Michael Baigent's "Jesus Papers"

Even people who like what Baigent has to say are criticizing him over at Amazon.com for this one, which is just a more personalized version of his Holy Blood, Holy Grail material. It's filled with errors in scholarship in plenty (notably, dating the Zealots far too early, and other errors associated with the trial and crucifixion of Jesus) and also shows that Baigent depends heavily on secret meetings and lost doucments conveniently outside scrutiny by peer reviewed scholarship.

He appeals to the story of Abbe Sauniere, who was discredit in The Da Vinci Hoax as a credible source. (See comments here.) He makes the Dead Sea Scrolls into Zealot documents [36]. He makes original Christianity into a politically correct movement that was ruined by the intolerant [70]. There is the standard c ommentary about the canon [78] and the claim that the Council of Nicea deified Jesus [101 -- it didn't; both sides there agreed he was divine, they disagreed on whether he was eternal or not].

It goes on. Jesus was married. Use of 1 Cor. 14:34-5 to show that Paul hated women [109]. Baigent asks why a "good Jew" [110] would want to found a "church" (Matt. 16:18), never mind that the word used means an assembly of people like a synagogue would be too (Baigent seems to think the word means a typical eg Southern Baptist church complete with choir loft and bells).

Jesus survived the crucifixion. Soma vs. ptoma. Jesus went to Egypt. Secret Gospel of Mark (Stephen Carlson has shown that that one was forged). Bibliography with Koester and Pagels but no Witherington or Wright.

You know it's bad when even the ideological friends say this was a moneymaking exercise, and the poor scholarship and use of arguments that have been answered and outdated for years just adds to reasons to give this one a pass.

-JPH