Alfred Loisy

Posted on by
Posted in bibliographies/biographies, Jesus-skepticism | Tagged , ,

Alfred Firmin Loisy (1857-1940)       “The believer of the past is above all one who confesses, who frequently confesses—who does so more often even than Catholic morality requires to atone for sinfulness. He is a man who practices intellectual obsequiousness, acknowledging what the Church requires by fiat and accepting all that it teaches him without examination, contesting neither the sense nor the logic of what he believes and considering himself a minion who learns from the Church all that he needs regarding the great subjects touching upon his existence—what he must do in order to be a good person and (above all) what he must accomplish to be a good Christian. His activity is thus ultimately regulated by an exterior authority … Continue reading →

Ernest Renan

Posted on by
Posted in bibliographies/biographies, Jesus-skepticism | Tagged

Historian, philologist, Semitic scholar, and critic, Ernest Renan was considered one of France’s foremost thinkers during the later years of the Second Empire. Born in Brittany, he began studies for the priesthood and became an accomplished Hebraic scholar. Renan’s work on sacred texts, however, presented him with grave doubts concerning the divine inspiration of the Bible and revealed religion in general. In 1845 he gave up his ideas of becoming a priest and devoted himself to the new religion of science. His conviction that the future of the world rested in science is expressed in l’Avenir de la Science (English: The Future of Science), written around 1848 though not published until 1890. Renan never lost his idealism nor abandoned the … Continue reading →

The French school of biblical rationalism

Posted on by
Posted in bibliographies/biographies, Jesus-skepticism, mythicism | Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

NOTE: For those who read French, an extensive website dealing principally with European Jesus mythicism can be found here.—R.S. Charles-François Dupuis (1742-1809) Constantin-François Volney (1757-1820) * Ernest Renan (1823-1892 Arthur Heulhard (1849-1920) * Alfred Loisy (1857-1940) Salomon Reinach (1858-1932) * Joseph Turmel (1859-1943) Salomon Reinach (1858-1932) Éduard Dujardin (1861-1949) * Charles Guignebert (1867-1939) Daniel Massé (1872- ?) André Ragot (1874-1971) E. Moutier-Rousset (?-?) * Prosper Alfaric (1876-1955) * Paul-Louis Couchoud (1879-1959) * Georges Ory (1897-1983) Guy Fau (?-?) Georges Las Vergnas (1911-?) Charles-François Dupuis (1742-1809) Man of letters, scientist and politician. Born in the Oise region, Dupuis was the son of a school teacher of modest means. His talents were precocious, particularly in geometry, which brought the lad to the attention of the Duc de la Rochefoucauld. … Continue reading →

B. Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus”

Posted on by
Posted in Book reviews, contemporary commentary, Salm | Tagged , ,

A critique of Bart D. Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (HarperOne 2005) Chapter Six: “Theologically Motivated Alterations of the Text” by René Salm Even the avid reader will have a hard time keeping up with Bart D. Ehrman. By my count he’s written twenty-three books and his next, “Did Jesus Exist?” (of particular interest to Jesus mythicists) appears this March. Yet, I have heard it declared that Ehrman has not written many books but has written one book many times. Perhaps I can be excused then for not having read all of his oeuvre, and for critiquing but one chapter of this book, with the modest hope that what I have to say … Continue reading →

A short response to B. Ehrman’s Did Jesus Exist?

Posted on by
Posted in contemporary commentary, Salm | Tagged ,

By René Salm Some people have asked me why I have not offered a response to Bart Ehrman’s Did Jesus Exist? My reply—a full (and probably long) chapter—will appear in the forthcoming book (edited by Frank Zindler) from American Atheist Press. In the deluge of responses to Ehrman (here), I felt it unnecessary to add a prompt rejoinder as so much of value has been supplied virtually on a daily basis. The following several paragraphs will perhaps suffice for now. To my knowledge, no one has specifically countered Ehrman regarding his pages 191–97, which deal with the existence of Nazareth at the turn of the era. I can say here that Ehrman is evasive, tendentious, and entirely wrong. He is … Continue reading →

Mythicists, docetists, Nazoreans (Salm)

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, Gnosticism, John the Baptist, mythicism, Nazarene, Salm, Samaritans | Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

The present confrontation between Jesus mythicists and the tradition may seem new to some. Others may suppose that it dates as far back as the eighteenth century, when scholars began to question the historicity of Jesus. However, I suggest in this statement that mythicism is a modern name for ancient docetism—Christianity’s “twin” born along with the religion itself. In his Panarion (29.6.1) Epiphanius writes of a sect of “Nasarenes” whom he denominates as heretics. He writes that “the Nasarene sect was before Christ and did not know Christ.” The Church Father carefully distinguishes these Nasarenes (with sigma) from later “Nazoreans” (with zeta) whom he accepts as “Christians.” Other indications also exist of a pre-Christian movement somehow attached to the Greek … Continue reading →

The Acts of Mark: What is the date of this text?

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins | Tagged

Specialists often assign a date to a text: “This is a fifth century text”, “…dates to the latter part of the second century,” and so on. Subsequently, historians look for contemporaneity and construct histories based largely on such datings. But what do such datings mean? I would suggest that in a great many cases they have little applicability and, moreover, are often misleading. The problem is that many ancient texts are products of accretion and change over a great length of time. This is especially the case with the Christian writings of late antiquity. So often, the date given to a text reflects the time of its last major edition. This is the case with the Acts of Mark (AM), … Continue reading →

The Acts of Mark: Introduction

Posted on by
Posted in bibliographies/biographies, Christian origins, Salm | Tagged

By René Salm This remarkable text challenges the orthodox understanding of the apostle Mark, and also of Christian origins. Among other curiosities, Mark is a disciple of John the Baptist, and he is a Levite. Though the Greek text has been in the public domain since publication in 1969 (Analecta Bollandiana 87, pp. 346-71), it has yet to be translated into any modern language and languishes in obscurity. Such is the ability of scholarship to shun that which it steadfastly refuses to acknowledge! Nevertheless, this text contains clues to a very different history of Christian origins… What set me on the search for the text of the Acts of Mark, some years ago, was a note by A. De Santos … Continue reading →

The Acts of Mark: Summary

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins | Tagged

Deeds and Miracles and Testimony of the Holy and All-praiseworthy Apostle and Evangelist Mark From the codex Athonensi stauronicetae 18, s. xiii., f. 175v–189 [Note: The following headings, as supplied by F. Halkin (in French), accompany the published Greek edition of 1969 in Analecta Bollandiana 87:346-371.–RS] 1. Prologue. 2. Mark’s youth; his knowledge of scripture. 3. His Generosity; his other virtues. 4. He Is baptized by St. Peter; his mother receives Jesus the miracle worker. 5. A disciple of John the Baptist, and then of Jesus; Mark received St. Peter freed from prison. 6. The last supper at the house of Mark. His sermon at Antioch and elsewhere. 7. He evangelizes Cyprus, where St. Paul had converted the proconsul Sergius. … Continue reading →

Samaria: The Messiah’s Homeland (Ory) Pt. 6

Posted on by
Posted in Christian origins, Dositheus, John the Baptist, Josephus, Ory, Samaritans | Tagged , ,

by Georges Ory Cahiers du Cercle Ernest Renan, no. 11 (1956) Edited and translated from the French by R. Salm (April, 2012) Note: Bracketed editorial additions are in green and signed “R.S.” Followed by a concluding note A little further on in the same book, Josephus recounts the victory of Aretas (Ant. XVIII.5.1). After giving certain details, he writes (§2): “Some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment for what he did against John…” Now, until this passage John had not yet been mentioned by Josephus who, we recall, had also not named the Samaritain messiah (for whom he certainly had no admiration). Immediate thereafter, §2 continues … Continue reading →