[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Criteria
In point of fact, I really quite agree with Professor Sennett in this matter,
which is why I added my peculiar phrasing, "if one must say anything of this
sort at all..." I meant that it is up to the "Church"--if the "Church" can or
could come to an agreement over this sort of thing, to make determinations of
what is the canon of the NT, but even to determine the "authentic" text in
terms of the best procedures of textual criticism, is free from theological
bias or should be, and in principle should be no different from establishing
the authentic text of Homer or Vergil. Likewise, I would affirm again that
it seems to me that the Jesus Seminar is engaging in a properly historical
task. There may and indeed certainly are believers who would decide questions
about the historical Jesus on theological grounds, but their interest in the
historical Jesus is not a scholarly one at all, much less a historical one. I
would have thought that the concerns of this list are, in fact, text- and
history-related rather than theological.
CARL W. CONRAD, C25001CC@WUVMD.BITNET OR C25001CC@WUVMD.WUSTL.EDU
Classics, Washington University, One Brookings Dr., St. Louis, MO 63130
Phone: (314) 935-4018