Originally posted by rogue06
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
How can we know that God is?
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
By no means obvious, and contrary to your opinion, I don't care whether any part of the Bible is accurate or not. If an author got something wrong, it is no more than evidence that he was not infallible.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostI don't consider a scant few errors to impact particularly on a writer's overall veracity, nor that a scant few verified claims show a writer to be reliable.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostAs I said, it may be that Luke picks up after Paul's return to Damascus from Arabia. I won't know until I have examined the texts fully.
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
You haven't examined the text, nor paid attention to my comments. I have formed a hypothesis based on a brief overview that I have not tested - a hypothesis is not a theory.
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
I have not said that the texts don't contradict each other. I have said that on the basis of a brief overview, there is a possibility that they could be reconciled.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostWhat seems possible on a brief overview may prove to be not so with closer examination.
Claims of contradictions are not often borne out by examination, but it does happen from time to time.
Whether the texts contradict each other will not be established on the basis of partisan commentators' claims.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
So what evidence do you have that Paul's use of quotes from the Old Testament did not match one of the early first century Hebrew versions of the Old Testament?
The "minor" differences in the renderings are hardly inconsequential.
not overly different concerning faith and the righteous
And you were the one who introduced the MT."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
I never mentioned "minor" differences. I wrote that the two texts were:
not overly different concerning faith and the righteous
And you were the one who introduced the MT.Last edited by tabibito; 06-18-2022, 04:52 AM.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
Look who has been busy Googling!
So when can we expect you to again start declaring that Luke's Acts of the Apostles is a Greek or Hellenistic romance?
I mean, it isn't as if you were schooled on this the last time and learned nothing.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
Why are you writing posts to yourself?
The very fact that you haven't produced anything supporting your typical ignorant ravings about Scripture pretty much says it all.
Seriously, it would behoove you to actually read what you have been criticizing all these years rather than relying on snippets provided by critics.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View Post
Jesus’ appearance on the Damascus Rd was a visionary experience of some sort which Paul equates with the multiple “appearances” listed in 1 Cor 15. That there is no fleshly body of Jesus is evidenced by the confusion regarding the event depicted in Acts. Certainly, there was no realistic physical body such as that described the decades-later gospels – e.g., the doubting Thomas story with Jesus’ wounds being physically touched.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View Post
Jesus’ appearance on the Damascus Rd was a visionary experience of some sort which Paul equates with the multiple “appearances” listed in 1 Cor 15. That there is no fleshly body of Jesus is evidenced by the confusion regarding the event depicted in Acts. Certainly, there was no realistic physical body such as that described the decades-later gospels – e.g., the doubting Thomas story with Jesus’ wounds being physically touched.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostResponded twice to this post, huh? Must be something in it bothering you.
The very fact that you haven't produced anything supporting your typical ignorant ravings about Scripture pretty much says it all.
Seriously, it would behoove you to actually read what you have been criticizing all these years rather than relying on snippets provided by critics.
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostIndeed. And obviously had far more success than you did who returned empty-handed.
So when can we expect you to again start declaring that Luke's Acts of the Apostles is a Greek or Hellenistic romance.
I mean, it isn't as if you were schooled on this the last time and learned nothing.
Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 06-18-2022, 06:55 AM."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostI just find your tendency to write posts to yourself somewhat peculiar. With whom are you attempting to communicate?
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostIf you consider what you produced proves your point, why should we disabuse you and spoil your little fantasy?
So I guess, until next time, when you again decide to expose your laughable ignorance on the topic.
You know after your earlier fiasco regarding Acts, it seems that this particular work gives you know end of trouble.
Maybe you really should read it before trying to pontificate on it again
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
Regardless of the precise language used, the "not overly different" wording does have a significant impact for interpretation, and the fact remains that Paul was writing in Greek, not Hebrew. It would be reasonable to assume that a significant proportion of his intended audience would not know Hebrew, and the Septuagint was considered authoritative by the Jewish religious authorities until at least twenty years after the fall of Jerusalem. All of which means that Paul would have solid reason to use the LXX.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by hypatia_alexandria View Post
you appear to hold the view that in the early first century the lxx was one accepted universal text. That was not the case. The various translations of the hebrew bible texts show differences in style, accuracy, and substance and indicate that there was no single original translation into greek. The various mss found at qumran along with other early mss as well as quotations from the lxx in ancient writings are evidence that revisions were constantly being made. I recommend you go back to the university library and find the anchor bible dictionary [all six volumes] and read the entry on the septuagint.https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...38#post1387038
it is not possible to declare that the hebrew scriptures used in the temple were not accurately reflected in whatever LXX version paul might have been usingLast edited by tabibito; 06-18-2022, 08:33 AM.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
You appear to hold the view that in the early first century the LXX was one accepted universal text. That was not the case.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostIt is nice to some times document things and their rebuttal
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAs per usual you've learned nothing because you cannot ever allow yourself to be wrong about anything.
However, if you consider citing a brief paragraph from Google edition of of a book and two sentences [with an error] from another Google edition of a book [neither of which I sincerely doubt you have actually read even in their reduced Google formats] as well as part of the introduction to an article in the Oxford Bibliographies series, constitutes any serious argument, it merely serves to illustrate your pretentions. An observation further demonstrated by the affectation of your footnote implying that you have some in depth understanding of Klijn's position."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-22-2024, 06:28 PM
|
17 responses
100 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
04-23-2024, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
70 responses
392 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-26-2024, 05:47 AM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
160 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
126 responses
682 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-30-2024, 09:12 AM | ||
Started by whag, 04-07-2024, 10:17 AM
|
39 responses
252 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-12-2024, 02:58 PM
|
Comment