** you do not have permission to see this link **
this guy apparently a scholar arguing for massively early dates to most nt books
would it not have been more responsible to subject these claims to critique before comibg out with a book the fundies will eat up and annoy people with? Seriously he needs to learn some scholarly manners i feel
Well, it isn’t by Steefen, so that is a good start. Jonathan Bernier does appear to be in the field professionally, and is a published scholar. (I am assuming that this is the Jonathan Bernier who teaches as Regis College in Toronto, and not the hockey player.) I have not read any of his publications, so I cannot judge his general merits; and I have not read this particular book, so it is hard to judge the specific argument. But overall, I would guess that it is not a joke, without actually assigning a value to the work in question. It would seem that he is going much against the broader consensus, so for his sake I hope that he has a good argument.
JAS said
Well, it isn’t by Steefen, so that is a good start. Jonathan Bernier does appear to be in the field professionally, and is a published scholar. (I am assuming that this is the Jonathan Bernier who teaches as Regis College in Toronto, and not the hockey player.) I have not read any of his publications, so I cannot judge his general merits; and I have not read this particular book, so it is hard to judge the specific argument. But overall, I would guess that it is not a joke, without actually assigning a value to the work in question. It would seem that he is going much against the broader consensus, so for his sake I hope that he has a good argument.
In a video podcast he actually claims he thinks most of John is written by a witness
Easily the most moronic thing I’ve heard from any credentialed anybody.
RM said
JAS said
Well, it isn’t by Steefen, so that is a good start. Jonathan Bernier does appear to be in the field professionally, and is a published scholar. (I am assuming that this is the Jonathan Bernier who teaches as Regis College in Toronto, and not the hockey player.) I have not read any of his publications, so I cannot judge his general merits; and I have not read this particular book, so it is hard to judge the specific argument. But overall, I would guess that it is not a joke, without actually assigning a value to the work in question. It would seem that he is going much against the broader consensus, so for his sake I hope that he has a good argument.
In a video podcast he actually claims he thinks most of John is written by a witness
Easily the most moronic thing I’ve heard from any credentialed anybody.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
RM said
He thinks JAMES WAS WRITTEN BY JAMES
He needs to subject himself to some massive and brutal critiques. Seems like a nice well intentioned guy but utterly incompetent. Who actually thinks John is mostly written by an eyewitness or that James is written by James?
Apparently he does . . . but that might make him part of a very small group, if limited to scholars.
JAS said
RM said
He thinks JAMES WAS WRITTEN BY JAMES
He needs to subject himself to some massive and brutal critiques. Seems like a nice well intentioned guy but utterly incompetent. Who actually thinks John is mostly written by an eyewitness or that James is written by James?
Apparently he does . . . but that might make him part of a very small group, if limited to scholars.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
getting torn to pieces by a single article
incredibly shoddy work. I get the feel bernier strongly wants to believe the texts are true
He needs to subject himself to some massive and brutal critiques. Seems like a nice well intentioned guy but utterly incompetent. Who actually thinks John is mostly written by an eyewitness or that James is written by James?
Millions of conservative fundamentalist evangelicals in the US who have heard no different from their pastors. I was raised in a hardcore strain of that community. When I was a teenager it was a true sub-culture barely acknowledged by the “mainstream” media of the time. But now even Hollywood and late-night comedians know fundamentalist End Times mythology. Is it a sign of the fundamental resilience of our society that it can absorb anything? Or are we all slowly going insane? Some faster than others.
I totally love this kind of book. I can’t see myself paying $25 but if I could find a used copy for $5 I would love to read it. Who knows? Maybe he’ll have some interesting points. He will have an uphill climb.
Stephen said
He needs to subject himself to some massive and brutal critiques. Seems like a nice well intentioned guy but utterly incompetent. Who actually thinks John is mostly written by an eyewitness or that James is written by James?Millions of conservative fundamentalist evangelicals in the US who have heard no different from their pastors. I was raised in a hardcore strain of that community. When I was a teenager it was a true sub-culture barely acknowledged by the “mainstream” media of the time. But now even Hollywood and late-night comedians know fundamentalist End Times mythology. Is it a sign of the fundamental resilience of our society that it can absorb anything? Or are we all slowly going insane? Some faster than others.
I totally love this kind of book. I can’t see myself paying $25 but if I could find a used copy for $5 I would love to read it. Who knows? Maybe he’ll have some interesting points. He will have an uphill climb.
Id read the blog, his book is vapid
brenmcg said
RM said
In a video podcast he actually claims he thinks most of John is written by a witness
Easily the most moronic thing I’ve heard from any credentialed anybody.
What’s moronic about it? Why couldn’t most of John be written by an eyewitness?
What eyewitness would that be? Certainly not John, if he was the fisher portrayed in the synoptics.
CEJ said
What eyewitness would that be? Certainly not John, if he was the fisher portrayed in the synoptics.
Why certainly not? He didn’t remain a fisherman – he became one of the pillars of a new religious movement centered in Jerusalem which collected money from cities around the Turkey/Greece. Neither he or his wife had any longer to work for a living outside of preaching the gospel.
“He didn’t remain a fisherman – he became one of the pillars of a new religious movement centered in Jerusalem which collected money from cities around the Turkey/Greece. Neither he or his wife had any longer to work for a living outside of preaching the gospel.”
he used the money to teach him about greek literary devices ? how come his teachers didnt teach him about using first person perspective in his own eyewitness account ? if he did, then bart would not need to ask mike licona “demonstrate from john that john wrote john”
licona replied , “i can’t”
jakejones said
he used the money to teach him about greek literary devices ? how come his teachers didnt teach him about using first person perspective in his own eyewitness account ? if he did, then bart would not need to ask mike licona “demonstrate from john that john wrote john”
licona replied , “i can’t”
The church he was a pillar of had wealthy patrons – he could have learned to read from any of them. Greek literary devices are learned by reading Greek literature.
Whoever wrote the gospel claimed it was written by the beloved disciple. The most likely candidate for the beloved disciple is John.
jakejones said
“Whoever wrote the gospel claimed it was written by the beloved disciple. The most likely candidate for the beloved disciple is John. “how do you know?
Because no one is able to come up with a more likely candidate.
you mean its like reading a washing machine manual and then you can come out with comflex literary features in writing?
No its like reading the gospel of Matthew and then you can come out with something on the same level as it.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)