I've delayed launching this discussion due to a limitation in my own brain. I'm not exactly sure where to start. As I turned it around inside my noggin, the thing that has become clear is a need to settle a philosophical question before we turn to the historical questions.
Many who reject the gospels do so for reasons that have to do with texts and history and bias and the process involved. But there's a separate issue that precedes this discussion. Many who reject the gospels as history do so for a reason that has nothing to do with history. Their objection is philosophical. They reject the possibility of the supernatural and miraculous. This a priori assumption, when present, makes a discussion about texts, authorship, dating, etc a big waste of time. For those who reject the miraculous, the gospels are rejected as history because miracles don't happen in history. Babies can't be born to virgins. People blind from birth don't suddenly start seeing. The dead don't rise.
Now I'm not asking at this point whether or not you believe the particular miracles in the gospels happened. I'm asking in general terms if you believe miracles happen? Do we live in a closed system of uniform natural causes? Or, do we live in a somewhat open system where supernatural cause is possible? Probable?
I need to know your current position on that question before I can know where to start.
Congrats on quitting smoking. I'm proud of you bro.
Alan
Alright man, I know you're snowed in... so get to writing! (Surely you're not busy, what with the wife, three kids, and a congregation to care for!) ;)
ReplyDeleteJ
Ok...just posted something introductory.
ReplyDelete