aa5874

Why do you think that the Pauline writer was truthful?

There is no credible external source that can show that there were real 1st century characters called James or Peter/Cephas and that they met the Pauline writer. Even internally the Pauline writer is contradicted by the author of Acts his supposed close companion.

The author of Acts claimed Saul/Paul went to Jerusalem with Barnabas very shortly after he was converted by a bright light but the Pauline writer claimed he went to Jerusalem after at least 3 years.

It is either that one or both wrote fiction.

What credible historical source of antiquity can resolve the whereabouts of the Pauline writer or Saul/Paul?

spamandham

I suppose that depends on what you mean by 'mainstream' and by 'Biblical scholarship'. For example, there are many 'Biblical scholars' who have little or no training in historical methods, history itself, the relevant ancient languages or cultures, or even textual analysis.

But they hold theology degrees and are considered experts on the Bible. They're quacks. But they are often included in the phantom group known as 'mainstream'.

As to that group, it's common to see references to 'mainstream scholarship' as if it had some meaning other than 'properly trained and credentialed individuals using broadly accepted techniques'. When used to mean 'scholarship which presupposes x, y, and z', then we are not really referring to scholarship at all, but to cult dogma.

Maybe. The evidence for it exists, but IMHO is weak.

I don't think Q is a necessary hypothesis (because of my conclusions regarding datings of the gospels). But if you draw different conclusions about the datings of the gospels (more traditional datings), then Q becomes almost necessary. If the synoptics were penned at roughly the same time, how else could you explain the amazing similarities?

show_no_mercy

Just like Jesus makes the same exact "prediction" later in Matthew 22:33-40 with the parable of the Wicked Tenants. Both "predictions" have the theme of Jews supposedly killing their prophets and god destroying them (or will destroy them, as both your interpretation of 1 Thes 2:16 and Matthew have it) because of it. Both are allusions to the destruction of the temple in 70 CE. "Predictions" in religious writings are a sign that they were written after the fact.

aa5874

This is an extremely significant observation.

Predictions in religious writings about the Fall of the Temple may indeed indicate that they were written after the fact.

Eureka!

ApostateAbe

Sometimes, apocalyptic or eschatological predictions are made simply out of hatred or zeal (i.e. the Tyre prophecy of the Old Testament). Christians including Paul thought that the kingdom of God was right around the corner, and the critics or their cult, especially the Judaists, would be the first to bear God's wrath. I don't see Paul's language as anything that needs a special explanation.

show_no_mercy

So is this one instance where you're depending on your own personal opinion instead of the scholarship on 1 Thes 2:14-16?

ApostateAbe

Sort of. I am not aware of the scholarship on the matter.

Kapyong

Gday,

Oh dear ...

we had normal text for a couple years maybe,
then aa5874 found bold and we've suffered that for some months,
now he's tumesced to bold underline.

I predict BOLD, UNDERLINE, ALL-CAPS in a few weeks,
followed shortly by RED, BOLD, UNDERLINE, ALL-CAPS

After that, I guess he'll be reduced to QQing in Barrens Chat.


K.

aa5874

But, this is most incredible.

Every thing I post is scrutinized as if I am a "no-bold" list.

Now, you have been "SUFFERING" for months when I bold some words!

What's next?

Please deal with the OP.

Kapyong

Gday,

Wow.

Bold underline italic all-caps already !

Red flashing large bold underline all-caps can't be far behind.


K.