Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ApostateAbe · 11-26-2009, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

The evidence? The quotes of Jesus in the synoptic gospels that predict the imminent end of the world ("...there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God..." and "...this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."). That and the late attempts to explain those words when the prophecies apparently failed (John 21:20-23 and 2 Peter 3:3-8). None of those passages can be easily explained had Jesus not been an apocalyptic cult leader.

Apocalyptic rhetoric is a standard component of Jewish literature. As the Jewish Encyclopedia makes clear, it does not necessarily entail anything about the end of the world. While Christ's followers, after his death, expected the end of the world, I don't think it likely that he did. He uses his phrase "Kingdom of Heaven" in many non-eschatological passages:

Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you.--Lk 17:21

Yes, and that seems to be an unusual verse indeed. The corresponding passage in the gospel of Mark does not contain it, and neither is it found in the gospel of Matthew. Furthermore, the verse is followed by claims about the coming kingdom of God that is very external, very physical, and very scary. Ehrman claims that it was an interpolation meant to change the meaning of "the kingdom of God" after the deadline passed, and I think he may be right.

No Robots · 11-26-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

BTW, have you actually read this review, or is your claim there based upon what you found in a contribution by a subscriber to the Tilliette Facebook page?

Quote:

In his account of the unexpected revolution, book by Michel Baraz in Studies v.367 (1987), p. [LEFT]423, Tilliette fait mention de Brunner et de “sa magnifique théorie du Christ”. 423, [Tilliette mentioned Brunner and his "beautiful theory of Christ."]Il évoque Brunner aussi dans La mythologie comprise, p. 117 [ It evokes Brunner also included Mythology, p.

Yeah, of course, I have a photocopy of the article. It is Tilliette's review of a book on Brunner written by a devoted follower. That was me posting on Tilliette's Facebook page, trying to find if Tilliette had written anything at length on Brunner.

No Robots · 11-26-2009, 10:26 AM

Spinoza scholar Errol E. Harris has also attempted to assess Brunner. He summarizes Brunner's Christology as follows:

Constantin Brunner maintained that the divinity of Christ consists in his realisation of the identity in God and man of the transcendental Ego (the Cogitant).--The restitution of metaphysics / Errol E. Harris, p. 274.

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2009, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Spinoza scholar Errol E. Harris has also attempted to assess Brunner. He summarizes Brunner's Christology as follows:

Constantin Brunner maintained that the divinity of Christ consists in his realisation of the identity in God and man of the transcendental Ego (the Cogitant).--The restitution of metaphysics / Errol E. Harris, p. 274.

Which just goes to show that, as I already noted, Brunner's "exegesis" of the NT was actually eisegesis which was guided and predetermined by philosophical a priorii about ontology and anthropology that were hardly Biblical, and that he used the NT to find proof for his view of who and what Jesus was that he already and apart from the Gospels knew was "true".

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2009, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

BTW, have you actually read this review, or is your claim there based upon what you found in a contribution by a subscriber to the Tilliette Facebook page?

Yeah, of course, I have a photocopy of the article. It is Tilliette's review of a book on Brunner written by a devoted follower. That was me posting on Tilliette's Facebook page, trying to find if Tilliette had written anything at length on Brunner.

I didn't ask if you possess a copy of the review. I asked if you had actually read it. I also asked if what you said here regarding Tilliete's mention of Brunner is taken directly by you from the review or is an unattributed quotation of the response you received to your facebook question.

I note with interest that you have avoided actually answering these two questions.

Jeffrey

No Robots · 11-26-2009, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Which just goes to show that, as I already noted, Brunner's "exegesis" of the NT was actually eisegesis which was guided and predetermined by philosophical a priorii about ontology and anthropology that were hardly Biblical, and that he used the NT to find proof for his view of who and what Jesus was that he already and apart from the Gospels knew was "true".

Science proceeds on the basis of testing a hypothesis. For Brunner, Christ is the ultimate test case for his theory of ontology and anthropology. In my view, Brunner's theory is justified by the fact that it presents a thorough-going explanation of Christ.

No Robots · 11-26-2009, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

I didn't ask if you possess a copy of the review. I asked if you had actually read it.

Yes, of course I have.

Quote:

I also asked if what you said here regarding Tilliete's mention of Brunner is taken directly by you from the review or is an unattributed quotation of the response you received to your facebook question.

The Tilliette quotation is taken from the review. You can verify it by going to Études in Google Books, and searching "sa magnifique théorie du Christ". This will only give you a snippet view, but it does show the quotation.

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2009, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

BTW, have you actually read this review, or is your claim there based upon what you found in a contribution by a subscriber to the Tilliette Facebook page?

Yeah, of course, I have a photocopy of the article. It is Tilliette's review of a book on Brunner written by a devoted follower. That was me posting on Tilliette's Facebook page, trying to find if Tilliette had written anything at length on Brunner.

Here's what appears there:

Barrett Pashak Vous avez parfois mentionné Constantin Brunner. L’avez-vous jamais traité en détail?

August 25 at 2:23pm · View Feedback (3)Hide Feedback (3) · Report Xavier TillietteNo, mais je voudrai avoir de plus amples information

August 27 at 2:34am · Report

Barrett PashakDans son compte rendu de La révolution inespérée, livre de Michel Baraz, en Études v.367 (1987), p. 423, Tilliette fait mention de Brunner et de “sa magnifique théorie du Christ”. Il évoque Brunner aussi dans La mythologie comprise, p. 117.

August 27 at 10:43am · Report

Xavier Tilliettemerci beaucoup

September 6 at 4:17pm · Report

Are you Barrette?

Jeffrey

No Robots · 11-26-2009, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Are you Barrette?

Yeah. No terminal "e", though, please.

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-26-2009, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

I didn't ask if you possess a copy of the review. I asked if you had actually read it.

Yes, of course I have.

You read French?

Quote:

I also asked if what you said here regarding Tilliete's mention of Brunner is taken directly by you from the review or is an unattributed quotation of the response you received to your facebook question.

The Tilliette quotation is taken from the review. You can verify it by going to Études in Google Books, and searching "sa magnifique théorie du Christ." This will only give you a snippet view, but it does show the quotation.

I am not asking what the snippet shows. I am asking whether what you reported here about what Tilliett said about Brunner is secondarily derived, i.e, taken from the facebook page.

How did you come to know that you could find in Etudes what you report Tillette as having said there?

Jeffrey

11-26-2009, 10:26 AM	#153
No Robots Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Edmonton Posts: 5,679	Spinoza scholar Errol E. Harris has also attempted to assess Brunner. He summarizes Brunner's Christology as follows: Constantin Brunner maintained that the divinity of Christ consists in his realisation of the identity in God and man of the transcendental Ego (the Cogitant).--The restitution of metaphysics / Errol E. Harris, p. 274.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.