[aruanan]

“I CAN’T THINK of any New Testament scholar who takes [the Gospel accounts of Jesus’s birth] to be historically reliable,” said Fredriksen, a Boston University professor who specializes in early Christianity. “Most believe he was born in Nazareth.”

This guy is hopelessly out of touch with New Testament scholarship. He's still living in the late 19th century. His statement is one of the sure ways that you can spot a theologically liberal Bible scholar--in their minds, anyone who believes differently from them is, by definition, not a scholar; hence, he doesn't know of a single scholar who doesn't believe exactly the way he does.

[JeepInMazar]

Re: your post # 21.

You have stated it exactly. I have seen nothing new in liberal biblical "scholarship". They keep repeating the same silly arguments about Moses not writing the Torah and Daniel not writing Daniel and Isaiah not writing Isaiah, etc.

By the way, the Muslims use the scholarship of the liberals and point out that even "Christians" believe the Bible has been changed.

[RobbyS]

This guy is hopelessly out of touch with New Testament scholarship. It is a she, and she is Jewish, so this is an outsider's view. But it's a dead give away when they quote Crossan and Borg. Crossan is an apostate priest and Borg is the quintesssential liberal. The only things that rings true in this story is the notion that Jesus may have been born among relatives, since Joseph seems to have been a native of Bethlehem.