Re: The historical Jesus
NT Wright is seriously wrong, part 2: does all history depend on interpretation? By: paulhartigan (42 replies) 16 November, 2006 - 02:50
- Well, history was always By: joeAnne (09/10/2008 - 23:00)
- Re: NT Wright is seriously wrong, part 2: does all history depen By: Jacob (19/09/2007 - 06:12)
- More on pushing barrows By: paulhartigan (21/11/2006 - 23:15)
- Re: More on pushing barrows By: andrew (22/11/2006 - 16:53)
- Still more on pushing barrows By: paulhartigan (23/11/2006 - 04:50)
- Horses for courses By: andrew (23/11/2006 - 11:27)
- Horses for courses....yes, in a sense By: paulhartigan (23/11/2006 - 20:27)
- Horses for courses By: andrew (23/11/2006 - 11:27)
- Still more on pushing barrows By: paulhartigan (23/11/2006 - 04:50)
- Hermeneutical spiral By: peter wilkinson (22/11/2006 - 09:13)
- Re: More on pushing barrows By: andrew (22/11/2006 - 16:53)
- Re: NT Wright is seriously wrong, part 2: does all history depen By: Chris (21/11/2006 - 09:29)
- Re: NT Wright is seriously wrong, part 2: does all history depen By: danutz (21/11/2006 - 21:06)
- The historical Jesus By: paulhartigan (22/11/2006 - 00:24)
- Re: The historical Jesus By: peter wilkinson (23/11/2006 - 10:15)
- Jesus- do we really know what happened? By: paulhartigan (27/11/2006 - 20:42)
- Re: Jesus- do we really know what happened? By: peter wilkinson (28/11/2006 - 04:32)
- Wittgenstein, Jesus and history By: paulhartigan (28/11/2006 - 23:42)
- Re: Wittgenstein, Jesus and history By: peter wilkinson (29/11/2006 - 11:42)
- Re: Wittgenstein, Jesus and history By: paulhartigan (30/11/2006 - 01:14)
- Re: Wittgenstein, Jesus and history and due diligence By: peter wilkinson (30/11/2006 - 14:25)
- Jesus in history By: samlcarr (01/12/2006 - 19:38)
- Re: Wittgenstein, Jesus and history and due diligence By: peter wilkinson (30/11/2006 - 14:25)
- Re: Wittgenstein, Jesus and history By: paulhartigan (30/11/2006 - 01:14)
- Re: Wittgenstein, Jesus and history By: peter wilkinson (29/11/2006 - 11:42)
- weighty opinions By: samlcarr (28/11/2006 - 06:12)
- Wittgenstein, Jesus and history By: paulhartigan (28/11/2006 - 23:42)
- Re: Jesus- do we really know what happened? By: peter wilkinson (28/11/2006 - 04:32)
- Ungracious. By: paulhartigan (23/11/2006 - 10:23)
- Re: Ungracious? By: peter wilkinson (23/11/2006 - 10:52)
- Jesus- do we really know what happened? By: paulhartigan (27/11/2006 - 20:42)
- Re: The historical Jesus By: danutz (22/11/2006 - 16:45)
- Re: The historical Jesus By: andrew (22/11/2006 - 17:02)
- Re: The historical Jesus By: danutz (22/11/2006 - 17:40)
- Re: The historical Jesus By: andrew (22/11/2006 - 17:02)
- Re: The historical Jesus By: peter wilkinson (23/11/2006 - 10:15)
- The historical Jesus By: paulhartigan (22/11/2006 - 00:24)
- Re: NT Wright is seriously wrong, part 2: does all history depen By: danutz (21/11/2006 - 21:06)
- Re: NT Wright is seriously wrong, part 2: does all history depen By: brad (20/11/2006 - 21:14)
- How to settle historical questions By: paulhartigan (20/11/2006 - 23:53)
- Re: How to settle historical questions By: samlcarr (21/11/2006 - 00:45)
- Beware epistemology! By: paulhartigan (21/11/2006 - 03:01)
- too late by half By: samlcarr (26/11/2006 - 06:56)
- Beware epistemology! By: paulhartigan (21/11/2006 - 03:01)
- Re: How to settle historical questions By: samlcarr (21/11/2006 - 00:45)
- How to settle historical questions By: paulhartigan (20/11/2006 - 23:53)
- Do we all have a barrow to push By: paulhartigan (20/11/2006 - 20:44)
- Re: Do we all have a barrow to push By: peter wilkinson (21/11/2006 - 00:32)
- Did I misunderstand Wright's argument? By: paulhartigan (21/11/2006 - 02:51)
- Re: Do we all have a barrow to push By: ericboehmer (21/11/2006 - 00:38)
- Re: Do we all have a barrow to push By: peter wilkinson (21/11/2006 - 00:32)
- Do we all have a barrow to push? By: paulhartigan (18/11/2006 - 23:53)
- Re: Do we all have a barrow to push - the final instalment? By: peter wilkinson (21/11/2006 - 20:45)
- Re: Do we all have a barrow to push? By: peter wilkinson (20/11/2006 - 12:37)
- Wright, interpretation and theories of knowledge By: peter wilkinson (18/11/2006 - 16:48)
- stereohindsight By: samlcarr (17/11/2006 - 21:17)
- Facts in history are subjective???? By: paulhartigan (19/11/2006 - 00:01)
- Re: Facts in history are subjective???? By: Chris (20/11/2006 - 01:39)
- Aren't they? By: samlcarr (19/11/2006 - 16:20)
- Facts in history are subjective???? By: paulhartigan (19/11/2006 - 00:01)
Re: The historical Jesus
The problem with this, to my mind, is that this ‘different type of community’ is not merely a future ideal. It has been in existence arguably since Abraham (whatever that means historically), and more importantly claims that its identity and nature were critically changed by events that took place at a certain point in history. It seems to me that as a historical (and no merely ideal) community we are bound to ask: What happened to us? How have we been shaped by that event? If we presuppose historical continuity, it seems rather weak-minded not to face up to questions of historical origins.