Once again into the land of multiple unnecessary coding commands surrounding virtually every phrase making reading what was written while trying to respond to it difficult
Then again, maybe that's the plan all along.
Who claimed that Paul ever said that he considered his letters as divinely authoritative?
Straw man much?
Is that a serious question? I can't think of one major endeavor where, in spite of all the major players being onboard, it wasn't "beset with internal dissention from the outset." Look at the founding of our country and the drawing up of the Constitution for instance. An awful lot of "internal dissension" which sometimes got rather heated, and yet can still be described as involving a consensus.
So... pretty much like any and everything run by humans.
It also appears that Paul's major complaint against the "Judaizers" was that they were "adding to" the Gospel message. Requiring acts that Christ Himself never did. Basically, putting "an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way" (Romans 14:13) rather than spreading completely alien lessons. IOW, you could even ask them about the Resurrection and get the same answer.
And has anyone thanked you for taking on the role of judge for what is and is not "Paul's authentic letters" lately?
That there has been different disagreements among Christians is hardly anything new. You wouldn't find Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox denominations if there weren't any.
As I noted, you'll always find disagreement among humans -- ironically even when they're all in agreement.
If you look at I Corinthians you will see how Paul, over and over again suggests that anyone who wishes to check the veracity of his message should just ask any of the eyewitnesses who were still around and available. No, they couldn't exactly call them on the phone, but history indicates that many of them were among those "peripatetic teachers" (who you think never traveled) and it likely wouldn't be long before some stopped by (especially at a large city like Corinth with what appears to have been a fairly robust Christian community). I mean, if it weren't the case, the Corinthians would have dismissed Paul as a fraud.
An awful lot of scholarship has taken place since Bultmann nearly a century ago -- and much of it disputes his conclusions. Relying on him for an accurate summary is like relying on a physicist who supported the existence of luminous ether to explain electromagnetics or gravity. Even Bart Ehrman, who agrees with some of his positions, admits that nobody agrees with his theories any more (how he reached those positions).
I'd be surprised if you could find a New Testament scholar who contends that any of those apocryphal works aren't much later than the four canonical gospels. Even the much ballyhooed Gospel of Thomas reveals a dependence upon Mathew, Luke and Paul's Epistle to the Romans. NT historian Craig A. Evans (John Bisagno Distinguished Professor of Christian Origins at Houston Baptist University) has estimated that roughly half the text is dependent upon them. And I'll note that, these gnostic works have been shown to be vastly inferior to the canonical Gospels are at providing historical information about Jesus (see, for instance Philip Jenkins Hidden Gospels and the later Who Chose the Gospels? Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy by Charles Hill)
Again, you sound like those who will list the reasons that Columbus could never have made a trip across the Atlantic given all the perils of such a sea journey in the 16th cent.
The simple fact is that they were in steady communication. Look at Paul's first letter. He's writing to folks he has already visited and met. In Romans he's listing the names of prominent Christians there even though he had never been to the city at that point. How could that be unless Christians endeavored to stay connected with one another?
Further, as Bauckham shows, many Jewish Christians would have travelled to Jerusalem for various festivals much like other Jews around the Empire did. And we have churches that popped up all over the Roman Empire as well as outside of it during the 1st cent. -- someone had to found them since they didn't just magically sprout up ex nihilo. You know, maybe it just might have had something to do with what Jesus told His disciples after the Resurrection in the Great Commission recorded at the end of Matthew: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations."
Sorry H_A, your personal incredulity just doesn't cut it in face of the historic evidence.
If Paul was merely teaching his own tradition then he would have been rejected. He went to a lot of cities that already had vibrant Christian communities (amazing how that happened what with everyone staying home ) that would have considered him to be the false prophet if he arrived teaching "another gospel." But the fact that he generally was warmly received indicates that he wasn't, as you so very much want him to, "preaching his own ideas."
And maybe he flew off on a T. rex wearing a jet pack.
Talk about your utterly baseless, pure speculation. Please keep this bit of nonsense in mind the next time you haughtily criticize anyone else for theorizing.
What constitutes a "miracle" has been open to debate for some time now. Is it only something that pretty much flies in the face of natural law (like resurrections), or can it also include very mundane occurrences where the timing is, shall we say, incredibly fortuitous. But that really is a discussion for another thread.
Translation: I disagree with him therefore he must be wrong.
Your incompetence at posting is duly noted. Further, as a result, don't get upset if a poster doesn't respond to you because it is just not worth all the effort required to parse through all the codes to pick out the snippets of text.
Then again, maybe that's the plan all along.
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Straw man much?
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
It also appears that Paul's major complaint against the "Judaizers" was that they were "adding to" the Gospel message. Requiring acts that Christ Himself never did. Basically, putting "an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way" (Romans 14:13) rather than spreading completely alien lessons. IOW, you could even ask them about the Resurrection and get the same answer.
And has anyone thanked you for taking on the role of judge for what is and is not "Paul's authentic letters" lately?
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
As I noted, you'll always find disagreement among humans -- ironically even when they're all in agreement.
If you look at I Corinthians you will see how Paul, over and over again suggests that anyone who wishes to check the veracity of his message should just ask any of the eyewitnesses who were still around and available. No, they couldn't exactly call them on the phone, but history indicates that many of them were among those "peripatetic teachers" (who you think never traveled) and it likely wouldn't be long before some stopped by (especially at a large city like Corinth with what appears to have been a fairly robust Christian community). I mean, if it weren't the case, the Corinthians would have dismissed Paul as a fraud.
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
The simple fact is that they were in steady communication. Look at Paul's first letter. He's writing to folks he has already visited and met. In Romans he's listing the names of prominent Christians there even though he had never been to the city at that point. How could that be unless Christians endeavored to stay connected with one another?
Further, as Bauckham shows, many Jewish Christians would have travelled to Jerusalem for various festivals much like other Jews around the Empire did. And we have churches that popped up all over the Roman Empire as well as outside of it during the 1st cent. -- someone had to found them since they didn't just magically sprout up ex nihilo. You know, maybe it just might have had something to do with what Jesus told His disciples after the Resurrection in the Great Commission recorded at the end of Matthew: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations."
Sorry H_A, your personal incredulity just doesn't cut it in face of the historic evidence.
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Talk about your utterly baseless, pure speculation. Please keep this bit of nonsense in mind the next time you haughtily criticize anyone else for theorizing.
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Your incompetence at posting is duly noted. Further, as a result, don't get upset if a poster doesn't respond to you because it is just not worth all the effort required to parse through all the codes to pick out the snippets of text.
Comment