Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dog-on · 04-12-2012, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdl

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Mark must be read according to the words written on the paper.

And your reading can't be informed by the perspective of people who existed within Mark's cultural milieu?

Nor will his reading be informed by what Mark actually means to say, it seems.

dog-on · 04-12-2012, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdl

And your reading can't be informed by the perspective of people who existed within Mark's cultural milieu?

My interpretation can.

But I cannot claim that Mark said something that isn't written in his book. I cannot say that Mark said something that I only interpreted him as having sad.

Because that's just dishonest.

What do you think the main themes in Mark's story are?

jdl · 04-12-2012, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdl

And your reading can't be informed by the perspective of people who existed within Mark's cultural milieu?

My interpretation can.

But I cannot claim that Mark said something that isn't written in his book. I cannot say that Mark said something that I only interpreted him as having sad.

Because that's just dishonest.

Interpretation is fundamental to the process of reading. You can't read something without interpreting it. This is just so silly.

Can we move on yet? You did choose the title The Jesus Puzzle, not The Jesus Puzzle, Page 1, Paragraph 1, Line 1. Presumably you have something more to say about the book.

Vorkosigan · 04-12-2012, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Once upon a time, someone wrote a story about a man who was God.

We don't know who that someone was, or where he wrote his story. We are not even sure when he wrote it, but we do know that several decades had passed since the supposed events he told of. Later generations gave this storyteller the name of "Mark," but if that was his real name, it was only by coincidence. (p. 1)

JonA, nowhere in this quote you have provided does Earl say here that Mark thought Jesus was God, only that he wrote a story about a man who was (elsewhere identified as) God.

Vorkosigan

JonA · 04-12-2012, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdl

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Mark must be read according to the words written on the paper.

And your reading can't be informed by the perspective of people who existed within Mark's cultural milieu?

Nor will his reading be informed by what Mark actually means to say, it seems.

'Means to say' is just nonsense gobbledygook talk for 'what I want them to say'.

There is what is written and there is what is not written.

Anything else is nonsense.

JonA · 04-12-2012, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

Quote:

Once upon a time, someone wrote a story about a man who was God.

We don't know who that someone was, or where he wrote his story. We are not even sure when he wrote it, but we do know that several decades had passed since the supposed events he told of. Later generations gave this storyteller the name of "Mark," but if that was his real name, it was only by coincidence. (p. 1)

JonA, nowhere in this quote you have provided does Earl say here that Mark thought Jesus was God, only that he wrote a story about a man who was (elsewhere identified as) God.

Vorkosigan

I guess I must have bought an earlier edition of Doherty's book which lacked that parenthetical 'elsewhere identified as' bit.

Really, though. Is there no level too low for y'all to sink to in defending this error? Can't Doherty and his disciples simply admit that there was a mistake; at the very least some questionable wording?

On one's infallible.

dog-on · 04-12-2012, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Nor will his reading be informed by what Mark actually means to say, it seems.

'Means to say' is just nonsense gobbledygook talk for 'what I want them to say'.

There is what is written and there is what is not written.

Anything else is nonsense.

Interesting and quite true, though not in the way you seem to mean it here.

So, again I ask you. What are the main themes present in Mark's gospel?

For instance, what do you think Mark's point is with regards to the recognitions?

Vorkosigan · 04-12-2012, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

I guess I must have bought an earlier edition of Doherty's book which lacked that parenthetical 'elsewhere identified as' bit.

Really, though. Is there no level too low for y'all to sink to in defending this error? Can't Doherty and his disciples simply admit that there was a mistake; at the very least some questionable wording?

On one's infallible.

Haha. No JonA, I just wanted to illustrate how stupid your position is, and how with a bit of bad faith, you can sink to the level you sunk to in the OP of this thread. Not difficult, eh?

Come back when you have something substantive.

Vorkosigan

Diogenes the Cynic · 04-12-2012, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

The whole point of the gospel attrib. Mark is that Jesus was 'God, with us'.

That's Matthew.

Diogenes the Cynic · 04-12-2012, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Mark thought it was blasphemy because he didn't know what the Messiah was and he didn't know what constituted blasphemy.

Just for the record, saying "I am" was not blasphemy (certainly not in Greek), and even verbalizing the Tetragrammaton (which Mark does not say Jesus did), contrary to popular belief, was not, per se blasphemy.

"Son of God" was not a claim to divinity either. All kings were sons of God, and even thoufh the Messiah was sometimes referred to as the son of God, the Messiah still wasn't God, so it doesn't matter.

Messiah
Son of God
Son of Man

None of those things implied divinity in normal, 1st Century Palestinian Aramaic speech, in Hebrew scripture or in Jewish tradition.

Though they did so in Mark's Gospel, dear reader. Understand!

Where?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.