- Joined
- Apr 29, 2012
- Messages
- 17,870
- Reaction score
- 8,356
- Location
- On an island. Not that one!
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
There has been a great deal of 'discussion' in this forum (Philosophical) and the other (Religious) about the reliability of the texts found in the book commonly called The Bible. Those who have some background in the academic study of history often refer to the criteria used in the study of secular history: HOW does a scholar determine the authenticity of ancient data? In addition to the solid objects that have come to us from the past - statues, stelae, coins, paintings and other physical bits and pieces of our history - we have texts, papyri and codices, containing the words used in support of modern perceptions of the past.
What are these criteria? The headline for this topic and following quotes come from Vridar.org, a blog which discusses religion and politics
For the True Believer, it is not seen as necessary to examine the texts in the described manner because they 'know' the words are the Truth. However, when the methods commonly used by historians as they seek to pry more reality out of the distant past are laid out in examining the Bible, we end up with more questions than answers.
An example of the real world in a fictional tale is of course to be found in the Harry Potter tales - Harry Potter - Locations in London Simply because a person or place is named in a story does not automatically authentic the whole story.
Why are the theologians unwilling to use the same standards of examination as are seen to be necessary for secular historians when they look at ancient artifacts?
What are these criteria? The headline for this topic and following quotes come from Vridar.org, a blog which discusses religion and politics
A historian needs to establish some fundamental facts about the sources at hand before he or she starts pulling out data from them to make a historical narrative or argument. Let’s take the gospels as one set of sources to be used in investigating the question of Christian origins. What does any historian need to establish about these — or any — sources?
- We need to know when they were written.
- We need to know by whom and why. (“By whom” means more than the name of the person: it refers to where the person is from, to what social or political entity he or she belongs — “Who is this person?” — that is more important than a mere name.)
- We need to know what they are, what sorts of documents they are. Their genre, if you like. This will include knowledge of how they compare with other literature of their day.
- We need to know something about their reception at the time they were written and soon after.
- We need to know something about the world in which they were written — both the political and social history of that world and the wider literary and philosophical cultural world to which they belonged.
- We need to know a little how the documents came into our possession. Through what authorities or channels were they preserved and what sort of manuscript trail did they leave.
For the True Believer, it is not seen as necessary to examine the texts in the described manner because they 'know' the words are the Truth. However, when the methods commonly used by historians as they seek to pry more reality out of the distant past are laid out in examining the Bible, we end up with more questions than answers.
The terms used by historians in dating objects or texts are terminus post quem - point after which the object must originate and terminus ante quem - the latest date which can be assigned to the object/text being studied.The First Step
So for the first point above, the date of the gospels, we can do no better than accept a range of year in which they were written. A combination of internal evidence and the evidence that they were known by others leads us (well, me at least) to a period between 70 CE and the mid second century (possibly known to Justin, certainly to Irenaeus).
The second step
This is the “What is it?” question. Are we reading a letter? A memoir? A biography? A what? What’s a gospel?
<snip>
This is a critical question that needs to be resolved before we can know how to interpret what we are reading.
The third step.
What do we make of what we are reading? Is it a true story? Is it partly true? Based on true persons and events? Obviously our conclusions from the above two steps will have some impact on our answers to these questions.
Narratives, even ancient fictional ones, certainly can and sometimes do involve persons known to have a real historical existence. And probably most ancient fiction is known to contain scenes based on real ethnic groups, geographic areas and cities.
An example of the real world in a fictional tale is of course to be found in the Harry Potter tales - Harry Potter - Locations in London Simply because a person or place is named in a story does not automatically authentic the whole story.
Why are the theologians unwilling to use the same standards of examination as are seen to be necessary for secular historians when they look at ancient artifacts?
Last edited: