FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-30-2013, 05:21 AM   #11
jgreen44
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: About 120 miles away from aa5874
Posts: 268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar View Post
Paul's Jesus lived a human 'in the flesh' (Ro 8:3) life on earth before ascending into heaven.
I take it then that you view the contradiction I pointed out as just more Pauline double-talk.
jgreen44 is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 05:24 AM   #12
jgreen44
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: About 120 miles away from aa5874
Posts: 268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
For a thousand years Christianity accepted the Classic Form of Atonement, that Jesus Christ was crucified as a ransom to Satan to end Satan's dominion over Planet Earth. Anselm came up with a new theory in the 11th Century.
Are there any Bible verses that indicate Jesus was given to Satan?
jgreen44 is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 05:27 AM   #13
jgreen44
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: About 120 miles away from aa5874
Posts: 268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
... and before that it was a ransom from the Creator (Yahweh) to the Good God (Elohim).
By offering sacrifices, the ancient Jews were also paying off Yahweh not to smite them. No?
jgreen44 is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 05:39 AM   #14
jgreen44
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: About 120 miles away from aa5874
Posts: 268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Please provide the actual evidence from antiquity which shows that Paul argued that his Jesus never seemed to have spent any time on earth.
Perhaps Paul did not feel obliged to argue against non-existent ideas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
1. The author of Acts mentioned Paul and claimed Jesus was on earth before he ascended..
I learned from you that Acts is very late.

The following statement by John Chrysostom contradicts the belief that Acts of the Apostles was included in the NT canon as long ago as the 2nd century.

In the 2nd century, Irenaeus, we are told, appears to have written about Acts. Yet 200 years later John Chrysostom states that people hardly knew of the existence of the book of Acts and hardly knew its author.

Examine the words of John Chrysostom.

Homilies1 of Acts

"To many persons this Book is so little known, both it and its author, that they are not even aware that there is such a book in existence.

For this reason especially I have taken this narrative for my subject, that I may draw to it such as do not know it, and not let such a treasure as this remain hidden out of sight....."

At the end of the 4th century the Book of Acts, a book which supposedly had been included in the canon of the New Testament for 200 years, was "so little known" that it was "hidden and out of sight"? At the end of the 4th century the author of Acts, Luke, the author of the Gospel of Luke, was "so little known" that many people were "not even aware" that he or his writings existed?

As such Acts is propaganda designed to support the relatively late notion that Jesus was a Judean carpenter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
. Ignatius mentioned the Pauline writer and claimed Jesus was on earth but born of a ghost.

3. Irenaeus mentioned the Pauline Corpus and claimed Jesus was on earth but born of a ghost .

4. Tertullian mentioned the Entire Pauline Corpus and argued that Jesus was born of a Ghost and was still crucified under Pilate.

5. Clement of Alexander mentioned the Pauline Corpus and claimed Jesus was on earth.

6. Hippolytus mentioned Paul and claimed Jesus the Logos was on earth.

7.Origen mentioned the Pauline Corpus and claimed Jesus was on earth but born of a Ghost.

8. Eusebius mentioned Paul and the Pauline Corpus but still claimed Jesus, born of a Ghost, was on earth.
These are all much later than Paul. How would Paul argue against these people?
jgreen44 is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:03 AM   #15
aa5874
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Please provide the actual evidence from antiquity which shows that Paul argued that his Jesus never seemed to have spent any time on earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgreen44
Perhaps Paul did not feel obliged to argue against non-existent ideas?
You have asked a question when you should be presenting the data for your claims.

Are you aware that Paul claimed he persecuted the Churches of Christ?

Paul implied that he was not only arguing but destroying the Church.

Galatians 1:13 KJV
Quote:
For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it..
The Christ of the Churches MUST predate Paul's Christ.

Essentially Paul's Christ is the Later Christ.

Galatians 1
Quote:
21Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;22And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
1. The author of Acts mentioned Paul and claimed Jesus was on earth before he ascended..
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgreen44
I learned from you that Acts is very late.
You were also taught that the Pauline letters were unknown to the author of Acts. You did not learn all that I taught.

Please, read Acts again.

The Pauline letters were composed After Acts of the Apostles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgreen44
The following statement by John Chrysostom contradicts the belief that Acts of the Apostles was included in the NT canon as long ago as the 2nd century.

In the 2nd century, Irenaeus, we are told, appears to have written about Acts. Yet 200 years later John Chrysostom states that people hardly knew of the existence of the book of Acts and hardly knew its author.

Examine the words of John Chrysostom.

Homilies1 of Acts

"To many persons this Book is so little known, both it and its author, that they are not even aware that there is such a book in existence.

For this reason especially I have taken this narrative for my subject, that I may draw to it such as do not know it, and not let such a treasure as this remain hidden out of sight....."

At the end of the 4th century the Book of Acts, a book which supposedly had been included in the canon of the New Testament for 200 years, was "so little known" that it was "hidden and out of sight"? At the end of the 4th century the author of Acts, Luke, the author of the Gospel of Luke, was "so little known" that many people were "not even aware" that he or his writings existed?

As such Acts is propaganda designed to support the relatively late notion that Jesus was a Judean carpenter.
Acts of the Apostles does not state anywhere at all that Jesus was a Judean carpenter.

Acts of the Apostles is a product of fiction with the invented Activities of the Apostles including Paul. In fact, the character called Saul/Paul is mentioned more than Jesus or Peter and the author dedicated 13 chapters alone for Paul.

By the way, up to the mid 3rd century it was NOT taught that Jesus was a carpenter.

Origen's Against Celsus
Quote:
....... in none of the Gospels current in the Churches is Jesus Himself ever described as being a carpenter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
. Ignatius mentioned the Pauline writer and claimed Jesus was on earth but born of a ghost.

3. Irenaeus mentioned the Pauline Corpus and claimed Jesus was on earth but born of a ghost .

4. Tertullian mentioned the Entire Pauline Corpus and argued that Jesus was born of a Ghost and was still crucified under Pilate.

5. Clement of Alexander mentioned the Pauline Corpus and claimed Jesus was on earth.

6. Hippolytus mentioned Paul and claimed Jesus the Logos was on earth.

7.Origen mentioned the Pauline Corpus and claimed Jesus was on earth but born of a Ghost.

8. Eusebius mentioned Paul and the Pauline Corpus but still claimed Jesus, born of a Ghost, was on earth.

Quote:
These are all much later than Paul. How would Paul argue against these people?
You must present the evidence for your claims based on the rules of the forum.

It is already known that your claims about the Pauline Corpus are wholly unsubstantiated--completely speculative yet you repeat them.

Even in the Canon of the Church there is NO statement whatsoever that the Pauline letters were composed before Acts of the Apostles.

The abundance of evidence from antiquity support Late Pauline letters.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:09 AM   #16
Chili
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgreen44 View Post
I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; 24 but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body. (Philippians 1:23-24)

So Paul desired to end his earthly existence because being dead/the after life was "better by far" than this life.

It follows then that, for Jesus, his death was also a welcome release from this "inferior by far" life. It follows then that Jesus' death was not a sacrifice of any sort because Jesus, as the first Christian, was not giving up anything of value in this life compared to the "better by far" next life.

So what are we to gather from this apparent contradiction?

It's not a contradiction, if Paul's Jesus never walked the earth.
Nice lines! But I should add that for Paul being with Christ was to 'not preach' and so not be with them or among them now as servant instead of in freedom himself.

Paul had already died as crucified, and left religion behind that he now referrred to as inferior life as slave to the Christ in him.

Then let me add that 'the old was raised' and not left behind in this sense but was purified where he so now enjoys both as his good works in heaven as shown in Rev.14:13.
Chili is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:29 AM   #17
Chili
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar View Post

In the earliest stories of 'Jesus', The Gospels, 'Jesus' is born to a human mother with a genealogy descended from King David, 'in the flesh'.

'Paul' knows of this, and relates it;

"Jesus Christ our Lord, was made of the sperma of David according to the flesh;" (see Rom 1:3)

That is a statement by 'Paul' that 'Jesus' was a flesh and blood descendant of the genealogical line of King David.

King David although perhaps a bit mythologized and inflated in Scripture, is nonetheless portrayed as nothing more than fully human, and with human progeny and bloodline from his 'seed'.(Gr. sperma) sperm, or semen.
Mary is not human as sinless and sperma was not part of the act. It is about regeneration in flesh and not reproduction of flesh.
Chili is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:36 AM   #18
Sheshbazzar
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by igreen44
These are all much later than Paul.
''Paul';

Quote:
"Jesus Christ our Lord, was made of the sperma of David according to the flesh;" (see Rom 1:3)
A human descendant of the semen of King David (through his mother's human genealogy) and born on earth
Quote:
For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, (Rom 3:8)
He was born 'flesh' to suffer and die 'in the flesh', like any other human, or even his ancestor in the flesh, King David, to overcome death in the flesh, that is in his incarnate human flesh body, by the resurrection from the dead.
Paul understood this to have taken place on earth and to the human that was the son and the 'seed of David'.
There is no 'seed of David' in heaven, except it be that 'seed of David' which was first born, lived, was crucified, died, and was buried in the earth, on earth, who arose from the dead, and ascended into heaven.

Quote:
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
And when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. (1 Cor 11:23-24)
The only Biblical reference to the betrayal of the Lord 'Jesus' -'that night' - is in a setting upon earth, and is found in Luke 22.

That is the basis of what 'Paul' is relating here. There is no other Biblical reference providing or supporting 'Paul'.
Furthermore, consistently throughout the Bible 'night' is a condition that is experienced by humans upon earth. (see Gen 13:9, 30:16, Ex 12:42, 2 Kings 19:35 and many more.)

Building verbal sand castles out of the symbolic language employed in Revelations does not make for good textual exegesis, but serves as the basis for some pretty piss-poor and crappy eisegesis (good for book sales)

Hebrews;
Quote:
Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.(Heb 4:14-15)
ie. Jesus had a human body that lived on earth, and that was subject to all human experiences, emotions, pains, and desires, yet triumphed over all of these very human 'infirmities' in the flesh. human flesh.


.
Sheshbazzar is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:43 AM   #19
Sheshbazzar
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili
Mary is not human
She may not be now.
But in the Gospels she most certainly was understood to be, and is described as a human female who lived a life on on earth, and in the flesh, and whom was a lineal human decendent of the royal line of King David.
Sheshbazzar is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:44 AM   #20
ApostateAbe
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgreen44 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Paul's Jesus definitely spent some time on earth. There would seem to be a significantly greater contradiction if Paul believed Jesus to be born of a woman and born under the law (Galatians 4:4) yet was never on earth.
1A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”a And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. (Revelation 12)

“We also have reason to think, based on certain witness to Marcion’s version of Galatians, and common later tinkering with this passage by orthodox scribes, that the phrase ‘born of woman, born under the Law’ was not in the original.” (Doherty)
So, just in case "born of a woman, born under the law," really does mean a human being, we can still claim that the troubling passage was just a scribal tinkering and not written by Paul himself, and the hypothesis stands, as with any other troubling passage and any hypothesis. Sometimes, passages really are inserted (redacted) by scribes other than the author of the publication. The problem is that it is not nearly enough just to cite Earl Doherty's opinion to make that case, because he has no more qualifications on the matter than the rest of us, so it would be like me quoting a conclusion from aa5874 whenever I have a strange opinion on anything.

In the context of Galatians 4:4, there is nothing to indicate a heavenly realm where Jesus was born of a woman. On the contrary:
My point is this: heirs, as long as they are minors, are no better than slaves, though they are the owners of all the property; but they remain under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father. So with us; while we were minors, we were enslaved to the elemental spirits of the world. But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ So you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God.
So, in the same words, Jesus was born of a woman and born under the law in order to redeem others who were under the law--that is: Jews.
ApostateAbe is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:25 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.