a historical person as a "testable hypothesis," just like any other historical question.
Hoffman announced the "Jesus Project" on Sunday at the conclusion of a conference on "Scripture and Skepticism" at the University of California at Davis.
The conference attracted scholars from around the globe to explore the use of historical and critical interpretation in the study of religious texts.
The "Jesus Project" will keep that method of research at the forefront in examining the existence of Jesus, Hoffman said.
"We can't let this discussion be dominated by people who do theologically driven history," he said.
The "Jesus Project" is not necessarily an attempt to disprove that Jesus existed, Hoffman said. "I happen to believe there probably was a Jesus of Nazareth, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be asking the question," he said. "I'm kind of agnostic about it. I want to look at the historical evidence."
The committee will begin accepting applications in March from scholars interested in participating. Members of the project will meet twice a year - once in Amherst and once in Los Angeles.
Hoffman predicted the work of the group would take no more than five years and result in the publication of majority findings and minority findings.
I predict the will say He did not exist, or was a gay eviromentalist.
I will pray for these people.
Unfortunately, the Josephus passage is obviously a later editorial insert. Josephus' narrative stops right before the insertion and picks up on the other side; if the insertion were removed it would restore the narrative flow -- a good indication the piece was inserted. As the earliest extent examples of Josephus' work do not include the passage in question it's obvious a later editor inserted it.
As for your assertion there no other Jewish writings from the 1st century, a quick Google search shows that to not be the case. And as for establishing Christianity, that can be laid solely at the feet of Paul; the founding documents need be no more than something he and his circle cooked up either through a genuine belief that it was all divinely inspired, or as a cynical effort to make a little money.
They used marbles to vote on it.
Yet they are held as the ultimate in biblical scholarship.
No bias here...
Source please.
Probably the most penetrating question asked about this so far. I would love to see who also.
If the investigation is based on texts, records, and artifacts, then Jesus is probably the most recorded individual in history.
7Q5 dates Mark NLT 50 AD. Plenty of people around at that time who would have lived through the era who would also complain if someone brought forward a fictional person.
Not true.
There is no historical data to back up the claim Jesus existed outside of the Gospels themselves.
Peter was around before Paul- and unlike Paaul, was not an educated man. This lends more credence, if any is needed, to the truth of the narrative. Early Christians recognized his primacy.
To avoid starting side arguments, let's interpret that last sentence narrowly.
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
When is the left going to do a scientific study on why Marxism is such a failure or why Darwinism cannot be substantiated scientifically?
The mention of Jesus is included at the end of a series of accounts of how Pilate dealt with disobedient Jews in Judea; after Jesus is done with, Josephus moves on to the story of some contemporary Jews in Rome. Finishing that story, he goes back to how Pilate tackled with some Samaritans. It is the Rome story which obstructs the narrative flow, though that's in keeping with Josephus's general style as a historian, which is random and not very well-organized.
As the earliest extent examples of Josephus' work do not include the passage in question it's obvious a later editor inserted it.
That's incorrect. Unfortunately, there are no such texts.
As for your assertion there no other Jewish writings from the 1st century, a quick Google search shows that to not be the case.
Go on...
And as for establishing Christianity, that can be laid solely at the feet of Paul; the founding documents need be no more than something he and his circle cooked up either through a genuine belief that it was all divinely inspired, or as a cynical effort to make a little money.
Well all right, but that's pretty wild, and not well-correlated with the hard focus that Jesus's life and sayings get in the Gospels and the very little interest they attract in Paul's letters.
Unfortunately, my reference for the earliest versions of Josephus I cannot find (so I'll have to rescind that statement, pending my finding it again), though I want to say it was Bart D. Ehrman.
"Do we have any writings from the Jewish leaders at the time mentioning Jesus?"
There is also a Rabbinical reference to a man who proclaimed himself the messiah and who was crucified for heresy about the time in question (30-40ish AD/CE), a reference that is presumed to refer to Jesus.
Thanks professor, I'm familiar with Wikpedia. I'm also familiar with the fact that its not really the best source, as anybody can change it.
Wrong, Flavius Josephus mentions Jesus in his history.
ERGO, because we are alive, God exists.
Which begs the question.....what made God?
And good luck to them! They will find what they want to find.
And as for the existence of Jesus as a human being on this earth, well, as with any other thing, absence of proof is not proof of absence.
absence of proof is not proof of absence
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.