Joined: June 2009
|Quote (Quack @ Sep. 02 2011,17:56)|
|Freke and Gandy have been criticized by biblical scholars (and others) in their "looseness" with the facts. They have some good stuff, but anything they say should be checked out with other sources. There is no excuse for shoddy scholarship.|
I think it is more about their obvious agenda than shoddy scholarship. I think they could have done a more scholarly treatment if they wanted to but that would also have made it less of a good read. It helps that they reference their sources and that list is impressive.
BTW, IIRC, it was Robert M Price that I was stung by at t.o. once when I referred to TJM; he appeared as rather arrogant and asked why I would believe two journalists. He struck me as having an agenda too.
I think that they are all like that. There is so little evidence that it is easy to build fanciful towers in the air. It used to annoy me on IIDB that everybody used to shoot down everybody else's fanciful tower as it lacked evidence while they fiercely defended their own. It is worse in the FTK world as they hide and distort evidence to pretend that we know that Jesus exists.
So what do we know - In the first century we have Josephus who mentions Jesus. This is an obvious interpolation. (Also Eusiebius has a Josephus quote which is different from the copied document we now have.
In the second and third centuries we have some scraps of manuscripts and some mentions by Romans (quite a few disputed though), so we know that there was some kind of Jesus movement and that the gospels were close to what we have now.
In the fourth century we start to see the church as we know it now. Eusebius writes his history of the church, where we learn about FTK's precious church fathers. He quotes a lot of documents that no longer exist as even copies.
Now some of Eusebius's contemporaries say that he was dishonest - but why should you believe them anymore than you believe that Eusebius honestly wrote down the history of the church.