Robert Myles has yet another fantastic blog post, this time examining the entirely conventional rhetoric of subversion in historical Jesus studies.

This is good food for thought as I write about the conventionality of scholarly work on the question of taxation in the Gospel of Mark.  If these scholars’ Jesus were really so radical, why are they getting published by traditional media and the consumers of these books continue their lives with no difference except feeling somewhat better about themselves?  Has N.T. Wright’s work ever figured even vaguely into a political demonstration?