Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

The crosstalk challenge

Expand Messages
  • Philip B. Lewis
    Crosstalk s major domo e-mailed me again the instructions as to how to become a crosstalker. And I noticed that the PURPOSE of the e-mail opportunity was
    Message 1 of 36 , Sep 1, 1998
      Crosstalk's major domo e-mailed me again the instructions as to how to
      become a crosstalker. And I noticed that the PURPOSE of the e-mail
      opportunity was stated as:

      "This list server offers anyone with an e-mail address the opportunity to
      discuss the JESUS 2000 e-mail debate that is taking place between Marcus
      Borg, John Dominic Crossan, and Luke Timothy Johnson. (Who were) discussing
      their views about the historical Jesus in a free electronic forum sponsored
      by Harper San Francisco."

      The point: So the year 2,000 is steadily nearing. We've talked a lot about
      a number of things, synoptics, John, Paul, Thomas, etc. Does ANYONE feel
      capable of summarizing briefly the major conclusions crosstalkers may be
      said to have reached about the Historical Jesus?

      Philip
      -phil@...

      "Liberal" is not a dirty word;
      it is a state of grace.
    • Stephen C. Carlson
      ... I guess I must quibble with the Jesus Seminar rather than you. It is a bit of a pet peeve of mine for legal terminology to be misused, and the phrase
      Message 36 of 36 , Sep 7, 1998
        At 10:30 AM 9/5/98 -0400, Mahlon H. Smith wrote:
        >You read me right, Stephen. I was using a quick shorthand for the
        >definitions of my interpretation of the RPGB voting scale which the JS
        >adopted for Acts of Jesus:
        >
        >Red: "The historical reliability of this information is virtually
        >certain. It is supported by a preponderance of evidence." [History being
        >a science that depends on human interpretation of facts has nothing that
        >is "beyond doubt."]

        I guess I must quibble with the Jesus Seminar rather than you. It is a
        bit of a pet peeve of mine for legal terminology to be misused, and the
        phrase "preponderance of the evidence", the legal burden of proof in
        most civil cases, is one such phrase. Preponderance of the evidence does
        not mean "virtually certain", but merely that a plantiff only needs a
        51-49 split. In other words, the pros outweigh the cons.

        >Pink: "This information is probably reliable. It fits well with other
        >evidence that is verifiable." [This shows a shade less conviction in the
        >thesis, but still indicates a preference for accepting it when weighed
        >against alternatives.]

        This, I would call "preponderance of the evidence."

        Stephen Carlson
        --
        Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
        Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
        "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.