FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page Is Alexander the Great a Fictitious Character Based on Achilles?
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 20 of 27 « First 101819 20 2122 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-14-2007, 06:34 PM   #191
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Christianity is a religion which is based on a religious figure named Jesus who was crucified according to the tradition -- not a definition, but a necessary condition.
Is it? Why?
The term "christianity" comes from (Jesus) Christ. Are you suggesting that Jesus is not a necessary condition for christianity?


spin
spin is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 06:52 PM   #192
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Is it? Why?
The term "christianity" comes from (Jesus) Christ. Are you suggesting that Jesus is not a necessary condition for christianity?


spin
Isn't that exactly your position? Aren't you saying that Jesus Christ didn't exist? But surely you're not saying that Christianity doesn't exist?
J-D is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 07:01 PM   #193
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
No, I didn't. Thanks for clearing that up.
I still haven't. It was 2:12.



The agreement implied by the "right hand of fellowship".



You said "link" and pointed to this passage about the "right hand of fellowship".



You appear to be trying to establish that there was a successful link between Paul and the Jerusalem group by pointing to a statement that seems to be, at best, an exaggeration. spin acknowledged that Paul sought a link but failed. You countered that Gal 2:9 indicated Paul "succeeded in achieving a link". If you did not intend to suggest that the "link" was positive in nature, you chose your words quite poorly.



Disagreement and rejection are the opposite of success in achieving a link.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
What does "right hand of fellowship" from 2:9 really mean given that the matter of whether gentiles need to fully convert to Judaism clearly was not resolved? That "right hand of fellowship" is your link but it is clearly undermined by the passages describing ongoing conflict. What part is true and what part is exaggeration?
I don't know. But it doesn't make any difference to what I'm saying.
You are saying that Paul "succeeded in achieving a link" even though you don't know whether it was a genuinely successful link or not? Surely you can see that it does make a rather significant difference.[/QUOTE]The link I see is that they were at least indirectly linked by the fact that they were operating within the same movement.

As for what Paul 'succeeded' in doing, I used that word in a question to you about how you interpreted Galatians 2:9. And I also contemplated the possible interpretation that Paul's claim in that verse was a total fabrication. But that still means that there must have been some reason why he thought the claim worth fabricating.
J-D is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 07:30 PM   #194
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
The term "christianity" comes from (Jesus) Christ. Are you suggesting that Jesus is not a necessary condition for christianity?
Isn't that exactly your position? Aren't you saying that Jesus Christ didn't exist? But surely you're not saying that Christianity doesn't exist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
Christianity is a religion which is based on a religious figure named Jesus who was crucified according to the tradition -- not a definition, but a necessary condition.
Get it? Figure? This neither assumes a real Jesus nor negates a real one. For one to have a christianity one needs a Jesus (be he real or not).


spin
spin is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 10:05 PM   #195
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
The link I see is that they were at least indirectly linked by the fact that they were operating within the same movement.
How is that observation helpful to you?

Quote:
As for what Paul 'succeeded' in doing, I used that word in a question to you about how you interpreted Galatians 2:9.
No, you used the exact phrase I quoted in response to a post by spin. I already described the exchange.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 10:33 PM   #196
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Isn't that exactly your position? Aren't you saying that Jesus Christ didn't exist? But surely you're not saying that Christianity doesn't exist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
Christianity is a religion which is based on a religious figure named Jesus who was crucified according to the tradition -- not a definition, but a necessary condition.
Get it? Figure? This neither assumes a real Jesus nor negates a real one. For one to have a christianity one needs a Jesus (be he real or not).


spin
OK, yes, for the sake of argument I am canvassing the possibility that Jesus-the-figure is not a necessary condition for Christianity, on the basis that we can't be sure about what the first Christians believed.
J-D is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 10:34 PM   #197
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
The link I see is that they were at least indirectly linked by the fact that they were operating within the same movement.
How is that observation helpful to you?
It contributes to my case that the movement did not originate with Paul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
Quote:
As for what Paul 'succeeded' in doing, I used that word in a question to you about how you interpreted Galatians 2:9.
No, you used the exact phrase I quoted in response to a post by spin. I already described the exchange.
I've just searched and I can't find where I used 'succeeded' other than in a question (whoever it was addressed to). Can you link to the post?
J-D is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 11:23 PM   #198
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Get it? Figure? This neither assumes a real Jesus nor negates a real one. For one to have a christianity one needs a Jesus (be he real or not).
OK, yes, for the sake of argument I am canvassing the possibility that Jesus-the-figure is not a necessary condition for Christianity, on the basis that we can't be sure about what the first Christians believed.
That's sort of like Judaism without Yahweh.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 10-14-2007, 11:54 PM   #199
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
OK, yes, for the sake of argument I am canvassing the possibility that Jesus-the-figure is not a necessary condition for Christianity, on the basis that we can't be sure about what the first Christians believed.
That's sort of like Judaism without Yahweh.


spin
And your point is?

We can't be sure about what the first Jews believed either.
J-D is offline  
Old 10-15-2007, 12:02 AM   #200
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
That's sort of like Judaism without Yahweh.
And your point is?

We can't be sure about what the first Jews believed either.
Sorry J-D, you've apparently just terminated our discussion in absolute reductionism. :wave:


spin
spin is offline  
 
Page 20 of 27 « First 101819 20 2122 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:42 PM.

Top

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