Re: Galilean (as in Galileo, not Galilee!) method.
- Jack Kilmon wrote:
>An absolutely correct assessment.
> I don't think any member of the JS would claim that all the criteria
> used were foolproof or that certain genuinely Yeshuine sayings did not
> fall through
> and certain non-Yeshuine sayings made the grade.
> I don't think thePrecisely! The JS never represented its work as the final word on
> finished product as represented by 5G should be considered final and
> debate can continue by other scholars on the various "colors." The
> point is a groundwork has been laid where before there was only
anything. It is always presented it as a capsule summary of collegial
reasoning & judgment at a particular moment in time. We reconsidered &
altered some votes. And if we had the time, money & stamina to do the
whole thing over I dare say that many more of our earlier decisions
would come out somewhat differently. But we grow old & will be content
if we have involved more people (both scholars & laypersons) in
well-informed historical assessment of the Jesus tradition.
Mahlon H. Smith,
Department of Religion
New Brunswick NJ