Posts: 66546
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:28 pm
(This post was last modified: August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Peter James and John are literary eponyms......Luke (also an eponym)..was an evangelist (the idea that he was a historian has it's genesis in apologetic arguments of living memory, not any scholarly appraisal of the accuracy of luke)...and Paul appears to have been about as real as this jesus guy you keep going on about. '
WTF Steve?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 3064
Threads: 3
Joined: July 10, 2016
Reputation:
37
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:29 pm
(This post was last modified: August 16, 2016 at 3:30 pm by Jesster.)
(August 16, 2016 at 3:27 pm)SteveII Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:15 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Reporting on supposed eyewitness accounts =/= eyewitness accounts...
I wrote my sentence poorly. Peter, James and John = eyewitnesses.
Luke was kind of a reporter who interviewed eyewitnesses for Luke and Acts.
Paul knew some of the apostles and referred to them (so not an eyewitness but confirmed his belief that the apostles and others were eyewitnesses).
Peter, James, and John were not eyewitnesses. People wrote about that second hand too.
Luke and Paul just got second hand-claims. That's not evidence.
I don't believe you. Get over it.
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:25 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:20 pm)Jesster Wrote: "I think..."
Great. Opinion time.
Why not? It's a game everyone can play.
I think narrators are able to fashion their materials in such a way as to convey lessons within various contexts, 'prove' points, and suggest theological significance. Of course, my opinion is actually grounded in what we know about human narrators. No credulity required.
Still waiting for some evidence of a conspiracy/fraud/less than honest account...
In the meantime, I am going to accept the accounts/facts/period analysis as it was originally written. I have no reason to believe this group of people lied or were confused--especially since my belief in God is properly basic!! 
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 2:51 pm)SteveII Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 2:27 pm)Rhythm Wrote: ...lol, really, nothing to do with it?
What eyewitness accounts? Eyewitness to what, exactly, while we're at it?
Peter, James, John, Luke said he spoke to eyewitnesses to write his 2 books. Paul claimed to know and discuss the events with eyewitnesses.
Paul..."CLAIMED to know"
You just said it your self.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Posts: 7568
Threads: 20
Joined: July 26, 2013
Reputation:
54
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:27 pm)SteveII Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:15 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Reporting on supposed eyewitness accounts =/= eyewitness accounts...
I wrote my sentence poorly. Peter, James and John = eyewitnesses.
Luke was kind of a reporter who interviewed eyewitnesses for Luke and Acts.
Paul knew some of the apostles and referred to them (so not an eyewitness but confirmed his belief that the apostles and others were eyewitnesses).
You also seem to think that Peter wrote 2 Peter, a document written so long after the alleged events of Jesus' life that the claim of the Son of Man coming in his glory within the lifetimes of some of his listeners had become an embarrassment to the church. Hence, one of modern Christianity's favorite weasel verses to explain away the false prophecy of their own god: a thousand years is but a day to God.
Yeah . . . not buying it.
Posts: 3064
Threads: 3
Joined: July 10, 2016
Reputation:
37
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:35 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm)SteveII Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:25 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Why not? It's a game everyone can play.
I think narrators are able to fashion their materials in such a way as to convey lessons within various contexts, 'prove' points, and suggest theological significance. Of course, my opinion is actually grounded in what we know about human narrators. No credulity required.
Still waiting for some evidence of a conspiracy/fraud/less than honest account...
In the meantime, I am going to accept the accounts/facts/period analysis as it was originally written. I have no reason to believe this group of people lied or were confused--especially since my belief in God is properly basic!! And we're still waiting on your evidence. You're making the claims and we haven't bought it yet.
In the meantime, you're just giving up your argument and cycling back to one we've already beaten all to hell before. Our memory isn't that short when we have a forum full of posts to read back through.
Give it up already.
I don't believe you. Get over it.
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:35 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:28 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Peter James and John are literary eponyms......Luke (also an eponym)..was an evangelist (the idea that he was a historian has it's genesis in apologetic arguments of living memory, not any scholarly appraisal of the accuracy of luke)...and Paul appears to have been about as real as this jesus guy you keep going on about. '
WTF Steve?
You have sought out fringe theories that support your conclusion. I will stick with the 'most scholars believe...' prefix.
Posts: 9915
Threads: 53
Joined: November 27, 2015
Reputation:
92
The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:37 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm)SteveII Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:25 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Why not? It's a game everyone can play.
I think narrators are able to fashion their materials in such a way as to convey lessons within various contexts, 'prove' points, and suggest theological significance. Of course, my opinion is actually grounded in what we know about human narrators. No credulity required.
Still waiting for some evidence of a conspiracy/fraud/less than honest account...
In the meantime, I am going to accept the accounts/facts/period analysis as it was originally written. I have no reason to believe this group of people lied or were confused--especially since my belief in God is properly basic!!
Just remember, Steve...by properly basic standards, my belief in the flying purple people eater is JUST as rational as your belief in God! And I have evidence: special revelation! [emoji1]
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:37 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:33 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:27 pm)SteveII Wrote: I wrote my sentence poorly. Peter, James and John = eyewitnesses.
Luke was kind of a reporter who interviewed eyewitnesses for Luke and Acts.
Paul knew some of the apostles and referred to them (so not an eyewitness but confirmed his belief that the apostles and others were eyewitnesses).
You also seem to think that Peter wrote 2 Peter, a document written so long after the alleged events of Jesus' life that the claim of the Son of Man coming in his glory within the lifetimes of some of his listeners had become an embarrassment to the church. Hence, one of modern Christianity's favorite weasel verses to explain away the false prophecy of their own god: a thousand years is but a day to God.
Yeah . . . not buying it.
I am aware of the controversy of 2 Peter. That just shows the level of scrutiny that the rest have withstood. Thanks!
Posts: 3064
Threads: 3
Joined: July 10, 2016
Reputation:
37
RE: The real religion?
August 16, 2016 at 3:38 pm
(August 16, 2016 at 3:35 pm)SteveII Wrote: (August 16, 2016 at 3:28 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Peter James and John are literary eponyms......Luke (also an eponym)..was an evangelist (the idea that he was a historian has it's genesis in apologetic arguments of living memory, not any scholarly appraisal of the accuracy of luke)...and Paul appears to have been about as real as this jesus guy you keep going on about. '
WTF Steve?
You have sought out fringe theories that support your conclusion. I will stick with the 'most scholars believe...' prefix.
Most bible scholars already agree with Rhythm about the eponyms. You clearly haven't read into that one.
I don't believe you. Get over it.
|
