Freethought & Rationalism Archive

TedM · 09-10-2011, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

What word would be used for a parent who says he received the following from his 7 year-old:

We don't usually use the notion of receiving this way in English. How can you imagine a 7 year-old as a hander-down of tradition anyway? What we are dealing with is a process of known passer of a tradition giving it to a receiver. It is not sufficient that the tradition is authoritative--that's assumed. The passer-on has the authority to pass it on.

It appears to me that you are slyly slithering around the question. You are dealing with your understanding of the word and not my hypothetical question. If you wish, let's just cut to the chase:

You are adamant that scholarship has determined that the word was only used for teacher-student transmission, even though you do not have any example of the appropriate word the interpolator should have used if he was referring to a creed that men were passing along to each other in the street. Correct or not correct?

spin · 09-10-2011, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

What word would be used for a parent who says he received the following from his 7 year-old:

We don't usually use the notion of receiving this way in English. How can you imagine a 7 year-old as a hander-down of tradition anyway? What we are dealing with is a process of known passer of a tradition giving it to a receiver. It is not sufficient that the tradition is authoritative--that's assumed. The passer-on has the authority to pass it on.

It appears to me that you are slyly slithering around the question.

This thread is one big slither. You are trying anything you can to slither out of the significance of this verb.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

You are dealing with your understanding of the word and not my hypothetical question. If you wish, let's just cut to the chase:

You are adamant that scholarship has determined that the word was only used for teacher-student transmission, even though you do not have any example of the appropriate word the interpolator should have used if he was referring to a creed that men were passing along to each other in the street. Correct or not correct?

If this is an interpolation and the writer is putting Paul in his place, as answerable to the apostolic chain of transmission, then there is no problem with the use of this word for the interpolator. The problem is with the word if it is genuine Paul.

TedM · 09-10-2011, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

If you wish, let's just cut to the chase:

You are adamant that scholarship has determined that the word was only used for teacher-student transmission, even though you do not have any example of the appropriate word the interpolator should have used if he was referring to a creed that men were passing along to each other in the street. Correct or not correct?

If this is an interpolation and the writer is putting Paul in his place, as answerable to the apostolic chain of transmission, then there is no problem with the use of this word for the interpolator. The problem is with the word if it is genuine Paul.

Slither slither. Can't you just answer the question? Correct or not correct? Did I throw you off by mentioning the interpolator--which focused you back on your prior conclusions? Replace 'interpolator' above with 'interpolator or Paul'

spin · 09-10-2011, 09:18 PM

[]

spin · 09-10-2011, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

If you wish, let's just cut to the chase:

You are adamant that scholarship has determined that the word was only used for teacher-student transmission, even though you do not have any example of the appropriate word the interpolator should have used if he was referring to a creed that men were passing along to each other in the street. Correct or not correct?

If this is an interpolation and the writer is putting Paul in his place, as answerable to the apostolic chain of transmission, then there is no problem with the use of this word for the interpolator. The problem is with the word if it is genuine Paul.

Slither slither. Can't you just answer the question?

You don't seem to have understood the reply. Look at the bolded phrase above. The assertion is wrong. Why should an interpolator have had trouble using the verb??

Quote:

Correct or not correct?

False assumption.

Quote:

Did I throw you off by mentioning the interpolator--which focused you back on your prior conclusions? Replace 'interpolator' above with 'interpolator or Paul'

Still wrong. One involves no problem with the term, the other is problematic. There is no necessary reason against an orthodox interpolator using the verb. We can reject its use if it's supposed to be Paul.

We have good evidence for the significance of the word in the context of transmission of tradition, which is the case with our target. That significance is singularly out of place with Paul. It would not be out of place for a tendentious interpolator. Paul, not indicating superior authority, need only say that those who saw the appearances told him about them.

I don't think you are going to stop this apologetic tour d'endurance, TedM. You are not working at all with either evidence or scholarship. You can't expect me to keep responding when you have no reason other than your bald certainty to maintain your position.

stephan huller · 09-10-2011, 10:24 PM

xx

archibald · 09-11-2011, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

...
If Jesus did NOT exist then it is OBVIOUS the Greek word used for "RECEIVED" does NOT require a teacher-student relationship.

....

The word means what it means. If Jesus did not exist, it still means that "Paul" is reciting a passage that he got from a teacher.

Yes.

Personally, I think the whole thing about 'specific words said by a teacher to a pupil' threw me off course. And I accept that that was just crossed wires.

It (paralambano*) does appear to imply both the passing on of a tradition, and also, in the context of receiving information and as used in Paul, that the passer-on has authority, be it Jesus or someone else.

I think the passage is saying he received it from Jesus. This would tally with 1 Cor 11:23, and Gal 1:12, and not be contradicted by any other occasion that 'Paul' uses the word. The alternative, as you say, would be another, unnamed authority of some sort.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

It seems odd that neither Paul or the alleged interpolator would not have named the source of the knowledge if it was supposed to have been from someone of a high authority.

It's true 'he' doesn't name a source on many of the occasions that 'he' uses this word, or should I say when the word is in the text, but I think it hass become pretty clear to me that every time 'Paul' uses it, it does indeed seem to imply a source of authority, and the text is specific on two occasions, in which Jesus is named.

* And I can now also see that John 5: does uses paralambano, which then tallies with Galatians 1:. I hadn'tnoticed the 'para' bit, which was separated, in the text I was reading, by a few intermediate words.

Incidentally I think I have been additionally confused by the apparent difference between para-lambano and pare-labete, but that might just be my very poor Greek. :]

aa5874 · 09-11-2011, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archibald

...I think the passage is saying he received it from Jesus. This would tally with 1 Cor 11:23, and Gal 1:12, and not be contradicted by any other occasion that 'Paul' uses the word. The alternative, as you say, would be another, unnamed authority of some sort....

In Galatians, "Paul" claimed he did NOT confer with FLESH and BLOOD and that he was NOT taught the Gospel.

There was ZERO Teacher-student relationship between "Paul" and the resurrected Jesus.

"Paul" is claiming to have RECEIVED his gospel by REVELATION.

Ga 1:12 -

Quote:

For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ...

There is ZERO teacher-student relationship in Galatians 1.

Paul conferred with NO-ONE.

NO-ONE TAUGHT "PAUL" ANYTHING about the gospel according to the Pauline writer.

The Pauline gospel was RECEIVED REVELATION.

After all, a writer called John did also claim to have received REVELATIONS and wrote a book called REVELATION.

REVELATION 1:1 -

Quote:

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.....

'Paul" RECEIVED REVELATIONS from the RESURRECTED JESUS in the Pauline writings.

Jesus did NOT resurrect. "Paul" had NO human teacher. "Paul" had NO teacher-student relationship. "Paul" RECEIVED his gospel from his own IMAGINED REVELATION.

The use of the Greed word for "RECEIVED" does NOT require a teacher-student relationship.

...Neither was I TAUGHT it but by REVELATION......

TedM · 09-11-2011, 08:04 AM

I'm confused as to why everyone is confused:

Scenario 1:
Paul got a creed from someone off the street.
What word would be appropriate to use?
No one seems to know.
Conclusion: The restriction stated by scholars to a master-pupil relationship is questionable.

Scenario 2:
Paul got a creed from a higher authority
The word used is appropriate.
Who is the authority--God or some human?
It isn't God for the entire passage because it includes the appearances to others--not likely.
It is not a master because Paul wasn't taught the Christian message as part of his learning as a pharisee.
It is not likely that Paul received this message from Peter or James since he would have been already aware of the basic message; otherwise he wouldn't have been persecuting them.
Conclusion 1: Paul did not get the entire creed from a higher authority.
Conclusion 2: Paul could have been saying he got the first part of the creed from God (via scripture revelation or even a vision).

Scenario 3:
Someone interpolated in the passage and intended it to mean from a higher authority.
The word was used correctly.
Who cares what they intended?

Scenario 4:
Someone interpolated in the passage and intended it to mean from on the street
As in #1 above: What word would be appropriate to use?
No one seems to know.
Conclusion 1: The restriction stated by scholars to a master-pupil relationship is questionable.

Scenario #5:
It isn't even a creed. It's just basic info Paul heard.
There are indications that another word would have been appropriate.

Does this help at all? Have I missed anything?

Ted

aa5874 · 09-11-2011, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

I'm confused as to why everyone is confused:

Scenario 1:
Paul got a creed from someone off the street.
What word would be appropriate to use?
No one seems to know.
Conclusion: The restriction stated by scholars to a master-pupil relationship is questionable.

Scenario 2:
Paul got a creed from a higher authority
The word used is appropriate.
Who is the authority--God or some human?
It isn't God for the entire passage because it includes the appearances to others--not likely.
It is not a master because Paul wasn't taught the Christian message as part of his learning as a pharisee.
It is not likely that Paul received this message from Peter or James since he would have been already aware of the basic message; otherwise he wouldn't have been persecuting them.
Conclusion 1: Paul did not get the entire creed from a higher authority.
Conclusion 2: Paul could have been saying he got the first part of the creed from God (via scripture revelation or even a vision).

Scenario 3:
Someone interpolated in the passage and intended it to mean from a higher authority.
The word was used correctly.
Who cares what they intended?

Scenario 4:
Someone interpolated in the passage and intended it to mean from on the street
As in #1 above: What word would be appropriate to use?
No one seems to know.
Conclusion 1: The restriction stated by scholars to a master-pupil relationship is questionable.
Conclusion 2: If the interpolator used the words strictly as to mean a master-pupil relationship, he did so most likely to imply that Peter or James passed along the creed to Paul, as opposed to a teaching from his pharisee master.

Scenario #5:
It isn't even a creed. It's just basic info Paul heard.
There are indications that another word would have been appropriate.

Does this help at all? Have I missed anything?

Ted

Scenario #6:

"Paul" INVENTED his own story from his imagination since "Paul" claimed he was NOT TAUGHT by anyone.

Scenario #7:

ALL the Pauline writings are LATE and AFTER the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE so all claims by Paul about how he received his gospel are false.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-10-2011, 09:18 PM	#94
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	[]

09-10-2011, 10:24 PM	#96
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	xx

09-11-2011, 08:04 AM	#99
TedM Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: USA, Missouri Posts: 3,070	I'm confused as to why everyone is confused: Scenario 1: Paul got a creed from someone off the street. What word would be appropriate to use? No one seems to know. Conclusion: The restriction stated by scholars to a master-pupil relationship is questionable. Scenario 2: Paul got a creed from a higher authority The word used is appropriate. Who is the authority--God or some human? It isn't God for the entire passage because it includes the appearances to others--not likely. It is not a master because Paul wasn't taught the Christian message as part of his learning as a pharisee. It is not likely that Paul received this message from Peter or James since he would have been already aware of the basic message; otherwise he wouldn't have been persecuting them. Conclusion 1: Paul did not get the entire creed from a higher authority. Conclusion 2: Paul could have been saying he got the first part of the creed from God (via scripture revelation or even a vision). Scenario 3: Someone interpolated in the passage and intended it to mean from a higher authority. The word was used correctly. Who cares what they intended? Scenario 4: Someone interpolated in the passage and intended it to mean from on the street As in #1 above: What word would be appropriate to use? No one seems to know. Conclusion 1: The restriction stated by scholars to a master-pupil relationship is questionable. Scenario #5: It isn't even a creed. It's just basic info Paul heard. There are indications that another word would have been appropriate. Does this help at all? Have I missed anything? Ted

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.