Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2016, 11:20 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 09:33 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The Book of Acts presents a timeline which, when compared with the "Before God I do not lie" accounts of (supposedly) Paul himself in Galatians, are totally irreconcilable. Paul never claimed to have "met Jesus". The two texts are not both possible as the truth. One of them is outright lying, or made up. Deal with it. Both texts are religious writing, and there is nothing to prove.

But ... are we speaking about the Book of Acts? No. Nice red herring.

We are speaking only of 1 Cor 9:1. Every scholar on the planet knows that each and every Gospel, Acts, and Letters in the New Testament were, at one time, completely separate documents.

Therefore, what the author of Acts says in hindsight at least 30 - 40 years after the crucifixion of Jesus cannot be fairly compared to what Paul wrote in real time.

Of course there will be contradictions, and for many reasons. Paul's letters written in real time to members of the Christian church in Corinth sometime around CE 50-55 cannot be compared to the embellished history of figures that we see in Luke-Acts written around CE 64 -70

It's a false comparison. Paul's letters obviously predate Luke-Acts, so they must be taken as more authoritative, naturally.

Quote:"Seen" used the way he did, is not "lexiconical".
It's a common idiomatic error of the (very) uneducated.

That's not how I seen it.

Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 11:25 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:11 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-08-2016 11:05 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  Yet, here we are with 1Cor 9:1 which says he did meet Jesus.

Complete meaningless bullshit, none of which actually addresses the POINT.
So how about you reconcile your claim that you are not a believer, AND that Paul actually did meet a dead and resurrected Jesus. You haty ve in NO WAY dealt with the translation problem, or that you possess ANY ABILITY in Greek or ANY knowledge of Jewish Apocalyptic themes. In fact you have in this thread demonstrated not even ANY knowledge of current concepts in the historicity question. You said you refuse to even listen to DR. Carrier, and DR. Price.

We all "seen" that. Laugh out load .. Laugh out load .. Laugh out load

Wow ... full of red herrings today, aren't you?

Again, 1 Cor 9:1 does not give any indication that it refers to Paul meeting Jesus after he was supposedly resurrected.

Hence, what the text indicates is that he knew Jesus before Jesus was crucified.

Now, let's see if your little brain can deal with that.

Or will we see another red herring because you have no response to it?

Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 11:46 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 10:42 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Unfortunately for you, GoneDown, one does not have to go very far.
The CHRISTIAN seminary professor Dr. B.B. Scott translates it that way. It's also the meaning Ehrman takes in his book, "How Jesus Became a God, the EXALTATION of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee", and there are others (Crossan) who agree also. They are not mythicists.

No, neither Ehrman or Crossman translate it that way at all, and this "B.B. Scott" you speak of is unknown.

Quote:The concept that religious writing has to be DISproven, rather than supported with EXTERNAL evidence is bullshit.

I am asking you to prove your point successfully enough to mount an adequate rebuttal of mine.

So do it.


Quote:I really wonder if GoneDown's "secular" claims are true. I mean he's actually arguing here that Paul really met a dead and resurrected Jesus.

And you think I have a problem with "seen" when you can't understand such a simple point- WRITTEN IN PLAIN ENGLISH- such as the one I am making in my previous post(s)?

Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 11:49 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 09:49 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  Often said? is there any consensus?

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/rl...ure-14#ch0

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 11:51 AM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2016 11:55 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:46 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  No, neither Ehrman or Crossman translate it that way at all, and this "B.B. Scott" you speak of is unknown.

Dr. B. B. Scott may be unknown to you, but that's just because you know NOTHING of this field, or what he wrote.
The words were NOT "written in plain English", idiot. You have to attack the GREEK translation YOURSELF, with examples.
You can't.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 11:53 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:46 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  I am asking you to prove your point successfully enough to mount an adequate rebuttal of mine.

I have proven that Paul and Acts contradict themselves ABSOLUTELY. Neither is reliable.
No one but a fool asks that religious / mythological writing has to be disproven.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 11:56 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:51 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-08-2016 11:46 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  No, neither Ehrman or Crossman translate it that way at all, and this "B.B. Scott" you speak of is unknown.

Dr. B. B. Scott may be unknown to you, but that's just because you know NOTHING of this field, or what he wrote.

How about actually giving up a name instead of initials?

Links please ...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 12:09 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2016 12:48 PM by GoingUp.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-08-2016 09:49 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  Often said? is there any consensus?

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/rl...ure-14#ch0

I have the transcript of that lecture. Here is what it says:

"Okay, other things about Paul, Paul has this many letters in the New Testament [pointing to the board].

As you've been reading in your textbook you've already noticed that Bart Ehrman talks about the undisputed letters. This just means these are the letters that almost all scholars will agree Paul wrote.

The disputed letters--that is the letters that scholars disagree about, and then there are three letters that most scholars are agreed are not by Paul.

The undisputed letters are Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon.

"Most of us reject as being by a later disciple of Paul- maybe even written in the second century,some people believe these are decades after Paul's death that these letters are written, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus.

We also call these the Pastoral Epistles because they show Paul trying to teach Timothy and Titus how to be good pastors of a church.
"


Transcript Source Here

Again, what you get from that text is exactly what my position is:

The undisputed letters are Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon.

Those are the undisputed letters of Paul, and it includes 1 Corinthians, which is what I am talking about.

He also states quite clearly that most scholars reject that the pastorals were written by a later disciple of Paul, or written in the second century, or that they were written decades after Paul's death. This means that he is saying that most scholars accept that even the so-called "disputed pastorals" were, in fact, written by Paul!

Your link doesn't help Mark's position at all but rather it disputes Mark's position and instead it actually furthers my position! It's bad enough that you shoot yourself in the foot, but no ... you had to go and shoot Mark in the foot too! It's not often we are so privileged to see a suicidal bird pick up the stone that kills himself and another bird in what amounts to killing two birds with one stone! Remarkable!

Thanks!

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 12:35 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:53 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-08-2016 11:46 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  I am asking you to prove your point successfully enough to mount an adequate rebuttal of mine.

I have proven that Paul and Acts contradict themselves ABSOLUTELY. Neither is reliable.

You haven't proven that Paul's letters are not reliable whatsoever.

Everybody knows that Acts and Paul's Letters are two different authors, so of course contradictions can almost certainly occur. We see this thing in virtually all historical texts that speak of similar things. It's common.

But can you show me where Paul contradicts himself with 1 Cor 9:1?


And that's the logical thing to do here. All historians can say things about the past that can contradict each other. No two versions from two different people will ever be identical.

So your argument is worthless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2016, 12:41 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(07-08-2016 11:46 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  No, neither Ehrman or Crossman translate it that way at all, and this "B.B. Scott" you speak of is unknown.

The laugh is on you, MR (not DR). The "internal experience" / "transformation'' ("coming to see") IS EXACTLY Crossan's view of the resurrection experience.
(Just goes to show you know absolutely nothing of this subject, and the players and experts who comment on it).
http://cdn.theologicalstudies.net/69/69.4/69.4.2.pdf
And it IS the theme of Ehrman also.

Paul said he "got his gospel from no man". That means he denied having ever met Jesus, AND if he did, the huge tension with the Church in Jerusalem he fought would never have happened. You really cook up shit to make your insane fakery look legit.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: