There have been some incredibly substantive posts around the blogosphere over the past couple of days. In the domain of New Testament: Loren Rosson has an extensive overview and review of John P. Meier’s latest volume on the historical Jesus. Michael Barber considered the historicity of the temple incident. Mike Koke asked about pseudonymous works in the canon. David Ker wrestled with the relationship between history and hagiography. Unorthodoxology reviewed Ehrman’s Jesus, Interrupted.
Anumma asks whether it is worth scholars’ efforts to debunk claims like those made in Angels and Demons, and offers these words of wisdom: “Sadly, it turns out that a decade of graduate work in philological-linguistic biblical studies does not an able marketing executive or a sexy talking head make.” Gypsy Scholar looks at Samson as suicide bomber.
On religion and science, Michael Dowd explains why those who debate God’s existence misunderstand the meaning of “God”. Clashing Culture asks why there is no controversy over “theistic embryology”. John Pieret also has some things to say about embryology and creationism.
And yet, if you look at the recent list of the awesomest blogs by the smartest people, most of the aforementioned discussion is not even noticed…