Though the four gospels have been regarded as canonical since Irenaeus in the 2nd century,[1] Harnack—like earlier German scholars—rejected the Gospel of John as without historical value regarding Jesus' life:
"In particular, the fourth Gospel, which does not emanate or profess to emanate from the apostle John, cannot be taken as an historical authority in the ordinary meaning of the word. The author of it acted with sovereign freedom, transposed events and put them in a strange light, drew up the discourses himself, and illustrated great thoughts by imaginary situations. Although, therefore, his work is not altogether devoid of a real, if scarcely recognisable, traditional element, it can hardly make any claim to be considered an authority for Jesus' history; only little of what he says can be accepted, and that little with caution. On the other hand, it is an authority of the first rank for answering the question, What vivid views of Jesus’ person, what kind of light and warmth, did the Gospel disengage?"[2][3
Harnack denied the possibility of miracles but argued that Jesus may well have performed acts of healing that seemed miraculous: "That the earth in its course stood still; that a she-ass spoke; that a storm was quieted by a word, we do not believe, and we shall never again believe; but that the lame walked, the blind saw, and the deaf heard will not be so summarily dismissed as an illusion."[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_von_Harnack#Theology
ealgeone:
First, you are reading into what you want to read into. Not trying to be flippant here, but I have to point out that I only cited Harnack as a Historian who is well versed in early Church history and as he correctly notes, no Church Father, Church Council, etc. ever denied veneration of relics and honoring dead saints. Second, while I did cite him as a historian, at no time in my post did I ever cite him in the context of theology nor do I share his theology
In summary, one can respect the scholarship of a Patristic Scholar while not agreeing with his theology. This is the context that I linked an article that cited Harnack. He was among the Protestant German Historical Critical scholars in terms of theology. I am well aware of that, nevertheless, that does not mean that his historical analysis of the subject at hand, i.e. veneration of relics and honoring deceased saints was wrong, because it is not.
Good day to you, you, as compared to some of your FR Protestant cohort always post in a respectful manner.