An Introduction to David Trobisch

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
toejam
Posts: 744
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by toejam » Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:28 pm

maryhelena wrote:
toejam wrote:And Trobisch responded once more, this time answering the question:

"There is little doubt in my mind that the wealth of Jesus traditions originated with a historical person. But historical facts do not carry meaning. They can be interpreted in many different ways.
Keep asking short questions.
David"


So there you go... Trobisch thinks there was a historical Jesus, but is hesitant in saying what kind of historical Jesus he was.
Ah - but a 'historical person' does not necessary mean someone going by the name of 'Jesus'. i.e. Jesus could simply be the 'meaning' that has been ascribed to a historical person.
Oh FFS. You don't seem to be able to resist trying to drag every thread in the direction of your pet theory. Try just letting it go now and then. I think it's pretty obvious in the context of the correspondence with Trobisch that when he says "There is little doubt in my mind that the wealth of Jesus traditions originated with a historical person" he's talking about some sort of stock historical Jesus - a 1stC Jewish cult leader who was executed from whom the traditions emerged - but he's hesitant in saying more.
My study list: https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-bignell/judeo-christian-origins-bibliography/851830651507208

maryhelena
Posts: 1578
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by maryhelena » Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:22 pm

toejam wrote:
maryhelena wrote:
toejam wrote:And Trobisch responded once more, this time answering the question:

"There is little doubt in my mind that the wealth of Jesus traditions originated with a historical person. But historical facts do not carry meaning. They can be interpreted in many different ways.
Keep asking short questions.
David"


So there you go... Trobisch thinks there was a historical Jesus, but is hesitant in saying what kind of historical Jesus he was.
Ah - but a 'historical person' does not necessary mean someone going by the name of 'Jesus'. i.e. Jesus could simply be the 'meaning' that has been ascribed to a historical person.
Oh FFS. You don't seem to be able to resist trying to drag every thread in the direction of your pet theory. Try just letting it go now and then. I think it's pretty obvious in the context of the correspondence with Trobisch that when he says "There is little doubt in my mind that the wealth of Jesus traditions originated with a historical person" he's talking about some sort of stock historical Jesus - a 1stC Jewish cult leader who was executed from whom the traditions emerged - but he's hesitant in saying more.
I don't happen to think the Trobisch statement is as clear cut as you maintain it is....his wording leaves open options both for interpreting his words - and his own options. Indeed, Trobisch, re his statement, is indeed hesitant to commit himself to an outright statement that Jesus is a historical figure. Perhaps you could seek clarification with a simple question: i.e. Do you, Trobisch, believe in a historical Jesus? Or this one: Would you, Trobisch, be happy to be know as a Jesus historicist?

As to my 'pet theory' - fundamentally no different to any ahistoricist/mythicist: There was no historical Jesus. There was no historical Jesus crucified by Pontius Pilate.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5296
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by Peter Kirby » Fri Apr 01, 2016 11:40 pm

toejam wrote:
maryhelena wrote:
toejam wrote:And Trobisch responded once more, this time answering the question:

"There is little doubt in my mind that the wealth of Jesus traditions originated with a historical person. But historical facts do not carry meaning. They can be interpreted in many different ways.
Keep asking short questions.
David"


So there you go... Trobisch thinks there was a historical Jesus, but is hesitant in saying what kind of historical Jesus he was.
Ah - but a 'historical person' does not necessary mean someone going by the name of 'Jesus'. i.e. Jesus could simply be the 'meaning' that has been ascribed to a historical person.
Oh FFS. You don't seem to be able to resist trying to drag every thread in the direction of your pet theory. Try just letting it go now and then. I think it's pretty obvious in the context of the correspondence with Trobisch that when he says "There is little doubt in my mind that the wealth of Jesus traditions originated with a historical person" he's talking about some sort of stock historical Jesus - a 1stC Jewish cult leader who was executed from whom the traditions emerged - but he's hesitant in saying more.
Interpretation in general isn't easy and rarely certain, but it looks that way to me also.

Also, further followup has the characteristics of a witch hunt or tiresome pedant. ("Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Historical Jesus party?")
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
toejam
Posts: 744
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by toejam » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:43 am

^Ha. Yes. I felt that way too when I sent the follow up. But I felt a little cheated by the first response. Don't like getting a deliberate dodge from what was a fairly straight forward question. Having read some of his work, I respect Trobisch immensely. It wouldn't have bothered me either way.
My study list: https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-bignell/judeo-christian-origins-bibliography/851830651507208

User avatar
toejam
Posts: 744
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by toejam » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:49 am

maryhelena wrote:Perhaps you could seek clarification with a simple question: i.e. Do you, Trobisch, believe in a historical Jesus?
That's what I asked him the first time around. I asked what his *suspicion* was, where he leaned on the historical Jesus question, specifying that I wasn't asking what he could demonstrate or profess to know - but basically whether he thought Jesus was an Apocalyptic Prophet (ala Ehrman, Dale Allison, Fredriksen, etc.), or a Wisdom Sage (Crossan, Borg, etc.), or a Revolutionary (Reimarus, Brandon, etc.), or that he may not have existed (Price, Carrier, etc.), or some combination or something else...
Last edited by toejam on Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
My study list: https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-bignell/judeo-christian-origins-bibliography/851830651507208

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5296
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by Peter Kirby » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:49 am

toejam wrote:^Ha. Yes. I felt that way too when I sent the follow up. But I felt a little cheated by the first response. Don't like getting a deliberate dodge from what was a fairly straight forward question. Having read some of his work, I respect Trobisch immensely. It wouldn't have bothered me either way.
By "further followup," I mean another question asking for more clarification at this point.

And, yeah, Trobisch seems like an okay guy. Good on him for finding a way to get paid to do what he enjoys.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
toejam
Posts: 744
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by toejam » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:52 am

^Oh, I see. I thought about a further follow up, but the 'witchhunt' would definitely be on at that point! The second response was satisfactory, if still a little curiously whetting.
My study list: https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-bignell/judeo-christian-origins-bibliography/851830651507208

maryhelena
Posts: 1578
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by maryhelena » Sat Apr 02, 2016 2:11 am

toejam wrote:
maryhelena wrote:Perhaps you could seek clarification with a simple question: i.e. Do you, Trobisch, believe in a historical Jesus?
That's what I asked him the first time around. I asked what his *suspicion* was, where he leaned on the historical Jesus question, specifying that I wasn't asking what he could demonstrate or profess to know - but basically whether he thought Jesus was an Apocalyptic Prophet (ala Ehrman, Dale Allison, Fredriksen, etc.), or a Wisdom Sage (Crossan, Borg, etc.), or a Revolutionary (Reimarus, Brandon, etc.), or that he may not have existed (Price, Carrier, etc.), or some combination or something else...
OK - I like that approach, asking for his *suspicion*....I would imagine that a lot of scholars are becoming suspicious re the historicist question - in that they know full well the shaky ground on which the assumption lies. However, coming 'out' can have consequences many will not want to face. Thomas Brodie only came 'out' at the very end of his career. Not, of course, suggesting timidity on the part of scholars who have suspicions. Some of us will man the barricades a moment after a Damascus enlightenment. Others will chew over the issues as a dog does with a bone. Certainty is not to be had however.......and sometimes a leap into the dark, into the unknown, is the way forward....
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

Steven Avery
Posts: 493
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

David Trobisch and Codex Sinaiticus

Post by Steven Avery » Sat Apr 02, 2016 5:08 am

Stephan Huller brought up Sinaiticus questions to David Trobisch earlier. Apparently David is skeptical about the usually accepted fourth century date, thinking it was a century or two later. (In the 1800s this was a common position.) Yet afaik had never put that into any public writings. Maybe he could go on the record? And give any reasons, conjectures or thoughts. That would be really neat.

Or is any questioning too problematic for scholars involved in the literature that is largely connected to the British Library and their access? Hmm.... ;)
Here is the most recent pub:

Codex Sinaiticus: New Perspectives on the Ancient Biblical Manuscript (2015)
Codex Sinaiticus and the Formation of the Christian Bible - David Trobisch
http://g.christianbook.com/g/pdf/hp/978 ... 7-ch01.pdf

The article itself (not online) from David is good, while a bit milquetoast, it has small parts on nomina sacra, book order and such.

Also David Trobisch had not really considered any possibility of Sinaiticus being a modern production, and had basically passed on that question, when asked by Stephan.

Now, with the physical condition of the manuscript being available ( http://www.sinaiticus.net ) in new ways like composite pictures, and it being easy to see that the St. Petersburg pages were coloured by 1859-1862 (while the earlier heist, the 1844 Leipzig pages, remained "snow-white" parchment, both are "exceptional" in condition) .. maybe he would revisit this question?

Thanks!

========================================================

"White sheep or calves and goats will tend to produce white parchment, whereas animals with darker coats will produce parchment showing shadowy brown patterns. ... The colour of parchment varies with animal type, making process and condition or state of decline. New parchment can be near white but as it ages or is exposed to detrimental factors it will start to yellow and go brown-black if left to degrade completely. The colour change can also be influenced by the type of degradation and degree of gelatinization. (see fig. 14)"

Parchment Assessment of the Codex Sinaiticus Gavin Moorhead - May 2009
http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/project/c ... hment.aspx

After 1650 supposed years, with 1,000 years of conjectured heavy use in multiple locations, the 1844 Leipzig Germany "CFA" Codex Friderico-Augustanus pages are still nice and white.

When will they ever turn?
When will they ever learn?

========================================================

Here is a picture of David Parker handing over the smoothed color facsimile to the SBL:
http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/ac ... imile.aspx

Did anybody care that they yellowed the Leipzig pages to even things out in the "color facsimile"?

Are the academic and textual scholars today truly independent, or is there a bit of a club? Where you don't rock the boat.

========================================================

Steven Avery
Dutchess County, NY

Irish1975
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: An Introduction to David Trobisch

Post by Irish1975 » Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:39 pm

On what grounds does Trobisch argue that Marcion's gospel is earlier than Mark's?
"Jesus tricked everyone" ~the gospel of Philip

Post Reply