Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
10-03-2009, 03:02 PM | #71 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Location: eastern North America
Posts: 1,468
|
Quote:
Quote:
In brief, then, you would argue that the New Testament is (with or without some interpretative guide) the sole source of information regarding Jesus, including, what he said, when, where and to whom. The New Testament is entirely written in Greek. Does it not trouble you, No_Robots, even slightly, to think of a "god" unable to write Greek, though we know that other Jewish rabbis did read and write Greek in that era? Why wouldn't this famous Jewish rabbi, Jesus of Capernum, not write, himself, of his thoughts, his ideas, his dictums, if he were a real person, or a god, for that matter? Why should we require a German, or a Frenchman, or an Englishman, thousands of years later, to explain to us what Jesus himself said, or believed, based upon interpretation of some unknown Greek authors, writing at an unknown location, at an unknown time, with an unknown agenda of their own? To answer Heilman's question, if we change it slightly, to read "Socrates", rather than "Jesus", then what is your reply? Do we not depend upon Plato to learn what Socrates said??? Sure we do. Why not argue, then, No_Robots, that those of us who posit the Bible as literature, and myth, ought, to be consistent, consider Socrates' words, also documented, as with Jesus', in Greek, as fanciful, mythical, and untrue? Do we need, as with the case of Jesus' supposed teachings, an interpreter, to help us understand the ideas of Socrates? |
||
10-03-2009, 09:03 PM | #72 | ||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|