Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by mlinssen »

Peter Kirby wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 1:57 pm
Olson is described as a "historian and critical sceptic."
Oh! That is rather kind, isn't it? Isn't historian a buddy word used by religious to indicate someone who is a "faithful academic" so to say?

Like religiots like to use the very suggestive phrase "historical records" when they refer to Bible and Church Fathers and such?
Last edited by mlinssen on Thu May 06, 2021 4:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by mlinssen »

Peter Kirby wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 2:04 pm
I will employ this term for those scholars who are overtly anti-fundamentalist, anti-organised religion (sometimes even atheistic in outlook). Their constructed world-view, equally favours their approach although, by default, due to the fact that they have no personal attachment to the topic of their discussion they are more likely to be supremely critical and immediately accepting of any outcome that is backed by hard evidence. Many of these researchers seem to accept the import of embracing a provisional state of understanding and vehemently eschew any form of unsubstantiated dogma.
As an atheist, I consider it naive to believe that atheists in general have "no personal attachment" to the topics under discussion. Unfortunately, humans being what they are, the rare atheist who might be completely disattached is not going to put in enough time to become an expert, so the quality of anything they write on the subject would generally suffer from flaws other than bias.

It's also naive to think that atheists are "immediately accepting of any outcome that is backed by hard evidence." The mountainmen of the world show that they are far from "immediate" in coming to realize that their pet theories are flawed, just like most anyone else. Confirmation bias is a human trait, not just a religious one.

The "import of embracing a provisional state of understanding" is of course held by "many" but not all.

Overall, those who are "overtly anti-fundamentalist, anti-organised religion" tend to just have their own fairly predictable favorite positions. To be able to make these positive claims about how critical these people are, the category would at least have to be further subdivided, between the "liberal"-minded atheists and the more closed-minded, in much the same way that the Christian category has to be subdivided.
Very well worded!

It is a very odd passage that you quote, and I don't know it, nor the book, nor the author (I guess I'm one of those atheists who hasn't put in enough time to become an expert in all topics, oh my) but it seeps through - the thinly veiled hate towards those that don't belong to his club

No emotional attachment? That's a stab.
But tell me now, really: why on earth would one vehemently eschew any form of unsubstantiated dogma

Tsk tsk
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by maryhelena »

It seems that Nicholas Allen is not only interested in Josephus - he is also a professional artist.

His Curriculum Vitae has images of five of his paintings. (scroll to the bottom of page)

https://nwu.academia.edu/NicholasPeterL ... culumVitae


2016 Article.

Allen N.P.L. “Christian Misappropriation in the
Jewish Antiquities
: Josephus Redeemed.”
Journal of Early Christian Studies,
Baltimore, Md: John Hopkins University Press. Underreview

Pity, can't find that article online...
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUUB96c6EpY&t=113s
Giuseppe wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:53 am
More sceptical scholars regularly accuse the more conservative researchers like Kirby of being victims of a so-called “bandwagon” effect. Cf. Doherty, 2008: 49 and Doherty, 2009: 534

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/resou ... sample.pdf

Is he alluding to the authenticity of the Baptist Passage ?
JW:
Must have been during Peter's Catholic period.


Joseph
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by Giuseppe »

JoeWallack wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 5:56 am https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUUB96c6EpY&t=113s
Giuseppe wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:53 am
More sceptical scholars regularly accuse the more conservative researchers like Kirby of being victims of a so-called “bandwagon” effect. Cf. Doherty, 2008: 49 and Doherty, 2009: 534

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/resou ... sample.pdf

Is he alluding to the authenticity of the Baptist Passage ?
JW:
Must have been during Peter's Catholic period.


Joseph
:lol:
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by Irish1975 »

Is Allen's book any good? Even if you don't agree with his judgments and conclusions (who ever does), is it a credible and honest treatment of the non-Christian testimonials?

Wondering if I should bother.
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by maryhelena »

Irish1975 wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 10:30 am Is Allen's book any good? Even if you don't agree with his judgments and conclusions (who ever does), is it a credible and honest treatment of the non-Christian testimonials?

Wondering if I should bother.
Try the PDF of his doctrinal thesis. The new book is based on this.... Link is in 3rd post of this thread... Book expensive so give the PDF a try first.

(not on laptop right now.....)
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8048
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by Peter Kirby »

Bernard Muller wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 6:51 pm to Peter Kirby,
Peter Kirby wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 4:20 pm
Bernard Muller wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 4:14 pm 2) "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others"

For 2): Since "James/Jacob" name was fairly common among Jews, that James again is not identified as a specific individual.
The Greek for "one named James" could have stood here, lightly edited to "whose name was James" when adding the gloss. The specific identity of the individual is not very relevant to the story either way (and was unknown to Roman readers), so it is plausible that there was no attempt to provide more information about the individual who was executed.
"one named James, and some others": then why Josephus would name a James if he did not identify him further? And the phrase put that James prominent as compared "to some [unnamed] others".
The readers would have been wondering about who was that James.

And Josephus lived in Jerusalem when James was executed. He must have known about the identity of that James. Why would he keep that as a secret?
These are possibilities and questions, not convincing arguments.

You seem to be saying that it is a general rule that one would never introduce an incidental character with no more information than a name. I doubt that this is actually a general rule.

Also, the specific claim that "readers would have been wondering about who was that James" seems mostly / probably false. It sounds like it is based on retrojecting our contemporary concerns and anxieties onto first century Roman readership.

The idea of an incidental reference necessarily containing a "secret" is, likewise, an inaccurate description that makes some sense only in the context of our interests, which are foreign to the text.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Peter Kirby,
You seem to be saying that it is a general rule that one would never introduce an incidental character with no more information than a name.
Not any name, just common name then such as James or Jesus or John.

Cordially, Bernard
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8048
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Why is Peter Kirby accused of being a "conservative researcher"?

Post by Peter Kirby »

Bernard Muller wrote: Thu May 06, 2021 3:37 pm to Peter Kirby,
You seem to be saying that it is a general rule that one would never introduce an incidental character with no more information than a name.
Not any name, just common name then such as James or Jesus or John.
Again, you seem to be assuming that Josephus would be attempting to connect the reference to someone the Roman readership would be aware of. But the most natural assumption is that the Roman readership would have no idea who this is. And it's also natural to assume that they wouldn't care either. The story isn't about the one executed at all; it's about the elites who lose power. So there is no need for Josephus to connect the name to someone the Romans know, and there is no need for Josephus to provide a back story either.

An expression like "one named James" or "a certain James" tells the reader that they don't know who it is. It would have been fully intelligble, and the story in book 20 of the Antiquities works without knowing anything more about the people who were executed.
Post Reply