Subject: Re: Andrew Welburn's scholarship
From: Jeffrey B. Gibson (jgibson000@comcast.net)
Date: Sat Sep 25 2004 - 16:10:32 EDT
Dierk van den Berg wrote: > As a Jew I dont like talk about Steiner's already light-brown Voelkische > German Romantik and the Antroposophy. > Is that understandable enough for you, Sir ??? It's clear that you don't like Steiner. I'm not a fan either. And it explains why you haven't read Welburn. But it's still not a straight answer to the question of whether you've actually read Welburn's _Beginnings_. The answer is either yes or no. > But I think that you don't want a review - you want a discourse. No, I want a review -- as my original question shows. From what I've gathered about Welburn's book, it looks as if it is a rehash of outdated Religionsgeshichte schule arguments about the origins of Christianity read through the spectacles of Steiner's anthroposophy. > Nice try. > Try this on a more right-orientated esoteric list, pls > > And I have all three - Wilburn, Bultmann and Bergmeier. And, of course, the > stuff I got from BT That you *have* them is no indication that you have read them. > For sure here are more that have these books - ask yourself why nobody is > willing to charge obsolete material with obscure roots. OK. I'll ask myself that, even thought it is not plain that the question is in any way relevant to the specific questions I've been asking about Welburn's acquaintance with, say, current Mithraic scholarship and his use of late traditions as evidence for his reconstruction of the matrix of Christianity. Jeffrey -- Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.) 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1 Chicago, IL 60626 jgibson000@comcast.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Sep 30 2004 - 23:50:10 EDT