Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 12-22-2009, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Without the phrase, it seems to mean that the "body" is the body of the individual subject,

I am arguing for three bodies!

An individual believer's real flesh and blood body.
Christ's
The body of believers together in communion - otherwise known by the Church through the centuries as the body of Christ - we are all partakers in one body. When the bride of Christ marries Christ the two fleshes become one - Genesis.

So we might be seeing an evolution in thinking here. Paul is talking about believers coming together for a good meal probably in a magial mystical fashion in Christ's name. Someone later comes along and eucharises this and gets rid of the meal element.

We are left now with a muddle of theological ideas, and a possible further clue that the body of Christ was first the believers coming together and only later morphs into an hj.

And thus the whole bit is an interpolation.

ApostateAbe · 12-22-2009, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

... The normal and good practice in Biblical scholarship is to presume the originality of each passage within the authentic letter until good evidence is found that the passage is unoriginal.

That is "normal" for Biblical scholarship, but not for any other branch of learning. In fact, it has no basis in logic or reason. It is a devise to avoid some embarrassing issues over the authenticity of documents, and just one of the reasons that the reputation of Biblical scholarship is so low on this forum.

Quote:

You should not arbitrarily discount certain passages just because it goes against your own unlikely theory of early Christianity. There are objective methods and reasons for choosing passages to be unoriginal.

1) Does it fit the point of view of scribes more than the original author's confirmed point of view?
2) Does the passage seem out of place in the context?
3) Does the passage not match the author's writing style and language?
4) Is there external evidence of interpolation (citations, quotations, earlier manuscripts)?

That sort of thing.

That sort of thing. You can generally fix the criteria to get the result you want, if you are creative enough.

Here spin has shown that the passage seems out of place, and removing it makes the text flow more naturally. This by itself indicates that this is not an arbitrary decision.

I just had this debate with Rick Sumner and have no energy to repeat it. Please refer to William O. Walker's Interpolations in the Pauline Letters (or via: amazon.co.uk) on google books. He discusses the lack of manuscript variations and why this should not be used against the idea of interpolations.

Can you please direct me to the debate you had with Rick Sumner? Thanks. The lack of manuscript variations of course is not evidence for lack of interpolation, but it underscores the lack evidence in favor of interpolation. For example, if spin really did show that the text flows more naturally with his reconstruction, that would be evidence for interpolation. But he seemingly has not. His reconstructed text starts with an admonition against competitive vanity ("No doubt there have to be factions among you, for only so will it become clear which of you have approval. When you come together, it is not the lordly supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else"). And it jumps into what spin proposes to be an admonition against gluttony ("A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup"). It hardly makes sense at all.

Rick Sumner · 12-22-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

That is "normal" for Biblical scholarship, but not for any other branch of learning.

Are you aware of any other branch of study, dealing with ancient manuscripts, that begins with the assumption that a work is composite?

Note that I say "begin with," not "currently hold."

Toto · 12-22-2009, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

..
Can you please direct me to the debate you had with Rick Sumner? Thanks.

Actually, it was pretty pointless. I think he was shooting from the hip. Just read Walker.

Quote:

The lack of manuscript variations of course is not evidence for lack of interpolation, but it underscores the lack evidence in favor of interpolation.

Please read what Walker says on the issue.

Quote:

For example, if spin really did show that the text flows more naturally with his reconstruction, that would be evidence for interpolation. But he seemingly has not. His reconstructed text starts with an admonition against competitive vanity ("No doubt there have to be factions among you, for only so will it become clear which of you have approval. When you come together, it is not the lordly supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else"). And it jumps into what spin proposes to be an admonition against gluttony ("A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup"). It hardly makes sense at all.

Paul is observing what he regards as unhealthy habits (both spiritually and physically) and proposing a solution. It makes some sense to me.

But in any case, the passing on of what Paul received about Jesus has no particular connection to the previous section, except that it involves eating.

ApostateAbe · 12-22-2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

..
Can you please direct me to the debate you had with Rick Sumner? Thanks.

Actually, it was pretty pointless. I think he was shooting from the hip. Just read Walker.

Please read what Walker says on the issue.

Quote:

For example, if spin really did show that the text flows more naturally with his reconstruction, that would be evidence for interpolation. But he seemingly has not. His reconstructed text starts with an admonition against competitive vanity ("No doubt there have to be factions among you, for only so will it become clear which of you have approval. When you come together, it is not the lordly supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else"). And it jumps into what spin proposes to be an admonition against gluttony ("A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup"). It hardly makes sense at all.

Paul is observing what he regards as unhealthy habits (both spiritually and physically) and proposing a solution. It makes some sense to me.

But in any case, the passing on of what Paul received about Jesus has no particular connection to the previous section, except that it involves eating.

Alrighty then. The book by Walker costs $52 on Amazon, and it doesn't seem to be the sort of book I can easily find at a library.

EDIT: Google books is an option, I suppose.

ApostateAbe · 12-22-2009, 11:07 PM

Toto, if it isn't too much to ask, can you please tell me which chapter in Walker you would like me to read, if any? There does not seem to be a discussion on 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 in Chapter 5. There is a discussion on 1 Corinthian 11:3-16, concluded to be interpolation (it is about a woman's role in the church). There is no evaluation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 or any overlapping passage thereof, at least as far as I can discern.

Clivedurdle · 12-23-2009, 12:03 AM

What do we have?

Communal ritual meals.

Paul talking of a Christ.

A body of Christ - the believers coming together for communal meals but adding this christing visionary stuff.

This body of Christ being expressed as a walking around godman body in Mark.

A further formalisation of a meal into a Eucharist.

Result?

Xianity.

Oops. Where's Jesus?

Remember, Acts spends a long time on food and behaviour of the body of Christ.

QED.

Clivedurdle · 12-23-2009, 12:12 AM

Remember the context.

Voluntary associations were not liked - the hassles voluntary fire brigades had.

Real issues of poverty and inequality. Philosophies that were concerned about injustice.

Communal eating, voluntary associations around a god were common - it was a normal true gods practice in the temples.

Mix in Jewish ideas of justice and equality from the Prophets into a Greek World, add in an empire, marinade for a few hundred years. result xianity.

Even today a mosque feeds and shelters travelling muslims. This is true of many other religions.

Clivedurdle · 12-23-2009, 12:15 AM

Was there ever an edict that you could not have your corn dole unless you attended Church?

Toto · 12-23-2009, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Toto, if it isn't too much to ask, can you please tell me which chapter in Walker you would like me to read, if any? There does not seem to be a discussion on 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 in Chapter 5. There is a discussion on 1 Corinthian 11:3-16, concluded to be interpolation (it is about a woman's role in the church). There is no evaluation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 or any overlapping passage thereof, at least as far as I can discern.

I wanted you to read Walker on the general method of evaluating possible interpolations, in particular the first 4 chapters, which are not technical.

Chapter 3 discusses the burden of proof, and chapter 4 discusses the general problem of evidence. The chapters after that get quite detailed and technical.

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

12-22-2009, 11:07 PM	#46
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Toto, if it isn't too much to ask, can you please tell me which chapter in Walker you would like me to read, if any? There does not seem to be a discussion on 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 in Chapter 5. There is a discussion on 1 Corinthian 11:3-16, concluded to be interpolation (it is about a woman's role in the church). There is no evaluation of 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 or any overlapping passage thereof, at least as far as I can discern.

12-23-2009, 12:03 AM	#47
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	What do we have? Communal ritual meals. Paul talking of a Christ. A body of Christ - the believers coming together for communal meals but adding this christing visionary stuff. This body of Christ being expressed as a walking around godman body in Mark. A further formalisation of a meal into a Eucharist. Result? Xianity. Oops. Where's Jesus? Remember, Acts spends a long time on food and behaviour of the body of Christ. QED.

12-23-2009, 12:12 AM	#48
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Remember the context. Voluntary associations were not liked - the hassles voluntary fire brigades had. Real issues of poverty and inequality. Philosophies that were concerned about injustice. Communal eating, voluntary associations around a god were common - it was a normal true gods practice in the temples. Mix in Jewish ideas of justice and equality from the Prophets into a Greek World, add in an empire, marinade for a few hundred years. result xianity. Even today a mosque feeds and shelters travelling muslims. This is true of many other religions.

12-23-2009, 12:15 AM	#49
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Was there ever an edict that you could not have your corn dole unless you attended Church?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.