Talk:Christian archaeology

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Mid‑importance

	Bible portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Mid‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East Mid‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Unsourced statement on 'higher-critical scholars'

Support should be given for the following allegation: "German higher-critical scholars in the 18th and 19th centuries questioned historicity of Caiaphas. By the 20th century Jesus myth theory argued he was merely fictional character having no basis in historical fact." Who were these scholars? How influential were they? Baroque Trumpet (talk) 22:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed the literature on this subject, and found no indications that the "mythicists" rejected the historicity of Caiaphas. To the contrary, Thomas Whittaker believed that Caiaphas was the "true founder of Christianity." Georg Brandes, also a mythicist, writes: "And Caiaphas is an historic personality, known and named as such by Flavius Josephus, which cannot be said of Jesus, as the forged passage in the "Antiquities of the Jews" (18:63) long ago has been recognized as such by even the most conservative students" (Jesus: A Myth, 1926, p. 46). Baroque Trumpet (talk) 08:02, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong content for this lemma

This article describes the field of Biblical archaeology, not the field, which is called "Christian archaeology" in scholarly fields. --Korrekturen (talk) 16:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed

A clarification ought to be inserted following the Brandes quotation, but I cannot figure out how to edit the

, The intent is to show that the Josephus passage is an inauthentic addition, not to suggest that the historical Jesus did not exist. Blcasey (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]