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 06-10-2013, 08:44 AM   #21
spin
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

On the Apollos passage in Acts 18:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
I just re-read this, and realized it doesn't say they didn't know of Jesus at all. It says they didn't know of his Holy Spirit Baptism. I thought there was a passage in Acts that indicated that there were JTB followers who had never heard of Jesus, but I can't find it. Apollos, in the prior chapter, sounds similar to those mentioned in ch 19: Apollos, mentioned in the prior chapter as being 'aquainted only with the baptism of John' was preaching about 'things concerning Jesus'. He too may have been well aware of Jesus, but not fully understanding the idea of 'baptism of the Holy Spirit' through Jesus.
Actually, it does say that he didn't know Jesus at all before Priscilla and Aquila fixed him up. That is the whole point of the passage. Apollos seems to have known the prophecies and the teaching of John about the way of the lord (remember the citation of "prepare the way of the lord"?). So what he knew about the messiah was what John had taught. He didn't know about the christian messiah, Jesus. He knew nothing about Jesus's teaching of the baptism of the holy spirit, only about John's baptism. That is why Priscilla and Aquila had to take him aside, so that he could teach the way of the lord more accurately. Not just what John taught about the messiah, but about Jesus directly. This allowed him to show that Jesus was the messiah (18:28).

This passage shows the theological debt christianity owed to the spread of the Johannine religion after John's death and shows that there was an alternative messianism in circulation that taught about the coming messiah, that one had to prepare for. It would seem that Priscilla and Aquila took Apollos's preaching of the messiah to come as teaching about Jesus, which would suggest a partial absorption of the Johannine religion into early christianity.
spin is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:45 AM   #22
Toto
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abe
I am just trying to understand JoeWallack's meaning of "fiction." Many mythicists define it as anything that is untrue, whereas literary scholars would define it more specifically. With the definition I prefer, all "fiction" would be intended for entertainment. What would be your definition?
No that would not be my definition.

Fiction, or storytelling, is an important social activity. It is used to provide moral instruction and vital cultural information.
Toto is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:48 AM   #23
spin
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
I am just trying to understand JoeWallack's meaning of "fiction."
This is reflective of a general problem in the forum concerning divergent definitions of regularly used terms, such as "fiction", "fake", "myth", "historical", etc. It's along the lines of people on one side of the street talking Flemish and on the other side talking Walloons. There may be a lot of noise, but not much communication.
spin is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:49 AM   #24
ApostateAbe
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abe
I am just trying to understand JoeWallack's meaning of "fiction." Many mythicists define it as anything that is untrue, whereas literary scholars would define it more specifically. With the definition I prefer, all "fiction" would be intended for entertainment. What would be your definition?
No that would not be my definition.

Fiction, or storytelling, is an important social activity. It is used to provide moral instruction and vital cultural information.
Thanks, that helps. I suppose there is an ancient Grecco-Roman work of fiction that would be closely analogous to the first gospels? Like the Odyssey maybe?
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:50 AM   #25
ApostateAbe
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
I am just trying to understand JoeWallack's meaning of "fiction."
This is reflective of a general problem in the forum concerning divergent definitions of regularly used terms, such as "fiction", "fake", "myth", "historical", etc. It's along the lines of people on one side of the street talking Flemish and on the other side talking Walloons. There may be a lot of noise, but not much communication.
Exactly right.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:52 AM   #26
Toto
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

I think in this context, Joe's use of the term fiction is not a problem. He clearly means "non a source for actual history" at a minimum. I don't know why Abe is trying to read more into the term.
Toto is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:54 AM   #27
aa5874
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Please, this is not Sunday School.
Your response in no way refuted what I wrote.

Yes of course the Christian writers took the Holy Ghost interpretation as meaningful. That's what religious people do. Doesn't negate what I said though. You seem to be dismissing the possibility that real events inspired the invention of non-existent imagined events, through interpretation.

Of couse it refutes you. In gJohn there is no mention of the baptism event but it certainly mentions the Holy Ghost Bird and that Jesus was identified as the Son of God by the very same fiction creature.

I have refuted your fallacy that the baptism made sense without the Holy Ghost and the voice from heaven.

It is clear that John the Baptist would not have been able to identify Jesus without the Ghost bird.

John 1
Quote:
33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending , and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

34 And I saw , and bare record that this is the Son of God.
Effectively, No Holy Ghost Bird there is No Jesus story.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:56 AM   #28
ApostateAbe
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
I think in this context, Joe's use of the term fiction is not a problem. He clearly means "non a source for actual history" at a minimum. I don't know why Abe is trying to read more into the term.
Yeah, the definitions would be relevant for both JoeWallack and I, though maybe not relevant for anyone who thinks the historical untrustworthiness of the gospels is all that's important.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 09:00 AM   #29
Toto
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
No that would not be my definition.

Fiction, or storytelling, is an important social activity. It is used to provide moral instruction and vital cultural information.
Thanks, that helps. I suppose there is an ancient Grecco-Roman work of fiction that would be closely analogous to the first gospels? Like the Odyssey maybe?
There is actually a body of literary criticism comparing elements from the gospels to the novels of the time, in particular the story of Chaereas and Callirhoe. These novels have elements like crucifixions of innocent people, empty tombs, etc. But no one claims that the gospels are exactly like those novels.

Dennis McDonald has pointed out the many parallels between Homer and Mark.
Toto is offline  
Old 06-10-2013, 09:05 AM   #30
aa5874
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
...
I take it by "fiction" you mean purely for the purpose of entertainment? Like, they drank and caroused with some lively gospel reading or something?
This is a strange comment. Some fiction may be for entertainment, but certainly not all.
I am just trying to understand JoeWallack's meaning of "fiction." Many mythicists define it as anything that is untrue, whereas literary scholars would define it more specifically. With the definition I prefer, all "fiction" would be intended for entertainment. What would be your definition?
If you are not even able to understand what fiction means then it is not even possible to discuss history.

Please, first find out the difference between 'fiction' and 'history'. It is extremely important that you do so immediately.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiction
Quote:
Fiction is the form of any work that deals, in part or in whole, with information or events that are not factual, but rather, imaginary and theoretical—that is, invented by the author.
The Jesus story in the NT is fiction from conception to ascension.
aa5874 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:24 PM.

Top

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