FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-05-2004, 11:49 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon
The fact is, the only people described in Paul's letters to any degree are Paul himself and Jesus.
Are you kidding? He names many individuals associated with his own ministry and they are identified as people known to his audience. He also names many specific locations associated with his own ministry.

Yet he never does the same for a living Jesus.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 02:54 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13
Are you kidding? He names many individuals associated with his own ministry and they are identified as people known to his audience. He also names many specific locations associated with his own ministry.
Just names and places, and that's all.

Quote:
Yet he never does the same for a living Jesus.
He gives more biographical details about Jesus than about anyone else, even himself.
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 04:01 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
Default

Quote:
Just names and places, and that's all.
And that is what is missing wrt Jesus: the names: Mary (his alleged mother), Joseph (his alleged father), Pilate (and Herod) (his alleged killer(s)).

Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Galilee, Golgotha.

Nothing in Paul's writings. Zero.
Ted Hoffman is offline  
Old 09-06-2004, 11:55 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon
Just names and places, and that's all.
And that is all that would be necessary to make it unquestionably clear that an actual human who literally walked the earth was being described.

Quote:
He gives more biographical details about Jesus than about anyone else, even himself.
You know better than that. Asserting that Jesus was "born of a woman" is simply bizarre if he was widely held to be a human but it hardly constitutes a "biographical detail". Do you know of any historical figure about whom an author felt compelled to make a similar assertion? Likewise, making the assertion that Jesus could claim Davidic lineage and Jewish heritage appear to be more statements of faith than "biographical details".
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 09-07-2004, 04:03 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13
And that is all that would be necessary to make it unquestionably clear that an actual human who literally walked the earth was being described.
True.

Quote:
You know better than that. Asserting that Jesus was "born of a woman" is simply bizarre if he was widely held to be a human but it hardly constitutes a "biographical detail". Do you know of any historical figure about whom an author felt compelled to make a similar assertion?
How would Paul say that of an MJ, and have it make more sense?

Quote:
Likewise, making the assertion that Jesus could claim Davidic lineage and Jewish heritage appear to be more statements of faith than "biographical details".
Nevertheless, biographical details. Paul calls both Jesus and himself "seed of Abraham".
GakuseiDon is offline  
Old 09-07-2004, 06:04 AM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
Default

Quote:
Nevertheless, biographical details. Paul calls both Jesus and himself "seed of Abraham".
This is an incorrect and literal interpretation of the passages like:

GAL 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Interpretation

A. SEED
Paul is saying that once you believe in Christ, you become the seed of Abraham. Christ is the seed of Abraham according to the covenant, not genetically and not ethnically - its a matter of faith. And this is how Gentiles could be of Adam's 'seed' too (and enjoy the 'fruits' of the covenant) - with their foreskins intact!

Being of Abraham's seed means being a person of faith as Abraham demonstrated when he undertook to sacrifice Isaac unflinchingly. In the same way, Paul tells us in Phillipians, an unnamed god descended and underwent persecution and was exalted by being named Jesus. This god/angel demonstrated the same 'spirit' as Abraham and thus was of the same 'seed'. Philo tells us that Jesus' soul was like any other soul except he chose to tenaciously stick to the logos (divine wisdom) and thereby became one with it.

Thus being of Abraham's seed has got nothing to do with genetics or bloodline: its spiritual. Just like you can call an evil person "Hitler's son" or Hitlerling.

B. HEIRS

Adam mucked up things. Abraham made them right so Abraham's heirs are freed from the sin of Adam.
Ted Hoffman is offline  
Old 09-07-2004, 10:52 AM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GakuseiDon
How would Paul say that of an MJ, and have it make more sense?
How can any statement of faith about a spiritual figure be said to not make sense?

Why would Paul need to emphasize or even mention that a historical Jesus was a Jew who was born of a woman?
Amaleq13 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:39 AM.

Top

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