spin

Wrong, yet again.

Marcion, whose gospel we can date and that's earlier than the extant copies of, and references to, Luke on which Marcion is supposed to have based his gospel (ie there is a good chance that Marcion's came first), only talks about the 15 year of Tiberius for when Jesus came down to Capernaum.

Note that Marcion knows nothing about Nazareth, which is merely a place and which should have been relevant to him if there had been a reference to it in some hypothetical source he may have used.

The dating basically belongs to Marcion, the error to Luke.

So Judge 1850 years after the event has paranormal perception.


spin

judge

A good chance eh?
That is reasurring...whew!
Some people think they have a good chance at the casino as well.

rlogan

Roger that Amaleq13. I don't remember Doherty making this point, and it will be attacked by the HJers as another "argument from silence".

But the more I think about it, there is just too much material for there not to have been solid incidental references that allow us to date with some certainty if there was a historical Paul writing about a historical Jesus.

Judge, I think that they are to a large degree what they intended to be. There were a lot of forgeries also hoping to achieve the same status.

Now, what exactly is the purpose of the Hebrew Bible if we were to for argument's sake adopt it as a "Christian" work?

judge

Ok perhaps you are right , what do you think Philemon was "intended to be"?

Quote:

Now, what exactly is the purpose of the Hebrew Bible if we were to for argument's sake adopt it as a "Christian" work?

Best I can tell these this is a collection of writings men kept detailing the law of the jewsih people , some stories from their history and some prophetic writings re the gift of God

spin

You continually make astounding claims for the literature based on no evidence. You should be happy that I give you some.


spin

rlogan

Regardless of whether Paul wrote it, or whether anyone named Philemon or Onesimus ever existed, it is a propaganda piece.

[2] And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:

We cannot say it was just a letter to his buddy Philemon. It was ostensibly a position paper on slavery, and runaway slaves in particular.

But I infer it is of much greater sonsequence. The runaway slave is about as low as you can get in society, and feeding him to the dogs would not be out of order for the time.

So how we are to treat the runaway slave is a metaphor for how we should treat even the lowest in society.

Whether sincere, or an insidious fabrication from a Roman forgery mill - it's tactical impact is the same.

At the strategic level, that is another question.


So no, I do not think it is an example of just a letter to people he knew.

judge

So ...you think there is a "good chance". But on the basis of this "good chance" you know that Luke is in error?

Funny that your agnosticsim and skepticism is not allowed entry here.

spin

We have the evidence of the existence of the Marcion gospel in the 140s and evidence of the gospel of Luke in the 180s. We have a description of what Marcion's gospel says on the dating. We can compare that with what Luke says. We have the evidence against the Lucan information regarding both Quirinius and Lusanias. Seems good to me.

But you have to have 100%, right? That's why you gamble on the Peshitta and make claims about it you can't back up, or you try extremely hard to conjure up farcical loopholes to justify the misappropriation of the Jewish literature.


spin

Impresario

Kind of like vegetarians who are for meat, no?

judge

Crafty bugger!

Quote:

Whether sincere, or an insidious fabrication from a Roman forgery mill

Hmmm...I have another idea. I'm going to record someone reading it and play the message backwards. It may be from the devil.