Talk:G. A. Wells

Untitled
Does he really go by the full name? Where is he a professor? -- Zoe —Preceding undated comment added 03:13, 27 March 2003‎


 * (google) The answers to your questions are "Yes, although he's also referred to as G. A. Wells" and "University of London", respectively. And the answer to the question you didn't ask is "Emeritus Professor of German", which explains some of the titles in the bibliography but doesn't actually say anything useful about his qualifications on the subject of Jesus.
 * --Paul A —Preceding undated comment added 03:26, 27 March 2003‎

Removed POV and spurious paragraph
I replaced the last paragraph because the a) the subject of the article is not Doherty and b) the name Doherty has not been introduced in the article at all yet. Also, this paragraph is blatently POV. Let's stick with the facts. Well's claims have received little attention and practically no support among historians and theologians. The facts speak for themselves.

"Currently Doherty's arguments have not made a very strong impression on the scholarly consensus and Doherty's position stands in the tradition of historical revisionism. In addition, there are many religiously leaning historians which have been very favourable to the Christian claim of the resurrection, and subsequently do not believe it is plausible that Jesus is a myth (given the cultural conditions, time required for myth formation in the given cultural milieu, etc.).  Scholars who have taken this position include: Thomas Arnold, A. N. Sherwin-White , and Michael Grant.. Wells views, however, have been a major influence on some even more radical proponents of the "Christ is a myth" theory, most notably his former student Earl Doherty." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sciguy.com (talk • contribs) 23:36, 28 August 2005‎

Concerns regarding Professional expertise
Why is a Professor of German language being used by Richard Dawkins as proof of a University professor who disputes the historicity of Jesus? He isn't even a historian? All of the rubbish about the historicity of Jesus should be removed from this page, because it's NOT his area of expertise 114.75.195.134 (talk) 14:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see any mention of Dawkins in the current version of the article. Even though the historicity of Jesus may have been outside Wells' field of academic speciality, he was noted for his books on that topic (whether or not we like them or agree with them), so discussion of them is unavoidable. Muzilon (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)