Posted by RomGabe [RomGabe] on March 27, 1999 at 08:46:02 {szt8oCKLMMi2FeK4AYaQMWQSpdplHcja6}:
In Reply to: *The historical Jesus posted by doug on March 26, 1999 at 13:37:40:
Doug,
While I agree with you on the assertion derived from the JS's methods of voting and categorizing verses of the gospels, I do not consider them to be a joke.
Although, based on evidence that will surface in the next hundred years or so, we will be looking back at the JS assertions as limited or too far-stretched in certain points, we have to take into account the timing of their analysis. And you made a great point about that at the end of your post.
But you also have to remember that certain members in their group are people of name in their field and people that have written successful academic papers in the field of the historicity of Jesus.
We, also have to take into account that certain people that were originally in the voting committee decided to dropp out because of their disconted with the voting methods and proceedings.
Besides that one book that you make reference to, they had published other books much more worth of scholarship and value. Look at the "Complete Gospels" collection. Personally, I'm glad someone took the time and effort to put together such a collection. Now I will get the full story of what had been written about Jesus's life, something that the Sunday School teacher won't tell me.
Sincerely,
RomGabe