For a thing, reading this act of accusation against crypto-theologians, in my opinion the historicists are crypto-theologians insofar, under the traditional dating of Paul, they assume that Paul placed the life of Jesus under Pilate and not in an undated past.
So only the Pilate/Jesus historicists are legitimately condemnable as crypto-theologians, not all the historicists.
Historicists == crypto-theologians?
Re: Historicists == crypto-theologians?
I read the short article and won't touch that bait with a ten foot pole.
Other than to say, you mean like, all American historians that teach the Declaration of Independence was signed in July 1776 are crypto-historians and condemnable, unlike the truth seeking professor's of the 1619 project?
"We should blame the sowers rather than the seed and the teachers rather than the taught."...Timaeus
Other than to say, you mean like, all American historians that teach the Declaration of Independence was signed in July 1776 are crypto-historians and condemnable, unlike the truth seeking professor's of the 1619 project?
"We should blame the sowers rather than the seed and the teachers rather than the taught."...Timaeus
-
GakuseiDon
- Posts: 2333
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm
Re: Historicists == crypto-theologians?
That's very fair minded of you, Giuseppe!
It's an interesting article. The conclusion is thought-provoking:
Webb nonetheless argues that a critical engagement with history and the historical Jesus is possible even for scholars who allegedly have crypto-(a)theological agendas (although he never uses the term “crypto-theological”). He recommends a “via media” approach, which rests in the middle of two approaches based on opposite ontological worldviews, namely the critical-theistic approach (which is open to divine causation in history) and an ontological naturalist approach (which rules out the possibility of miracles occurring in history).
Splitting out those two approaches, giving them there own peer-reviewed journals: I wonder what the results might be? The author was talking about non-Muslim scholars writing about the life of Mohammed, so I'd think it would result in a splitting into critical-theistic peer-reviewed Christian scholars on Mohammed and critical-theistic peer-reviewed Muslim scholars on Mohammed. It'd be interesting to see how the results would differ.