Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chris Weimer · 04-28-2006, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by post tenebras lux

But I keep hearing 'liberal' christians calling Paul a 'ding-a-ling', and I find it hard not to agree with them even though I also understand the argument that Paul was the 'first christian'. Thus Paul is not the most trustworthy of sources to me - he seems to me to have felt he had a license to fib and make things up on the hoof.

Do you have any actual evidence for this, or is it just how you feel? If the latter, than it's worthless.

Quote:

But if the stories of this Jesus were floating around as general folktales/folklore, isn't John the Baptist exactly the sort of figure people would include in the story?

Would it? Why would it?

Quote:

With Jesus we seem to keep switching back and forth between people obviously knowing that he was the chosen one and other people who had no clue who he was.

And this is a problem why?

Quote:

Jesus is born in a manger - but worshipped by kings - which seems to be forgotten when he goes to the temple - etc.

Please, we must keep the gospel traditions strictly apart from the gospel fabrications. Both birth stories are late fictions and do not reflect early Christian history.

Quote:

And then Jesus meets the famous Jonh the Baptist and - hey presto - John declares himself not worthy - then Jesus goes off and people start saying 'who is this man?'

It's possible, it is even plausible, but if you hinge your entire basis on that this relationship may be fabricated, then your'e stretching it quite a bit.

Quote:

I wish the gospel writers had just made up their minds as to whether Jesus was recognisably different or not: instead it looks like they portrayed Jesus to be anonymous or recognisable depending on whether it fits the story.

Why should you expect the gospel writers to be in harmony? That doesn't make any sense.

Quote:

To me it would be prefectly credible for the references to John the Baptist to be additions of the order of "Oh, so did this Jesus of yours ever meet the famous John the Baptist then?" - "Why yes! Not only did he meet him, but ... blah blah".

But if he antedated JtB, then the most likely response would have been, "Of course not! John the Baptist was preaching what Jesus taught 100 years before!"

Quote:

If we had independent writings from JtB - or if his followers (I forget their name) believed their own john/jesus stories - then I would reconsider, but to me the fact that christians claim to be able to co-op JtB is no different to people co-oping Richard the Lionheart into stories about Robin Hood.

Perhaps, but it is not acceptable merely because you say so. You need evidence for anyone to take this hypothesis seriously.

Quote:

Not quite sure what this is actually referring to. Perhaps it is just random chance as to which time period ended up as the fixed standard to which the heavily-vetted stories were bent to fit?

So you're saying that not only do the stories have to change significantly to fit the time period (believeable), but that they appropriated the characters of a different time (believeable), and were formed in such a way that the characteristics of the previous time were lost but the new time were added overwhelmingly, and all this happens by chance.

Sorry, but I'll take the more probable route. I think Occam's Razor can do away with your theory.

Chris Weimer · 04-28-2006, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

What are the exact words that Paul uses to identify the Founders and who they were?

Two passages:

Gal. 2.9: And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

I Cor. 15.3-9: 1 Corinthians 15:3-9 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juma

Why should we believe that Paul has anything to do with Jesus?

Well, he mentions him, and that he met and interacted with his followers.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.