Toto

Why is this bizarre, given that I have expressed doubts about the dating and reliability of Paul's letters?

Vinnie

i don't think Kirby was at his best in that article.

""""The variation in names cannot be used to prove that the 12 existed. """""""

no one said it did. The variations--if showing more than one list--is more positive than negative.

Vinnei

Layman

Well, those doubts themselves are unreasonable. And given that 1 Clement, who does not appear to be a Jew, refers to at least one of those letters in his own letter to another Church in Corinth prior to the close of the First Century, it's just bizarre.

But keep it coming Toto. Further marganlizing the Secular Web like this does not make me unhappy.

Vinnie

You must date the Gospels late as well view the authentic letters of Paul as inauthentic to hold to this position. I see ulterior motivation rather than genuine doubts given that you incessantly jump on whatever absurd fringe bandwagon you can.

You are also still saying Paul did not consider Peter a part of the twelve. This judgment is simply not warranted. The text can be consistent with Peter being a member: appeared to Peter alone and then to the twelve (includes Peter).


Vinnie

Toto

Vinnie - I didn't say that Paul thinks Peter was not a part of the 12, I only asked. I think that part of 1 Cor is interpolated in any case.

I suspect that the gospels did not take their current form until the second century. I suspect that the letters of Paul may contain some authentic parts, but were heavily redacted in the second century. I don't think that Christianity separated itself from Judaism until after 70 CE.

Why are you accusing me of jumping on every fringe bandwagon? For the record, I am not a follower of Acharya S, I do not have a purple Mohawk or a navel ring, and my tastes in music are quite retro. I just find the conventional Christian narrative unbelievable.

And for Layman, I am not the secular web. The SW Library has lots of fairly conventional scholarship. With much more credibility than the story that the Magi actually followed a start that came to a standstill over Bethlehem.

Steven Carr

LAYMAN
'The most important is the crucifixion, but also being born of a descendent of David. '

CARR
But your own examples of bar Kochba show that this is exactly the sort of thing that Jews would invent.

Layman

Can you prove this about bar Kochba? First they they believed he was a descendent of David? Second that it was not true?

Amaleq13

Regarding "The Twelve", Layman wrote:
I don't think this is "obvious" and, apparently, neither does Vinnie who wrote:

Quote:

I have some doubts myself about the twelve. My understanding is that either they go back to the historical Jesus or they go back to just after his death.

We've got evidence that a group called "The Twelve" existed during Paul's time but inconsistency as to the specific membership.

BK

1 Corinthians 15:5. "And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve. . . ." Because several of the Apostles were known by more than one name, e.g., Peter was aka Cephas.
By who? Paul? Try 1 Corinthians 1:23: "But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness. . . ." Well, let's since books have been written by both sides on this topic, we'll just say that that view is open to debate and move on.


Paul's Missionary Journeys, Peter's visit to Rome, the existence of Christians in Rome such that they were blamed for the burning of Rome by Nero isn't enough? That is a long topic, but there are not many people out there who doubt that most of Paul's letters are authentic, and using a cross between the internal evidence from the letters and the Book of Acts, we can get a pretty good idea of the times that each of the letters were written. I could recommend some good resources if you would like to read them.

I cannot speak for Layman, but I certainly would acknowledge that parts of the Bible appear inconsistent. That is not the same as saying that they contradict each other, but the first reading can give the appearance of inconsistency.

Generally, I read the Sec Web articles and know that if the authors say something is "fantasy, fiction, and psychedelic dreams", I know that it almost certainly isn't.

BK

BK

Would you be so kind as to state your reasons for believing each of these statements?

BK