FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-17-2013, 06:48 AM   #161
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
I am reading the books of the OT, the short gMark, the long gMark, gMatthew, gLuke, gJohn, Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Epistles, the Non-Pauline Epistles, Revelation, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Melito, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Arnobius, Ephrem, Eusebius, Jerome, Chrysostom, Philo, Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the younger, Lucian, Cassius Dio, Julian, the Muratorian Canon, The Donation of Constantine and other sources of antiquity.
You also need to read the books of Leucius Charinus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Photius' BIBLIOTHECA OR MYRIOBIBLON


114. [Lucius Charinus, Circuits of the Apostles: Acts of Peter,
Acts of John, Acts of Andrew, Acts of Thomas, Acts of Paul]



Read a book entitled Circuits [1] of the Apostles, comprising the Acts of Peter,
John, Andrew, Thomas, and Paul, the author being one Lucius Charinus, [2] as
the work itself shows. The style is altogether uneven and strange; the words
and constructions, if sometimes free from carelessness, are for the most part
common and hackneyed; there is no trace of the smooth and spontaneous expression,
which is the essential characteristic of the language of the Gospels and Apostles,
or of the consequent natural grace.

The contents also is very silly and self-contradictory. The author asserts that
the God of the Jews, whom he calls evil, whose servant Simon Magus was, is one God,
and Christ, whom he calls good, another. Mingling and confounding all together,
he calls the same both Father and Son. He asserts that He never was really made man,
but only in appearance; that He appeared at different times in different form
to His disciples, now as a young, now as an old man, and then again as a boy,
now taller, now shorter, now very tall, so that His head reached nearly to heaven.

He also invents much idle and absurd nonsense about the Cross, saying that Christ
was not crucified, but some one in His stead, and that therefore He could laugh
at those who imagined they had crucified Him. He declares lawful marriages to be
illegal and that all procreation of children is evil and the work of the evil one.

He talks foolishly about the creator of demons. He tells monstrous tales of silly
and childish resurrections of dead men and oxen and cattle. In the Acts of St. John
he seems to support the opponents of images in attacking their use.

In a word, the book contains a vast amount of

childish,
incredible,
ill-devised,
lying,
silly,
self-contradictory,
impious, and
ungodly statements,


so that one would not be far wrong in calling
it the source and mother of all heresy.


[1] Or "Travels."
[2] Also Leucius, or Leontius. His date is uncertain,
perhaps in the fifth century A.D.
mountainman is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 08:33 AM   #162
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo the Clown-O View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo the Clown-O View Post
What about the stuff in Hebrews 1:1-4?
What stuff? "Through whom he created all orders of existence, the Son who is the effulgence of God's splendour and the stamp of God's very being, and sustains the universe by his word of power"? Where is the Gospels story or the Gospel Jesus in that? "When he had brought about the purgation of sins"? Have YOU even read Hebrews? How did Jesus the High Priest do that? By offering his blood in the heavenly sanctuary! For this writer, THAT is the means of "purgation of sins", not the death, which itself is never located on earth. Where is the Gospel story in that?
I don't know. I wasn't talking about the Gospels. I was talking about the Vision of Isaiah.

Quote:
Why am I wasting my time with people who don't know what they are talking about?
Maybe some of these ‘people who don’t know what they are talking about’ only exist in your imagination.
The presence of some common ideas does not necessarily mean that one document is dependent on another. That is pretty basic logic. And there are huge differences between Hebrews and the Vision of Isaiah. The latter lacks the whole idea of Jesus' blood being offered on the altar of the heavenly sanctuary. Hebrews has nothing about the Father's direction to the Son to descend to Sheol and rescue the souls of the righteous. It has nothing about the place or agency of the cross that is found in VoI 9. So what exactly is it that you think Hebrews derived from the Vision to support the idea that Hebrews has to be a late 2nd century document?

In fact, there is virtually nothing in common between the two except for the basic idea of the Son's sacrificial death, never in either case located on earth or in the context of an earthly Jesus storyline. (Please note: general scholarly opinion is that the earthly 'story' in VoI chapter 11 is an interpolation. For this, see JNGNM, p.123-5....oh wait, I forgot, you all refuse to read my books. Heaven forbid that you should clutter up your minds with actual scholarship, or take into account arguments that contradict your own.) To say that one is dependent on another is like saying that one spy novel is dependent on another because it involves spies.

My remark about people who don't know what they are talking about still stands.

Earl Doherty
EarlDoherty is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 08:46 AM   #163
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: middle east
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
So what exactly is it that you think Hebrews derived from the Vision to support the idea that Hebrews has to be a late 2nd century document?
I never said that Hebrews has to be a late 2nd century document.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
My remark about people who don't know what they are talking about still stands.
And my remark about you imagining things still stands.
Bingo the Clown-O is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 08:51 AM   #164
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: middle east
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
In fact, there is virtually nothing in common between the two except for the basic idea of the Son's sacrificial death
You should tell that to Neil Godfrey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Godfrey
Doherty’s arguments are extensive and founded on a wide spectrum of evidence both within the New Testament writings and beyond. But there is one ancient document that appears to describe the very scenario that Doherty believes is found in writings such as the epistles of Paul and other New Testament letter-writers, in particular the Epistle to the Hebrews. This apocryphal text is The Ascension of Isaiah, which in its present form is a relatively late second century Christian document.

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2011/02/...aiah-in-brief/
Bingo the Clown-O is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 08:57 AM   #165
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Why is that my points which are by far the most interesting and go beyond mere 'opinion' get consistently ignored in this thread? :huh: :rolling:
stephan huller is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 08:59 AM   #166
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: middle east
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
In fact, there is virtually nothing in common between the two except for the basic idea of the Son's sacrificial death
What about the ‘sacred name’ motif?

And what about the ‘sitting at the right hand of God ’ motif?
Bingo the Clown-O is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 09:00 AM   #167
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo the Clown-O View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
In fact, there is virtually nothing in common between the two except for the basic idea of the Son's sacrificial death
You should tell that to Neil Godfrey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Godfrey
Doherty’s arguments are extensive and founded on a wide spectrum of evidence both within the New Testament writings and beyond. But there is one ancient document that appears to describe the very scenario that Doherty believes is found in writings such as the epistles of Paul and other New Testament letter-writers, in particular the Epistle to the Hebrews. This apocryphal text is The Ascension of Isaiah, which in its present form is a relatively late second century Christian document.

http://vridar.wordpress.com/2011/02/...aiah-in-brief/
Godfrey has not said that I have said that Hebrews is based on the Vision of Isaiah. The basic scenario in the NT epistles has light cast upon it by being found in a more spelled-out form in the Ascension of Isaiah, not because the epistles are dependent upon the Ascension. If one encountered a modern document that spoke somewhat allusively about spies and their activities, we might turn to another document which spells out those activities in order to better understand what lies behind the first document. It does not mean that one is directly dependent on the other.

You need to work on your reading and comprehension skills. One avenue toward that might be a reading of Jesus: Neither God Nor Man.

Earl Doherty
EarlDoherty is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 09:02 AM   #168
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: middle east
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
Why is that my points which are by far the most interesting and go beyond mere 'opinion' get consistently ignored in this thread? :huh: :rolling:
Superfluous verbosity? :huh:
Bingo the Clown-O is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 09:03 AM   #169
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Maybe that's it. The limited attention span of people today.
stephan huller is offline  
Old 01-17-2013, 09:05 AM   #170
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: middle east
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlDoherty View Post
You need to work on your reading and comprehension skills.
I think you’re just upset because you’re looking a little silly right now.
Bingo the Clown-O is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:12 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.