Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
12-19-2007, 06:36 PM | #51 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,210
|
Quote:
But in this instance, if you have a word that's usually used in one way, but may (as you admit) be read in another, then given that he was a visionary, why not use the alternative reading? (i.e. that he was plainly saying he received the information about the last supper from the Lord himself?) You've already admitted that the semantic argument isn't a clincher for the "oral tradition" view. Well, what objection is there to understanding the meaning in this way? |
|
12-19-2007, 06:53 PM | #52 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
|
Quote:
Ben. |
|
12-19-2007, 07:08 PM | #53 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,210
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
12-19-2007, 07:40 PM | #54 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
|
Quote:
The first issue that I addressed was the preposition from. I stated that the Greek one used here commonly indicates a chain of transmission, but also stated that there are exceptions (in which the chain is bypassed). I dealt with this issue only because you seemed to think that from the Lord had to be direct, as in a revelation. The second issue that I addressed was the language of receiving and delivering. This is not the same as the issue of the preposition. Toto offered a quote from Price, and I never spoke of exceptions on this issue. If your position is true, then we actually have two exceptions, as it were, since Paul (A) used a preposition associated with intermediaries and (B) used the typical verbs of tradition transmission via intermediaries, to wit, receive and deliver. (I might add that, if your position is true, someone ought to notify Robert Price that his thesis never gets off the ground, since most of his case for an interpolation in 1 Corinthians 15 hinges on pseudo-Paul claiming to have received the appearance list from human intermediaries.) Ben. |
|
12-20-2007, 03:20 AM | #55 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
|
Quote:
A major part of the 'answer' may be that the recipients were illiterate! Of what did this 'Oral Tradition' consist? Evidence? Come, demonstrate, of what did this oral {verbiage} consist? Supply evidence of 'oral' --- , in 1st CE, 2nd CE, 3rd CE - arrrh, I shall do that! |
|
12-20-2007, 04:29 AM | #56 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
|
Quote:
Crickey, dot mosus - "a new interpretation of Mithraism; pg 11 A description of the Mithraic mysteries A1. The mysteries give symbolic expression to ... 1. DEUS SOL INVICTUS MITHRAS 2. Harmony of tension in opposition.' . . C1. Axioms and themes .... . . 3. the sublunery world D1. The complexes of symbols conveying the axioms ... . . Chapter 5 discusses Mithraism as a symbol in the manner of the symbolist anthropologists, ...Jeffrey - this was recommended at SBL, and it arrived on my desk along with your suggested "The Jesus Legend (or via: amazon.co.uk)" by Eddy & Boyd. Naturally, I took the more serious work foist! |
|
12-20-2007, 07:52 AM | #57 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
There is a comment in the introductory pages of Beck about him using an anthropological approach called symbolism with the Mysteries of Mithras. I strongly recommend such an approach to xianity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_interactionism Quote:
Methinks we do have the beginnings of a scientific approach to explaining this fascinating social institution - xianity - and its roots are definitely not related to a living breathing Jesus but to interpretations and iterations of holy words, religious ideas, visions, yearnings - typical human stuff! http://www.glasgowmuseums.com/venue/...id=4&itemid=68 |
|
12-20-2007, 01:50 PM | #58 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 5 hours south of Notre Dame. Golden Domer
Posts: 3,259
|
Quote:
If you recall, you and I had a specific issue we were conversing about and it certainly was not White's position. We were discussing whether or not the thoughts you presented in the OP made Doherty's proposition more plausible. I contended it did not for specific reasons and for the sake of brevity, and the fact I am really tired right now, I will simply refer to my posts on page one in regards to this point. Quote:
|
|||
12-20-2007, 02:00 PM | #59 | ||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 5 hours south of Notre Dame. Golden Domer
Posts: 3,259
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Another pivotal fact to linking the two would be Paul's use of the phrase "Church of God." He persecuted the "Church of God." Was this "Church of God" based upon a Messiah different from the one in the Gospels? It is your burden to prove Paul was talking about a different Messiah than the one discussed in the bible. Merely assuming this as true for the point of criticizing my argument does not get us anywhere. Quote:
|
||||
12-22-2007, 07:56 AM | #60 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
Quote:
Hmmm: 1) Death - Doesn't really help much in the context of HJ/MJ does it? Plus my understanding is that it is the main requirement for a resurrection. 2) Burial - Usually follows from 1), except with crucifixion. Does that support HJ or MJ? 3) Resurrection - Finally, something we can be absolutely certain is MJ. So we can be certain that oral stories can transmit Fiction. 4) Proclamation the Messiah's death and resurrection cleanses us of our sins - To the extent "Mark" meant this, according to the original Gospel this was not a Historical observation. It was Revealed by "Mark". So more oral story not based on History. The Differences in the Gospellers also guarantee that these Christian oral stories transmitted Fiction. In contrast, we have no guarantee that these oral stories transmitted History. Putting the above all together we would have oral stories that tell little or nothing useful about HJ and no oral stories with quality HJ evidence. Joseph Ieousiscity.The Argument For HJ. A Skeptical Reconstruction |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|