This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Goetz, S. C. Articles by Blomberg, C. L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Burden of Proof

Oriel College Oxford OX1 4EW

Craig L. Blomberg

King's College Aberdeen AB9 2UB

Three main positions on the burden of proof compete for acceptance in current gospel research. The reasons generally given for assuming the burden of proof to be on the person affirming authenticity for any gospel portion cannot withstand close scrutiny. A Kantian argument, as well as analogy from secular historiography, suggest that the burden of proof is rather on the one who would deny authenticity. A mediating position which sees this debate as not profitable is well- intended but unhelpful. The criteria for authenticity and inauthenticity that one uses in detailed tradition-critical exegesis vary in important ways depending on the stance adopted on the burden of proof issue.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?