Historian of Early Christianity waiting for school to start . . . ask me anything!

[billsherman]

I’m honestly not really sure what you are getting at with the above. My apologies for being obtuse. Perhaps you can rephrase it for me?

 

[HarryStotle]

As simply as I can put it:

Perhaps your familiarity with history should not lead you to assume that easy conclusions can be made about theological truth.

And where you are drawing easy conclusions about theological truth, perhaps those conclusions are, in fact, clouding your thinking about history.

I have given at least one example above with reference to Luke and martyrdom.

 

[billsherman]

As simply as I can put it:

Thank you, I appreciate it the effort.

Perhaps your familiarity with history should not lead you to assume that easy conclusions can be made about theological truth.

I try to avoid drawing theological conclusions entirely. Because I am not even remotely qualified to do so. I try to draw only historical conclusions. I don’t recommend using my (or anyone else’s) historical conclusions to make theological arguments. In fact, there is a post I made someone above that outlines this fairly well. They are different things.

And where you are drawing easy conclusions about theological truth, perhaps those conclusions are, in fact, clouding your thinking about history.

I have given at least one example above with reference to Luke and martyrdom.

I wasn’t aware I was making a theological argument about Luke. I offered a simple guess. Nothing more, nothing less. I have no evidence (and neither does anyone else) as to why Luke omits the death of Paul in Acts. Hence, the reason why it is a guess.

 

[BartholomewB]

Thank you, Bill. I now have a supplementary question, arising from your answer about Justin Martyr and anti-Semitism. Who is right about that word in Psalm 22:16, the Christians or the Jews? “Pierced” or “like a lion”? With the aleph in the middle, it ought to be “like a lion,” but “pierced” seems to fit the syntax better.

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/psalms/22-16.htm

 

[billsherman]

Who is right about that word in Psalm 22:16, the Christians or the Jews? “Pierced” or “like a lion”? With the aleph in the middle, it ought to be “like a lion,” but “pierced” seems to fit the syntax better.

“Like a lion” is the better translation. I believe this is the official translation of most of the English speaking rabbinical conferences these days as well.

In fact . . . I just check with a friend of mine who is a Reformed rabbi, and he agrees with “like a lion.” So there you go!

 

[Raafat]

They invented it. The people who invented it, got to define it, and they defined their opponents as heterodox. The early Church was messy.

They certainly weren’t overly concerned with questions of historicity. For modern historians that makes our job a lot harder. They never investigated claims of authorship, oral transmission, or even appear to have looked into how source documents were used. These are modern historical concerns. Their concerns were purely theological.

Those are quite statements to put on a Catholic/Christian forum.

 

[billsherman]

Those are quite statements to put on a Catholic/Christian forum.

Why do you say that? I’ve tried hard to explain that I am a historian, doing historical work. I only go where evidence leads.

On top of that, history should not scare those who hold faith. Faith, after all, is fundamentally different.

As an example, let me quote you one great modern scholar on Jesus: “Hence, from a purely philological and historical point of view, the most probable opinion is that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were his siblings. This interpretation of the NT texts was kept alive by at least some Church writers up until the late 4th century.”

This statement, while backed by solid historical work would likely be considered controversial by Catholics. It was written by John P. Meier. You can find it on page 332 on volume 1 of “A Marginal Jew.”

The book carries the Imprimatur from The Most Rev. Patrick J. Sheridan, of the Archdiocese of New York. The author, John P. Meier is a Catholic priest, incardinated in that Archdiocese, has had this specific book praised by Pope Benedict XVI, and has won more awards from the various Pontifical Institutes than I can possibly name.

History and faith are not the same thing. One cannot disprove the other. Father Meier has written beautifully about how he can historically question things like the virgin birth, but still hold that belief as a core piece of faith. I highly, highly recommend his work.

Also, this website has at least a thread a week condemning the Pope as a heretic. We should probably work on cleaning that up.

 

[BartholomewB]

“Like a lion” is the better translation. I believe this is the official translation of most of the English speaking rabbinical conferences these days as well.

In fact . . . I just check with a friend of mine who is a Reformed rabbi, and he agrees with “like a lion.” So there you go!

… And yet the Septuagint has ωρυξαν, which – so the Study Bible website says – has the literal meaning “they dug,” which is also the primary meaning of the Hebrew verb that is the alternative reading (dropping the aleph) of the word in Psalm 22:16 translated as “like a lion.”

http://studybible.info/LXX_WH/Psalms 22:16

 

[Raafat]

Why do you say that? I’ve tried hard to explain that I am a historian, doing historical work. I only go where evidence leads.

On top of that, history should not scare those who hold faith. Faith, after all, is fundamentally different.

As an example, let me quote you one great modern scholar on Jesus: “Hence, from a purely philological and historical point of view, the most probable opinion is that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were his siblings. This interpretation of the NT texts was kept alive by at least some Church writers up until the late 4th century.”

This statement, while backed by solid historical work would likely be considered controversial by Catholics. It was written by John P. Meier. You can find it on page 332 on volume 1 of “A Marginal Jew.”

The book carries the Imprimatur from The Most Rev. Patrick J. Sheridan, of the Archdiocese of New York. The author, John P. Meier is a Catholic priest, incardinated in that Archdiocese, has had this specific book praised by Pope Benedict XVI, and has won more awards from the various Pontifical Institutes than I can possibly name.

History and faith are not the same thing. One cannot disprove the other. Father Meier has written beautifully about how he can historically question things like the virgin birth, but still hold that belief as a core piece of faith. I highly, highly recommend his work.

Also, this website has at least a thread a week condemning the Pope as a heretic. We should probably work on cleaning that up.

I know that history is fundamentally different than faith. That one should follow the evidence.
I will look at the book, I was looking for something to read for a while.

As for why I said what I said, that is because I come from Middle East and here things are a bit different. Science, philosophy and history must prove faith. There’s no separation, and I can hardly see how come can be a separation.

So, sir, do you know any easy-to-read books about church history, historical Jesus and the OT?

 

[billsherman]

As for why I said what I said, that is because I come from Middle East and here things are a bit different. Science, philosophy and history must prove faith. There’s no separation, and I can hardly see how come can be a separation.

It is equally difficult for me to imagine a situation like yours. Religious freedom and the separation of church and state are necessary for any meaningful scholarship, as far as I can imagine.

So, sir, do you know any easy-to-read books about church history, historical Jesus and the OT?

I generally don’t read much popular history, but I think E. P. Sanders is fairly accessible. He has several books on the early church and the historical Jesus.

 

[Raafat]

It is equally difficult for me to imagine a situation like yours. Religious freedom and the separation of church and state are necessary for any meaningful scholarship, as far as I can imagine.

In Middle East, they are not so scholarship oeiented.

I generally don’t read much popular history, but I think E. P. Sanders is fairly accessible. He has several books on the early church and the historical Jesus.

Great I wil try to find his books.

Thanks a lot, sir.

 

[PickyPicky]

Religious freedom and the separation of church and state are necessary for any meaningful scholarship, as far as I can imagine.

Religious freedom, no doubt. But to say separation is necessary would imply there is no meaningful scholarship in England. Which you probably don’t think. Or do you?

 

[alice24]

Hello @billsherman, just wanted to say hi and I really like this thread. I´m working and studying in a german university´s historic faculty and my boss has a similar research field. I´m looking forward for nice discussions over the ocean

 

[ajg]

@billsherman I hope I’m not too late to the party, and I hope you didn’t answer this one already.

What is the earliest record of Marian devotion? What about asking saints for intercession?

 

[goout]

guanophore:

Do you consider the New Testament and other pre-Nicean Fathers to be valid historical documents?

Of course, they just have to used with the same caution any historical source material receives. They were typically written as tools of evangelization, not as objective reviews of the past.

What I am specifically addressing is not the methodology of historians. I am looking at your casting of evangelization in a suspicious light from an historical point of view. Evangelization does not diminish history.
It is not the same thing as propaganda.

The fact that something is good news does not diminish it’s historical objectivity.

 

[BartholomewB]

Hi Alice. Several of the most interesting and memorable books I’ve read about the NT period were by German authors, in particular these three:

Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus
Joachim Jeremias,The Eucharistic Words of Jesus
Martin Hengel, Paul Between Damascus and Antioch.

What is the current standing of these authors in German academic circles? Are their books still on students’ reading lists, or have they been superseded by more recent authors?

 

[Hunho]

I ran across an article originally printed in the Huffington Post that reported that the “International Geology Review investigated an earthquake that was said to have occurred the same date as Jesus’ crucifixion. Biblical citations [Matthew 27:51] combined with geological research suggest the date may have been Friday April 3, 33 A.D. Taken alone, geological research has identified a window from 26 to 36 A.D.” The article in the Huffington Post online is dated 25 May 2012 and is titled “Jesus’ Crucifixion Date Possibly Friday April 3, 33 A.D., According To Earthquake Study.”

 

[billsherman]

Religious freedom, no doubt. But to say separation is necessary would imply there is no meaningful scholarship in England. Which you probably don’t think.

You got me there. In reality, England operates as if church and state are separate, but you already knew that!

 

[billsherman]

Hello @billsherman, just wanted to say hi and I really like this thread. I´m working and studying in a german university´s historic faculty and my boss has a similar research field.

Good to hear! Graduate school is one of the highlights of any academic career. Be sure to let your mind wander, and be certain to read those authors with whom you disagree most. The subject is far too vast to end up stuck is an echo chamber of ideas. Your mind can take you places neither of us have even imagined yet. Enjoy the journey!

 

[Curious11]

Did Paul and Peter really go to Rome? And did James really evangelize Spain?