Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
Quote:
|
All you needed to do, rather than the histrionics, was to say that Collins refers to 4Q246 then. Perhaps, it doesn't dawn on you that I don't spend all my time in one thing or another but find myself dealing with all sorts of religious aspects, dealing with Paul and Galatians, Tertullian, Tacitus, Josephus and Hebrew bible. If you want me to be a mind-reader, you can forget it. An explanation of what exactly you wanted me to read the specific passage would have saved all your rubbish.
|
I believe I did refer you to a specific passage. 7 pages of it. A 7 page discussion on the Danielic Messiah before Christianity. I referred you to a "fuller discussion." "Discussion," spin, implies that perhaps you should read the cited portion to see what's in store.
I couldnt' possibly have been any clearer as to what I expected you to read. There was nothing vague about it. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
To hear your theatrics one would think I told you to read the book, or vaguely referenced "Neusner's book on Messianism," or some other reference that you couldn't possibly be expected to find. It was a specific reference to a specific discussion in the book. I'm sorry that "fuller discussion" isn't restricted to a paragraph or two. I'm sure that would be more convenient. It's not the way it is.
|
:boohoo:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
Your failure to read it reflects on your sloppiness, not mine.
|
When stuck for something to say, rework what has come your way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
No need to be a mind reader, spin. Just read what's cited. If you don't have it, say so. I'll see what I can do to provide it.
|
I'm not going to read seven pages of anything just because someone pointed me to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
If you had it one must wonder why you couldn't read the 7 cited pages. There's even a few headers in there. It probably works out to more like 5 1/2 pages.
|
Time and money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
If you used "half a braincell"...
|
...rework what has come your way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
...you'd realize that telling me you have it but apparently not being able to read it doesn't tell me much about your competency.
|
How can I wind you up any further with your woad wage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
How about anyone who feels so inclined take a look at pages 163-170 to find a fuller discussion of the use of Daniel in 4Q246. I promise you won't be disappointed.
|
Do you feel that there is a solid connection between 4Q246 and Daniel? Don't answer, if Collins says so, it's gotta be what Wick thinks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
You won't find the term "4Q246," you'll find all kinds of references to it. Just not the catalog number. Should I conclude from now on that 1QS is only being discussed if I see that term, and that "Community Rule" isn't a reference to it going forward?
|
Yeah, it took six pages to mention it as it is known in the field.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
The suggestion that you won't find a "reference to it" is nonsense. I just gave you one such reference to it on p.167.
|
Stop being slow. 4Q246 is the subject. Where is it mentioned in the pages you cited? I told you where.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
To recap: I referenced a 7 page passage. You assured me you'd read it,...
|
Where exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
...but it didn't say what I claimed it did. I called bullshit. You implied again that you had read the section. I called bullshit again.
|
I'm glad scholarship is not your day job: you'd be out of a living quickly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
Now you didn't read, you skimmed for the term "4Q246." My how the tune has changed.
|
Perhaps, it has only just this very instant dawned that you have been making bad assumptions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
My guess? You still haven't read it.
|
If that's what your heart wants. Who am I to disavow you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
Quote:
|
Once you realize this has been just one big theatric, you can face the fact that you have nothing definite for your claim that there was a different type of Jewish messiah from one that was there as a fulfillment of god's designs on earth, both bringing about the millennium and then ruling over it. So far, no lollipop.
|
I thought you declared I shouldn't bother,...
|
You simply can't get anything right, can you? What did I say "don't bother" about??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
...while you were taking your toys and going home rather than dealing with the cited reference, presumably beacuse you either can't access it or can't be bothered.
|
"[O]r"? Ah, the glimmer of wider perspective. Not just the one lame option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Sumner
Has that changed? Try and keep me up to date. I can't be expected to address your latest whim without having it expressed to me first.
|
As you have succeeded in terminally changing the subject away from any content the conversation started out with, what you want to see as a whim (or not) doesn't make for inspiring or useful reading. Somewhere back there you thought you were trying to talk about messiahs. Then like a dose of rabies you got ugly. (Remember gems like "That bordered on dishonesty"? Straight out of Dale Carnegie.) We've wasted enough on this now. Get an injection.
spin
08-11-2009, 07:42 PM
