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

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-18-2010, 02:57 PM   #161
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post

Now that you have failed to show any substantial gripe regarding my OP, you've changed the subject.
If you say so.

Good luck in the real world with this stuff.
judge is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 09:04 PM   #162
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Now that you have failed to show any substantial gripe regarding my OP, you've changed the subject.
If you say so.

Good luck in the real world with this stuff.
I couldn't get you into the real world. You stalwartly refused to consider the way Paul used the non-titular κυριος. As it seems to be a necessity to understand the significance of terms in the text under examination, why refuse?

Instead, you crabwise argued to insinuate Jesus in "James the brother of the lord". (Well, Jesus did have a brother called James according to Mark!?)


spin
spin is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 11:06 PM   #163
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post

If you say so.

Good luck in the real world with this stuff.
I couldn't get you into the real world. You stalwartly refused to consider the way Paul used the non-titular κυριος.
I considerd it, but as I mentioned you're problems prior to this were too great to put the amount of weight on it you wanted to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
[ As it seems to be a necessity to understand the significance of terms in the text under examination, why refuse?

spin
I considered it but as I mention you had such enormous problems from the "get go", that I wouldn't give it the weight you do.
But, you are forced to put all your weight on that one leg, whilst ignoring the more pertinent issues, and, your table falls over.

Doesn't make you wrong. It's just not very convincing. But hey if you believe otherwise, then take it to the real world, and ,see how far you get.
I know you have mentioned here before that you abandoned ambitions to have another paper peer reviewed years ago. Why not try this out if you are so confident?

If I remember though, you behaved pretty confidently back then too, before quietly abandoning the idea.
judge is offline  
Old 03-19-2010, 12:13 AM   #164
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
I couldn't get you into the real world. You stalwartly refused to consider the way Paul used the non-titular κυριος. As it seems to be a necessity to understand the significance of terms in the text under examination, why refuse?
I considered it but as I mention you had such enormous problems from the "get go", that I wouldn't give it the weight you do.
You shown no sign of having considered it. Your reaction in this thread is tantamount to a refusal to consider it. I'm sorry, I can only go on what you say and do here and they disagree with your statement in this post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
But, you are forced to put all your weight on that one leg, whilst ignoring the more pertinent issues, and, your table falls over.
What are the more pertinent issues for understanding what Paul has to say, working from data that comes from the time of Paul? Please, I'm interested in knowing what you really have in mind as "the more pertinent issues" that I am ignoring. Do explain.

If you will not deal with the significance of an essential term, as is apparently the case here, you won't give the impression of trying to understand our text.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
I know you have mentioned here before that you abandoned ambitions to have another paper peer reviewed years ago. Why not try this out if you are so confident?
Why not deal with the task at hand, rather than continued changing of the subject?

How many times in this thread have I asked you to deal with what is being referenced with the non-titular κυριος? It can't hurt you to look at the data and report back your findings, can it? Why not show that you are willing to participate in the discussion?


spin
spin is offline  
Old 03-19-2010, 12:35 AM   #165
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
I considered it but as I mention you had such enormous problems from the "get go", that I wouldn't give it the weight you do.
You shown no sign of having considered it. Your reaction in this thread is tantamount to a refusal to consider it. I'm sorry, I can only go on what you say and do here and they disagree with your statement in this post.
Can you see, then , that you are jumping to conclusions?
Not having evidence that I did consider it is not the same as having evidence I did not.
This is the same kind of reasoning you seem to use throughout this thread on other matters.


Quote:
What are the more pertinent issues for understanding what Paul has to say, working from data that comes from the time of Paul? Please, I'm interested in knowing what you really have in mind as "the more pertinent issues" that I am ignoring. Do explain.
Is there anyone else here who is interested? If there is anyone else here who is; I'll consider going back over it.

Quote:
If you will not deal with the significance of an essential term, as is apparently the case here, you won't give the impression of trying to understand our text.
I really dont care what impression I am giving you. Its not important to me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
[
How many times in this thread have I asked you to deal with what is being referenced with the non-titular κυριος? It can't hurt you to look at the data and report back your findings, can it? Why not show that you are willing to participate in the discussion?
Depending who is interested it could be just a waste of time. If you want more discussion from me, lift your game.
judge is offline  
Old 03-19-2010, 01:47 AM   #166
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
You shown no sign of having considered it. Your reaction in this thread is tantamount to a refusal to consider it. I'm sorry, I can only go on what you say and do here and they disagree with your statement in this post.
Can you see, then , that you are jumping to conclusions?
This does not follow... which is typical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Not having evidence that I did consider it is not the same as having evidence I did not.
Agreed. But you are in a social situation and have responsibilities that you are not upholding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
This is the same kind of reasoning you seem to use throughout this thread on other matters.
Rubbish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
What are the more pertinent issues for understanding what Paul has to say, working from data that comes from the time of Paul? Please, I'm interested in knowing what you really have in mind as "the more pertinent issues" that I am ignoring. Do explain.
Is there anyone else here who is interested? If there is anyone else here who is; I'll consider going back over it.
It would have been best had you not voiced unfounded accusations, as you are not prepared to give back-up to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
I really dont care what impression I am giving you. Its not important to me.
Yes, typical evasion on your part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
How many times in this thread have I asked you to deal with what is being referenced with the non-titular κυριος? It can't hurt you to look at the data and report back your findings, can it? Why not show that you are willing to participate in the discussion?
Depending who is interested it could be just a waste of time. If you want more discussion from me, lift your game.
There is no play here for me to lift my game for. The notion of quid pro quo seems not to be part of your forum behavior. A few arrows then run for cover seems to be.

Ignore will now be back in force.


spin
spin is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:35 PM.

Top

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