Ted Hoffman

The only way to learn to dance well is by practice (if indeed we are bungling) even the best dancers did not become the best by deserting the floor everytime they missed a step. Besides, we have many floors here for all of us. The hamfisted and the nimble ones alike.

Toto

If you are going to dance with Layman, you have to remember that he is a professional at using language to shape the perception of reality. I have noticed that he tends to phrase things in a way that validates his assumptions. For someone who is not a lawyer and trained to make fine distinctions in meaning, I might assume this to be an unconscious process.

The differences are often subtle, but worth paying attention to - although it would be good to avoid dragging things out for a page of back and forth.

For instance, did Irenaeus believe that Jesus was a historical being, as Layman asserted? Or did Irenaeus merely claim that Jesus was a historical being for his own ideological and institutional purposes? We don't know what Irenaeus really thought, but you see how just reshaping the question in that way changes your perception of the evidence.

Layman

Egads! Alas, Toto, by this standard we never really "know" what anyone thinks. But most of us look at what they claim and how they act to make such a determination. So with Ignatius.

Who brought up Iranaeus?

Ted Hoffman

No, you dont. When they dont claim it, you say it doesn't matter - that they still believed even if they didn't claim.
So what you Layman, look at is not what they claim, but what you want.

Toto

You mean Irenaeus? The one who is suspected to have invented the historical Jesus? That was an old thread and I might not have remembered correctly, but things have moved on too far for me to go back and find it.

What do you think about the James ossuary now?

Layman

I mean the guy who wrote Against Heresies at the end of the second century. You really think no one bothered to invent the historical Jesus until 180 CE?

Then what did Igantius believe in? The guy who wrote those letters at the beginning of the first century. Or, if it fits your selective paradigm, what did Ignatius write about?

Now what? Something new come out?

Toto

Check the latest Ossuary thread. Israeli police have discovered engraving equipment and other intriguing material in a secret warehouse owned by Oded Golan.

As to Ignatius, who knows what he actually wrote about, if anyting? Doherty (and I gather liberal scholarship) consider his letters to have been heavily "edited" to add Gospel references. Radical critics dispute their authenticity completely. The only source for his life is the highly questionable document known as The Martyrdom of Ignatius.

Peter Kirby quotes the The Anchor Bible Dictionary

{emphasis added}

So the forged material has been part of the collection for so long, there seems to be little chance of separating out the original letters.

I think that topic is a bit too broad to get into now.

Layman

Interesting. Haven't heard of that. Was this restoration equipment or is there some real evidence of forgery?

So, are we talking about Igantius? Or Irenaeus?

Toto

There's been evidence of forgery all along. There will be two Israeli commissions examining the matter in more depth.

You were talking about Hebrews on this thread. I thought I remembered an earlier comment on Irenaeus, but I could be mistaken.

Layman

You misunderstood my question. Let me be more precise. Is there any evidence obtained from that location that lacked a legitimate use for an antiquities collector?

You said many believe that Irenaeus invented the historical Jesus myth. I asked if you really meant Irenaeus, since he did not write until the end of the second century. Most JMers I know lay the blame at Igantius' feet. He wrote at the beginning of the first century.

Did you know what you were talking about? I am sure you have more exposure to fringe extreme theories than I do, so I wanted to make sure.