Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GakuseiDon · 10-07-2011, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCalavera

GakuseiDon, I'd love to agree with you, but your interpretation in this case is too off. If you can get away with such a bizarre interpretation, then mythicists should then be allowed the same, and I won't agree with that.

I like keeping things as simple as necessary. Your explanation is just too complicated you had to add your own thoughts into the text.

It isn't mine, it is actually Dunn's and others, using the idea that Paul is referencing an "Adam Christology". As Paul puts it:

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

This key passage explains Paul's thinking with regards to Adam and Christ, both being key progenitors for those who followed. So when we read that Paul thought that Jesus was "the image of God" (2 Cor 4:4) just as Adam was thought to be the image of God, then a pattern starts to emerge.

Here are some links that expands on Paul's "Adam Christology":
http://emergingfrombabel.blogspot.co...s-letters.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=NHF...page&q&f=false

archibald · 10-07-2011, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by archibald

Guess, Dog-on. Give it your really best shot. Have a cup of coffee first, maybe. :]

:huh:

You realize that Paul was a Christian apologist, right?

Yes. If that's what Toto meant, then I stand corrected.

(He did say apologists plural though. Are you sure he meant Paul? I'm not).

GakuseiDon · 10-07-2011, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

... He humbled himself by NOT coming as king or warrior or ruler, but as a servant.

Yeah right, like I could have been the King of the World if I had merely decided to be born that way.

igsfly:

Imagine you were born that way -- the heir to a kingdom, for example -- and then you were taken to a large mountain where you were offered all the kingdoms of the world. And then you refuse the offer. That's the sort of scenario that would fit here.

Wow, GDon - so that rules out lowly carpenters from Nazareth (or whereever). So - out with it, what King, or heir to a kingdom, are you thinking about??

No, it rules IN lowly carpenters from Nazareth. I'm honestly confused by people's thinking on this. This is how it probably came about:

"Look! Jesus is the son of David! The Messiah!"
"Wait a moment, he's just a carpenter. And he just got crucified! How can he be the Messiah?"
"Er... he CHOSE that. Yeah, I know this will be a stumbling block to you guys, but actually Scriptures predicted that this would happen. Let me get the verses for you..."

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

No lowly carpenter, no gospel JC - looks like 'Paul' had someone else on his mind.....

Quote:

Page 112/113

...the Jesus of the early epistles is not the Jesus of the gospels. The ministry of the latter may well be modelled on the career of an itinerant Galilean preacher of the early first century, the former derives largely from early Christian interpretations of Jewish Wisdom figures with some influences from redeemer figures of pagan mystery religions.
Mark’s gospel fuses the two Jesus figures into one.

The Jesus Myth. G.Wells (or via: amazon.co.uk)

my bolding

Nice. But, so what?

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Hint: only pre-existent beings with plenty of juice (divine entities) would have been believed by the author to get to make these kinds of choices.

Really. So Paul is offering this example for his readers who are pre-existent divine entities?

Ignore the hymn for a moment and look at the surrounding context:

Phil2:3 Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.
4 Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others.
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who...

Then comes the hymn. Then Paul concludes:

12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.
14 Do all things without complaining and disputing,
15 that you may become blameless and harmless, the sons of God without fault...

See the themes: Humility. Obedience. These are the things that make you a son of God.

Would you agree that "sons of God" at the end does not refer to pre-existent divine beings?

Earthly, human, fleshly, sons of god - and heavenly sons of god (however imagined...). 'Paul' and his dualism - the Jerusalem above and the earthly Jerusalem. Can't have one without the other - you know that old song.....

Not really. Maybe you can get together and have a duet with Dog-on.

If you want to make a point, please make it. I can't read minds I'm afraid.

dog-on · 10-07-2011, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archibald

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

:huh:

You realize that Paul was a Christian apologist, right?

Yes. If that's what Toto meant, then I stand corrected.

(He did say apologists plural though. Are you sure he meant Paul? I'm not).

Perhaps he meant Paul, or whomever wrote it. Maybe a committee of apologists.

MCalavera · 10-07-2011, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCalavera

GakuseiDon, I'd love to agree with you, but your interpretation in this case is too off. If you can get away with such a bizarre interpretation, then mythicists should then be allowed the same, and I won't agree with that.

I like keeping things as simple as necessary. Your explanation is just too complicated you had to add your own thoughts into the text.

It isn't mine, it is actually Dunn's and others, using the idea that Paul is referencing an "Adam Christology". As Paul puts it:

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

This key passage explains Paul's thinking with regards to Adam and Christ, both being key progenitors for those who followed. So when we read that Paul thought that Jesus was "the image of God" (2 Cor 4:4) just as Adam was thought to be the image of God, then a pattern starts to emerge.

Here are some links that expands on Paul's "Adam Christology":
http://emergingfrombabel.blogspot.co...s-letters.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=NHF...page&q&f=false

Will look into this further tomorrow. I need to make sure of this myself anyway.

MCalavera · 10-07-2011, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archibald

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

:huh:

You realize that Paul was a Christian apologist, right?

Yes. If that's what Toto meant, then I stand corrected.

(He did say apologists plural though. Are you sure he meant Paul? I'm not).

I thought you were just being ironic and trying to prove a point to Toto.

aa5874 · 10-07-2011, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

......No, it rules IN lowly carpenters from Nazareth. I'm honestly confused by people's thinking on this. This is how it probably came about:

"Look! Jesus is the son of David! The Messiah!"
"Wait a moment, he's just a carpenter. And he just got crucified! How can he be the Messiah?"
"Er... he CHOSE that. Yeah, I know this will be a stumbling block to you guys, but actually Scriptures predicted that this would happen. Let me get the verses for you..."

Is that DUNN'S position or your own invention? Are you going to take the rap for that myth fable.

Well, Origen will DESTROY your probability INSTANTLY.

"Against Celsus" 6

Quote:

......... in none of the Gospels current in the Churches is Jesus Himself ever described as being a carpenter....

I hope you take the Rap for your ridiculous inventive myth fable about the carpenter.

Don't BLAME DUNN for the things you've DONE.

maryhelena · 10-07-2011, 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

... He humbled himself by NOT coming as king or warrior or ruler, but as a servant.

Yeah right, like I could have been the King of the World if I had merely decided to be born that way.

igsfly:

Imagine you were born that way -- the heir to a kingdom, for example -- and then you were taken to a large mountain where you were offered all the kingdoms of the world. And then you refuse the offer. That's the sort of scenario that would fit here.

Wow, GDon - so that rules out lowly carpenters from Nazareth (or whereever). So - out with it, what King, or heir to a kingdom, are you thinking about??

No, it rules IN lowly carpenters from Nazareth. I'm honestly confused by people's thinking on this. This is how it probably came about:

"Look! Jesus is the son of David! The Messiah!"
"Wait a moment, he's just a carpenter. And he just got crucified! How can he be the Messiah?"

"Er... he CHOSE that. Yeah, I know this will be a stumbling block to you guys, but actually Scriptures predicted that this would happen. Let me get the verses for you..."

GDon - carpenters are not messiah figures. And if one wants to nit-pick here - the word translated as carpenter can also be translated with reference to other craftsmen - or, interestingly, it could be "an idiomatic expression for a scholar". here In other word - don't read 'Paul' into the gospel JC story....If one wants to fuse these two stories - then perhaps pay attention to Wells - first get ones ducks in a row - first read these two stories as though they were independent stories - and then attempt the fusing of these two stories into one storyline, the NT storyline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

No lowly carpenter, no gospel JC - looks like 'Paul' had someone else on his mind.....

Quote:

Page 112/113

...the Jesus of the early epistles is not the Jesus of the gospels. The ministry of the latter may well be modelled on the career of an itinerant Galilean preacher of the early first century, the former derives largely from early Christian interpretations of Jewish Wisdom figures with some influences from redeemer figures of pagan mystery religions.
Mark’s gospel fuses the two Jesus figures into one.

The Jesus Myth. G.Wells (or via: amazon.co.uk)

my bolding

Nice. But, so what?

So what? Wells has suggested two Jesus figures - and that insight could go someway to resolving some of the issues over the NT JC storyline. ie the JC of the gospel story and the JC of the 'Paul' story are not one and the same figure. The biography of the one, the gospel JC, is not the biography of 'Paul's' JC figure. One is a lowly carpenter (the usual interpretation) - the other a figure who is able to lower himself, ie from a position of greater stature.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Hint: only pre-existent beings with plenty of juice (divine entities) would have been believed by the author to get to make these kinds of choices.

Really. So Paul is offering this example for his readers who are pre-existent divine entities?

Ignore the hymn for a moment and look at the surrounding context:

Phil2:3 Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself.
4 Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others.
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who...

Then comes the hymn. Then Paul concludes:

12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.
14 Do all things without complaining and disputing,
15 that you may become blameless and harmless, the sons of God without fault...

See the themes: Humility. Obedience. These are the things that make you a son of God.

Would you agree that "sons of God" at the end does not refer to pre-existent divine beings?

Earthly, human, fleshly, sons of god - and heavenly sons of god (however imagined...). 'Paul' and his dualism - the Jerusalem above and the earthly Jerusalem. Can't have one without the other - you know that old song.....

Not really. Maybe you can get together and have a duet with Dog-on.

If you want to make a point, please make it. I can't read minds I'm afraid.

The point - referencing the quote from Wells - is that there is no way to link 'Paul's' JC figure with the gospel JC figure. One figure, the gospel JC figure, is a carpenter. Who, according to Wells, is possibly modelled upon an itinerant Galilean preacher.

The other figure, 'Paul's' JC figure, chose a lowly option (no mention of carpenters) from a higher position. Thus, the question becomes - with regard to 'Paul's' dualism - who was 'Paul's' JC figure, the figure that lowered himself and was obedient even to the cross, modelled upon. ie who was the earthly, fleshly, figure, upon which 'Paul' modelled his heavenly JC figure?

archibald · 10-07-2011, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by archibald

(He did say apologists plural though. Are you sure he meant Paul? I'm not).

Perhaps he meant Paul, or whomever wrote it. Maybe a committee of apologists.

And that, Dog-on, was why I asked him for evidence.

Would you just like to go back to back before the bit you first commented? :]

dog-on · 10-07-2011, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archibald

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Perhaps he meant Paul, or whomever wrote it. Maybe a committee of apologists.

And that, Dog-on, was why I asked him for evidence.

Would you just like to go back to back before the bit you first commented? :]

So I ask you again, evidence for what?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.