Displaying 15 of 21 comments
See all comments
"To one degree or another, we all conform Jesus to our own image." Fantastic new book out on this very topic: Imaginary Jesus by Matt Mikalatos.
Excellent. Welcome home.
Historical Jesus studies don't do it for me any more therefore the discipline must be dead?
Note: Earthly pursuits have limit, do not provide evidence for things not seen. No mystical experiences in a dusty library, absent mushrooms. Academia is academic.
Would McKnight's Christian perspective be better served if he could remove all the historical flesh he has put on the spirit of orthodox Christ?
If you think not, then should we encourage more folks to pursue the historical Jesus rather than tell them it's passe?
I'm probably missing something. Thank you for the great article, Mr. McKnight.
What a strange article. Somehow you can sidestep all of the methodological issues about knowing Jesus, simply by conceptually shifting the object of your study from the "historical Jesus" to the "canonical Jesus"? Did that solution seem a bit easy when you first thought of it?
I mean, really, did you undergraduates project their personalities onto Jesus because that's a common thing for anyone to do, or because they had read 1 & 2 Maccabees and some Josephus? How does historical study make one particularly susceptible to this temptation?
The whole enterprise hearkens back to the 19th-century biblical commentaries that Mark Noll wrote about, which bragged that the authors had had no instruction in theology and the Bible.
J the H. C
"Cheeses age!" cries Donna Post.
those with a more adventurous curiosity and intellect might find this interesting:
however, if one is unwilling or unable to move beyond the sadly circular 'believe so you can know'; one probably needn't bother ..
1000 character limit