Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
12-23-2008, 03:21 PM | #51 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
If Paul doesn't even seem to know what a messiah was, given that he calls Jesus a messiah (despite the fact that Jesus died without achieving the tasks of the messiah and would obviously have been perceived by ordinary Jews if anything as a false messiah), you can understand that there would have been confusion about who believed what at the beginning. But I don't understand this necessary talk of lies: it's very reductive. It's almost down to either someone is telling the whole truth or total fraud. Things are usually a little more complicated. (Well, really, I do understand, but it's pretty useless.) spin |
|
12-23-2008, 05:37 PM | #52 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Quote:
What is so unthinkable about the idea that people shade the truth or otherwise just don't tell you everything? Do we know that Paul is reporting what is in Galatians 1:23, as opposed to a later editor, even assuming that Paul wrote this letter? We know suspiciously little about Paul's alleged career as a prosecutor from his own letters, and the whole story does not make a lot of sense. I do not understand how this subject can be so heated, given the lack of real information. |
|
12-23-2008, 08:21 PM | #53 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
The letter writer called Paul claimed over 500 people saw Jesus after he was resurrected and that he himself saw Jesus , too. Why is that not a lie? You think the horse is dead? It is a lie. |
|
12-23-2008, 09:02 PM | #54 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
12-23-2008, 10:38 PM | #55 | ||||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
Quote:
spin |
||||
12-24-2008, 08:58 AM | #56 | |||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
|
Quote:
Quote:
Do you ever make a claim in this discussion that actually connects to the text? Quote:
Quote:
PAUL NEVER DEFENDS CHRIST CRUCIFIED You want this to be true but there is simply no text to support it no matter how many times you repeat the falsehood. If he doesn't defend such an absurd notion to Jews so concerned about orthodox appearances, it can only be because the absurd notion was accepted by them. PAUL ALWAYS DEFENDS WHAT HE THINKS BELIEF IN CHRIST CRUCIFIED MEANS That is what the texts state no matter how many times you claim otherwise. Quote:
|
|||||
12-25-2008, 05:30 AM | #57 | |||||||||||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
Typically dumb. The people who'd repeated that Paul was now proclaiming what he'd persecuted had never met Paul. Doh! Quote:
Not the best description of yourself I've heard. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps you think if you say it louder you'll make it sound more relevant? Perhaps he and the people in Jerusalem believed in logical positivism as well, as he never defends logical positivism either. Quote:
As has been pointed out to you by others Paul says that although christ crucified was preached to the Galatians they seem to be turning away from that message (3:1). Someone has been turning them away from Paul's message, which includes christ crucified. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
spin |
|||||||||||
12-25-2008, 09:15 AM | #58 | |||||||||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
|
I didn't blunder. Check again. You tried to play pedant and failed.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I've tried repeatedly and with the smallest words possible but you still can't get it right? And you blame your lack of comprehension on me when others have had no problem successfully following? Pathetic. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You can still use it on Ben or Don, though. :rolling: Quote:
This is the mistake you (repeatedly) make when you (repeatedly) ignore the fact that there simply is no evidence for your beliefs about the texts. Quote:
You've got not evidence for your beliefs about the texts. Quote:
Quote:
Christ crucified is the gospel Paul persecuted, then preached. The meaning of Christ crucified is Paul's unique gospel. The meaning of Christ crucified is what is being attacked. The meaning of Christ crucified is what is defended. There is no indication that Christ crucified was ever attacked by Paul's Galatian opponents. Quote:
Quote:
The pieces fit and the story works. You simply cannot say the same. :wave: |
|||||||||||||
12-25-2008, 10:46 AM | #59 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
It resolves the apparent contradiction of Paul claiming to preach the same faith he persecuted and preaching something he obtained from no man but by revelation.Where does Paul claim he preached the same faith? One cannot trust a statement that fullfils what it claims to criticize. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Uh-huh. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What you don't understand is that it wouldn't have any real significance. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If you know the Monty Python sketch about the dead parrot, you have a man who goes into a pet shop to complain that the owner had sold him a dead parrot Mr. Praline: I wish to complain about this parrot what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.Paul wants to talk about the "beautiful plumage". The Jews are only interested in the fact that the parrot is dead. The one thing that is required of a Jew is torah observance. This one thing is negated by Paul. Quote:
Tell me this, why doesn't Paul use the name Jesus in any context that deals with the pillars or anyone else in the letter besides the Galatians and himself? His revelation was of Jesus Christ and it was from Jesus Christ that the Galatians were turning away. So why was the revelation of Jesus Christ? Where? No, what was being defended was Paul's hold on his Galatians through his gospel -- against torah observance. Quote:
Quote:
Dead christs are false christs to your average Jew. However, there is no reason why the Jerusalem group needed to contemplate Paul's theological views, when he wouldn't endorse torah observance. Quote:
Says Amaleq13 chipping the corners off the square peg. Umm, "the same"? See, I can. As I see the data, of course I can say that the pieces fit and the story works. You make a mess out of god's revelation to Paul of Jesus Christ. spin |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
12-25-2008, 07:05 PM | #60 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
|
Where he proudly describes his reputation for doing so.
Quote:
Quote:
I know that, had they offered objections to such a fundamental belief, Paul would have presented a defense. I know that Paul never defends Christ crucified. |
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|