|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
 Posted - 09/05/2002 : 13:05:03
|
It seems a lot hangs on the answer to this question;some say the NT was influenced by pagan myths.But this couldn't be if the writers were orthodox Jews.
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2002 : 15:57:33 [Permalink]
|
A short and somewhat incomplete list of gentlemen who have been considered to be the Messiah by one group or another of Orthodox Jews.
None of these said gentlemen claimed that they came to overturn Orthodox Jewish law. None claimed to be anything other than human.
Cyrus the Great (6Cent. BCE), Judas, son of Hezekiah (4 BCE), Simon of Peraea (4 BCE), Athronges, the shepherd (4 BCE), Judas, the Galilean (6 CE) , The Samaritan prophet (36 CE), King Herod Agrippa (44 CE), Theudas (45 CE) , The Egyptian prophet (52-58 CE), An anonymous prophet (59 CE) , Menahem, the son of Judas the Galilean (66 CE) , John of Gischala (67-70 CE), Vespasian (67 CE), Simon bar Giora (69-70 CE) , Jonathan, the weaver (73 CE) , Lukuas (115 CE) , Simon ben Kosiba (132-135), Moses of Crete (448), Abu Isa' al-Isfahani (c.700) , Moses al-Dar'i (c.1127), David Alroy (c.1147) , A Yemenite Messiah (c.1172), Abraham ben Samuel Abu'lafia (1230-1291) , Asher Lämmlin (c.1500), Isaac Luria (1534-1573), Hayyim Vital (after 1542), Sabbathai Zwi (1626-1676) , Jacob Frank (1726-1786) , Moses Guibbory (1899-1985) , Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994)
Mr Guibbory and Mr Schneerson were Messiahs at the same time.
Mr Schneerson was Messiah in Brooklyn.
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
 |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2002 : 16:38:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
It seems a lot hangs on the answer to this question;some say the NT was influenced by pagan myths.But this couldn't be if the writers were orthodox Jews.
You seem to be forgetting that the Old Testament is based in earlier pagan beliefs as are all myths except for perhaps Scientology which still borrows much of the institutional structure other cults have. Not that that matters. Your assertion that if the NT was written by Orthodox Jews it can't have pagan roots makes no sense. Dianetics could have been written by a Catholic priest and what would that prove? Nothing.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2002 : 17:56:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
It seems a lot hangs on the answer to this question; some say the NT was influenced by pagan myths. But this couldn't be if the writers were orthodox Jews.
The question is seriously flawed on a number of levels:- The category "orthodox Jews" is a relatively recent construct and, even then, limited to the Ashkenazi. Talking about "orthodox Jews" during the 2nd Temple Period is anachronistic.
- To speak of the NT as a single textual tradition is simply absurd. To which redaction of which version of which book of which codex are you referring?
- Ever were there such a thing as a New Testament or a 1st century orthodox Jewish movement, to suggest that they would necessarily have remained immune to the various influences of the Hellenists is simply naive.
- Finally, irrespective of the theological 'purety' of the original authors, what we have today is the end result of centuries of censorship and harmonization on the part of vicious theocratic movements, bolstered by dictatorial state power, who simple slaughtered the opposition and purged their documents.
There can be no good answer to such a defective and ignorant question.
quote:
@tomic wrote:
You seem to be forgetting that the Old Testament is based in earlier pagan beliefs as are all myths except for perhaps Scientology which still borrows much of the institutional structure other cults have. Not that that matters. Your assertion that if the NT was written by Orthodox Jews it can't have pagan roots makes no sense. Dianetics could have been written by a Catholic priest and what would that prove? Nothing.
Aside from begging the question, that's easily some of the most inane, peurile commentary I've read in a long time.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2002 : 18:32:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Aside from begging the question, that's easily some of the most inane, peurile commentary I've read in a long time.
You mean you don't proof read your own posts
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2002 : 13:51:28 [Permalink]
|
Under Pope (Saint) Sylvester many of the books of the New Testament were banned.
Were these books also written by "orthodox Jews?"
What standards were used to determine which gospel was historicaly accurate and which gospel was not "gospel" truth?
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2002 : 10:27:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A short and somewhat incomplete list of gentlemen who have been considered to be the Messiah by one group or another of Orthodox Jews.
None of these said gentlemen claimed that they came to overturn Orthodox Jewish law. None claimed to be anything other than human.
That is the whole point,what led the disciples, who were strict monotheistic Jews,to espouse a belief in Jesus as Jehovah.It would have been a psychological impossibilty for them to do so: The New Testament theologians were by upbringing,orthodox Jews.For men such as these,the language used about. Jesus in the NT was not the kind of language that it was permissible to use of any man.That they used it nevertheless, and used it spontaneously,as though it were fitting language in the world to apply to Jesus bears witness to the impact that he made on his immediate followers.(F.F.Bruce in a Response to,Jesus:God,Ghost or Guru? ,Jon A.Buell and O.Quentin Hyder,Zondervan Publishing House,p.121 emph. mine )
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2002 : 10:45:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
To speak of the NT as a single textual tradition is simply absurd. To which redaction of which version of which book of which codex are you referring?
Apparently,you are confused with the content of the text(or its message) and science of textual criticism which informs as to how we know the text is an accurate copy of the original,(try educating your self on the subject first next time,here's a good place to start: THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT; Its Transmission,Corruption,and Restoration,by Bruce Metzger,OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS).
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2002 : 14:53:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
Apparently,you are confused with the content of the text(or its message) and science of textual criticism which informs as to how we know the text is an accurate copy of the original, ...
What you wrote is stupid. Read the book.
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 11:13:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
darwin alogos wrote:
Apparently,you are confused with the content of the text(or its message) and science of textual criticism which informs as to how we know the text is an accurate copy of the original, ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you wrote is stupid. Read the book.
First, what a brilliant refutation[sic].Second,which part?:Even in incidental details one observes the faithfulness of scribes...These examples of dogged fidelity on the part of scribes could be multiplied, and serve to counterbalance,to some extent,the impression may otherwise make upon THE BEGINNER in New Testament textual criticism.[obviously he had someone like you in mind hyperboy! ] (op.cit.METZGER,p.206,empmh. mine)
Edited by - darwin alogos on 09/12/2002 11:17:52
Edited by - darwin alogos on 09/12/2002 11:19:22 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 11:41:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
To speak of the NT as a single textual tradition is simply absurd. To which redaction of which version of which book of which codex are you referring?
"So the variations,when they occur,tend to be minor rather than substantive?" "Yes,yes,that's correct,and scholars work very carefully to try to resolve them by getting back to the original meaning."..."How many doctrines of the church are in jeopardy because of variants?" "I don't know of any doctrine that is in jeopardy,"he responded confidently. "None?" "None,"he repeated.(A conversation between Bruce Metzger and Lee Strobel in Strobel's book THE CASE FOR CHRIST,A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus ,Zondervan Publishing House,1998,p.65)
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 11:45:41 [Permalink]
|
A few questions on the science of textual criticism.
I am unable to find any universities where this science is being taught. On what grounds do you call it a science?
I am also unable to find any reference to it in any other context than the bible. Is this soley a Christian science, like say creation science? Can you give a source that explains how it works?
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 11:48:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
darwin alogos wrote:
First, what a brilliant refutation[sic].
 Just what did you intend by the inclusion of "[sic]"?
Your understanding of textual criticism is, at best, naive, and, at worst, embarrassingly ignorant. Again, read the book.
In the meantime, could you, using real sentences, give us a definition of what constitutes a 1st or 2nd century CE orthodox Jew?
|
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 09/12/2002 : 20:07:14 [Permalink]
|
DA, please tell me you're not reduced to Lee Strobel books for quote-mining support for your apologetics. The man thinks his one-time disdain at the state of the world made him an atheist, for crying out loud.
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.
-D. Hume |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2002 : 09:00:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
DA, please tell me you're not reduced to Lee Strobel books for quote-mining support for your apologetics. The man thinks his one-time disdain at the state of the world made him an atheist, for crying out loud.
No Phd I'm not defending Strobel,I merely quoted an "expert" he interviewed who both RD and myself have used in our posts, to clarify the issue with how"variations" in the NT Mss have affected the current translations.And of course as Metzger said,which RD can't seem to comprehend,"I don't know of any doctrine that is in jeopardy,"he responded confidently. "None?" "None,"he repeated".
|
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2002 : 11:23:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
No Phd I'm not defending Strobel,I merely quoted an "expert" he interviewed who both RD and myself have used in our posts, to clarify the issue with how"variations" in the NT Mss have affected the current translations.And of course as Metzger said,which RD can't seem to comprehend,"I don't know of any doctrine that is in jeopardy,"he responded confidently. "None?" "None,"he repeated".
You mean Strobel's interviewee actually gave his opinion on the alleged historical veracity of myth-based doctrines he already believes to be true? Gosh, how will RD ever escape this one?
Strobel is a hack. His writing is vapid. His interviews are simply background to support the conclusions he has already made. Oh sure, he has multiple reasons to believe in Christ, which I will now summarize:
1) Looking through the rose-colored glasses of all these apologetics, Christ actually seems to be a cool guy.
2) Whenever I tried to control my own life, I failed miserably. I'd rather believe there is an invisible something doing it for me.
3) Life is really scary without religion.
Anything else?
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.
-D. Hume |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
