Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 02-20-2011, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Paul writes he was 'born under law" doesnt he? Wouldn't that mean being jewish?

That's a possibility, but not necessary.

So....um...whats your alternative?

"born under the law" is a formulaic anti-Marcionite interpolation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

How do you know this definitely means demons?

Couldn't "powers of this world" mean the jewish leadership or the Romans?

We've had this discussion before. Paul could have meant that the demons inspired the Romans or the Jews. But the point is that Paul does not name Pilate or any other secular ruler.

What makes you definitely sure demons were involved (in pauls mind)?

Of course, I can't read Paul's mind. He used language that indicated that demons were involved, and he lived in a world that his culture assumed was run by demons. (Read Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World (or via: amazon.co.uk) or William Manchester's A World Lit Only By Fire (or via: amazon.co.uk))

The important point is that he never mentioned Pilate, or Herod, or any particular Roman or Jewish ruler.

judge · 02-21-2011, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

So....um...whats your alternative?

"born under the law" is a formulaic anti-Marcionite interpolation.

That's not terribly convincing though. You don't like the text so you speculate it is an interpolation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

What makes you definitely sure demons were involved (in pauls mind)?

Of course, I can't read Paul's mind. He used language that indicated that demons were involved, and he lived in a world that his culture assumed was run by demons. (Read Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World (or via: amazon.co.uk) or William Manchester's A World Lit Only By Fire (or via: amazon.co.uk))

The important point is that he never mentioned Pilate, or Herod, or any particular Roman or Jewish ruler.

You claimed enequivocally that paul told us "demons were responsible", but now you are backpedalling.

Toto · 02-21-2011, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

"born under the law" is a formulaic anti-Marcionite interpolation.

That's not terribly convincing though. You don't like the text so you speculate it is an interpolation.

I have no problem with the text. It is a formula. It doesn't say that Jesus had a Jewish mother - you are trying to read that into it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Of course, I can't read Paul's mind. He used language that indicated that demons were involved, and he lived in a world that his culture assumed was run by demons. (Read Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World (or via: amazon.co.uk) or William Manchester's A World Lit Only By Fire (or via: amazon.co.uk))

The important point is that he never mentioned Pilate, or Herod, or any particular Roman or Jewish ruler.

You claimed enequivocally that paul told us "demons were responsible", but now you are backpedalling.

Nope. Paul said that the rules of the age crucified Jesus, and that refers to demons. The demons might have been working through a human agency, but Paul doesn't name a particular leader. So this passage is not evidence of any human characteristic of Jesus.

judge · 02-21-2011, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

You claimed enequivocally that paul told us "demons were responsible", but now you are backpedalling.

Nope. Paul said that the rules of the age crucified Jesus, and that refers to demons. .

How do you know? Just explain it in your own words rather than pointing me to a book by Carl Sagan, who as far as I know aint an authority on these matters.

dogsgod · 02-21-2011, 06:15 PM

.

The most annoying thing about that video occurs at 43 minutes, 23 seconds, when someone in the audience asks why the mainstream of scholarship does not see how fictitious the accounts read concerning Acts and Carrier says the main reason is that, and then it cuts to a later time and his answer is missing. Of all questions. Does Carrier ever post on this board? I want to know the answer to that question as he sees it.

.

aa5874 · 02-21-2011, 06:20 PM

I find it extremely disturbing when people here are trying to prove the most improbable.

The Pauline writings are NON-HERETICAL. It was deemed heretical by the Church writers that Jesus was just a man with an earthly father or was of the seed of man.

"Paul" was NOT named as an heretic in "Against Heresies", "Prescription Against the Heretics" and "Refutation Against All Heresies" where the Heresy that Jesus was a man with an earthly father was called an Heresy.

"Paul" claimed he was NOT the apostle of a man, did NOT get his Gospel from a Man, could NOT pleass Man to be a servant of Jesus, did NOT confer with flesh and blood, that Jesus was BORN after the Spirit and that Jesus was the Son of God who was RAISED from the dead all in Galatians.

Let us NOT waste time. The NT Canon is NON-HERETICAL where Jesus was the OFFSPRING of some kind of Ghost.

Toto · 02-21-2011, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsgod

.

The most annoying thing about that video occurs at 43 minutes, 23 seconds, when someone in the audience asks why the mainstream of scholarship does not see how fictitious the accounts read concerning Acts and Carrier says the main reason is that, and then it cuts to a later time and his answer is missing. Of all questions. Does Carrier ever post on this board? I want to know the answer to that question as he sees it.

He doesn't hang out here, but you can email him at rcarrier AT infidels.org

dogsgod · 02-21-2011, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogsgod

.

The most annoying thing about that video occurs at 43 minutes, 23 seconds, when someone in the audience asks why the mainstream of scholarship does not see how fictitious the accounts read concerning Acts and Carrier says the main reason is that, and then it cuts to a later time and his answer is missing. Of all questions. Does Carrier ever post on this board? I want to know the answer to that question as he sees it.

He doesn't hang out here, but you can email him at rcarrier AT infidels.org

Thank you.

I sent Richard an email.

.

Toto · 02-21-2011, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Nope. Paul said that the rules of the age crucified Jesus, and that refers to demons. .

How do you know? Just explain it in your own words rather than pointing me to a book by Carl Sagan, who as far as I know aint an authority on these matters.

To repeat the previous discussions on this issue:

This is what Paul says: 1 Cor 2:8

Quote:

None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory

Earl Doherty

Quote:

Corinthians 2:6-8:

6 And yet I do speak of a wisdom for those who are mature, not a wisdom of this passing age, nor of the rulers of this age who are passing away. 7 I speak of God's secret wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and predestined by God for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

A great amount of scholarly ink has been spilled over the meaning of "the rulers of this age" (ton archonton tou aionos toutou, verses 6 and 8). In both pagan and Jewish parlance, the word archontes could be used to refer to earthly rulers and those in authority (as in Romans 13:3). But it is also, along with several others like it, a technical term for the spirit forces, the "powers and authorities" who rule the lowest level of the heavenly world and who exercise authority over the events and fate (usually cruel) of the earth, its nations and individuals. That invisible powers, mostly evil, were at work behind earthly phenomena was a widely held belief in Hellenistic times, including among Jews, and it was shared by Christianity. J. H. Charlesworth (Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, p.66) puts it this way:

"Earth is full of demons. Humanity is plagued by them. Almost all misfortunes are because of demons: sickness, drought, death and especially humanity's weaknesses about remaining faithful to the covenant (with God). The region between heaven and earth seems to be almost cluttered by demons and angels; humanity is often seen as a pawn, helpless in the face of such cosmic forces."

There has not been a universal scholarly consensus on what Paul has in mind in 1 Corinthians 2:8, but over the last century a majority of commentators (see below), some reluctantly, have decided that he is referring to the demon spirits. The term aion, "age," or sometimes in the plural "ages," was in a religious and apocalyptic context a reference to the present age of the world, in the sense of all recorded history, since the next age was the one after the Parousia when God's Kingdom would be established. One of the governing ideas of the period was that the world to the present point had been under the control of the evil angels and spirit powers, and that the coming of the Kingdom would see their long awaited overthrow. Humanity was engaged in a war against the demons, and one of the strongest appeals of the Hellenistic salvation cults was their promise of divine aid in this war on a personal level....

...

Modern scholars like C. K. Barrett (First Epistle to the Corinthians, p.72), Paula Fredriksen (From Jesus to Christ, p.56), and Jean Hering (The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, p.16-17, a brief but penetrating analysis), have felt constrained to agree. Delling in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (I, p.489) notes that the spirit rulers are portrayed by Paul as "treating the Lord of glory as prey in ignorance of the divine plan for salvation." They operated in the spiritual realm, which S. Salmond (The Expositor's Greek Testament, Ephesians, p.284) describes as "supra-terrestrial but sub-celestial regions." Paul Ellingworth, A Translator's Handbook for 1 Corinthians, p.46, states: "A majority of scholars think that supernatural powers are intended here."

S. G. F. Brandon (History, Time and Deity, p.167) unflinchingly declares that although Paul's statement "may seem on cursory reading to refer to the Crucifixion as an historical event. . .the expression 'rulers of this age' does not mean the Roman and Jewish authorities. Instead, it denotes the daemonic powers who . . . were believed to inhabit the planets (the celestial spheres) and control the destinies of men. . . . Paul attributes the Crucifixion not to Pontius Pilate and the Jewish leaders, but to these planetary powers."

judge · 02-21-2011, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

How do you know? Just explain it in your own words rather than pointing me to a book by Carl Sagan, who as far as I know aint an authority on these matters.

To repeat the previous discussions on this issue:

OK, but you previously admitted,in that thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The evidence has been discussed here before, and, as with much Biblical interpretation, it is not definintive.

But now you sound like you know for sure. Have you changed your mind since then or were you just overstasing things a bit?

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

02-21-2011, 06:15 PM	#25
dogsgod Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: British Columbia Posts: 104	. The most annoying thing about that video occurs at 43 minutes, 23 seconds, when someone in the audience asks why the mainstream of scholarship does not see how fictitious the accounts read concerning Acts and Carrier says the main reason is that, and then it cuts to a later time and his answer is missing. Of all questions. Does Carrier ever post on this board? I want to know the answer to that question as he sees it. .

02-21-2011, 06:20 PM	#26
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	I find it extremely disturbing when people here are trying to prove the most improbable. The Pauline writings are NON-HERETICAL. It was deemed heretical by the Church writers that Jesus was just a man with an earthly father or was of the seed of man. "Paul" was NOT named as an heretic in "Against Heresies", "Prescription Against the Heretics" and "Refutation Against All Heresies" where the Heresy that Jesus was a man with an earthly father was called an Heresy. "Paul" claimed he was NOT the apostle of a man, did NOT get his Gospel from a Man, could NOT pleass Man to be a servant of Jesus, did NOT confer with flesh and blood, that Jesus was BORN after the Spirit and that Jesus was the Son of God who was RAISED from the dead all in Galatians. Let us NOT waste time. The NT Canon is NON-HERETICAL where Jesus was the OFFSPRING of some kind of Ghost.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.