Come on! Funk's theses at the end of Honest to Jesus include these very
suggestions - see Honest to Jesus, pages - demotion of Jesus so that we
see him as an ordinary Jewish guy with a powerful message, and the
re-appraisal of a canon to include the Gospel of Thomas and other
non-canonical works. I was not being unfair to Funk since I was merely
quoting his works. I'm sure this could be verified by anyone else who has
actually read Honest to Jesus.
I am sorry that my comments have rustled feathers and have sent a personal
noet to Frank. I think this thread must be closed now as it is certainly
way beyond Johannine Literature??? If anyone wants to write privately -
will get me!
New Testament Lecturer and Director of Studies,
Hope Valley, Derbyshire, UK
Tel: +44 1246 582321 x122
Fax: +44 1246 583739
From: Frank Glenn [SMTP:fcg3@...
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 03:05
Subject: RE: [John_Lit] Readiing strategy [was Why ascribed to John?]
At 09:11 AM 10/27/00 +0100, Pete wrote:
>2. Ken's comment about fundamental exegetes - do I understand you
>to mean historical critics here :) - the most fundamentalist of all
>categories of scholars. If you think I (or Jeff Staley, a I understand
>from reading his books) speak from a fundamentalist standpoint then you
>have created me in your own image just as we all create the text in our
>3. I agree completely that historical criticism itself is a reading
>strategy. Unfortunately too few historical critics reflect upon this.
> Instead HC is put across as a science, as that which is beyond
>questioning. The decisions of HC become fact and everything else is
>4. What is the goal of Historical Criticism? To reach the earliest text,
>stratum, tradition, purest truth? Of course for the Jesus Seminar this
>means recreating Jesus and the Jesus tradition in order to allow Funk to
>demote Jesus and request a new canon. Is there not a risk of those of us
>who do HC uncritically of following this line in thousands of other ways -
>recreating Christianity in our image, recreating the text in our own
At the risk of starting a "flame" war, may I suggest that your comments
about "creating text in our own image" and objection to Ken's purported
creation of you in his own image, you have done the same for Funk and the
Seems a little like a double standard to me.
Frank (closely related to your "Frankenstein") ;)
P.S. Don't forget to visit the Hunger Site today and every day.
Every time you do you feed a few hungry people somewhere in the world.
SUBSCRIBE: e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org
UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail email@example.com
PROBLEMS?: e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org