(September 22, 2016 at 7:56 pm)Firefighter01I don\t believe that Paul wrote most, if not anything at all in the Bible, but for the sake of argument there is plenty of instances in there about Paul writing of the divinity of Jesus, for example Romans 8:3. Just because you can find passages to the contrary just means that the book is a mess of contradictions as you know. Wrote:Firefighter01Quote:AractusThe best anyone can say about anyone's writings in the Bible is that someone wrote them. Who knows for sure who wrote what?
The author of Luke-Acts wrote more (by volume) than Paul. But Paul's writings are more original and earlier (Paul is writing before the fall of Jerusalem, and doesn't copy in the way the gospel writers do).
(September 22, 2016 at 8:13 am)Firefighter01 Wrote: C'mon Aractus, what would a real person do in that situation? Imagine that you were a travelling priest and had a vision of Jesus that was so awesome it blinded you for 3 days.
Quote:AractusOk so he wasn't a priest to start off, he was supposed to be converted. Is that what you were getting at?
Paul never claims that happened.
(September 22, 2016 at 8:13 am)Firefighter01 Wrote: Blasphemy was what I was thinking of, Jesus claimed he was the son of God. The Jews could have done that without approval from the Romans.
Quote:Aractus
I'm not convinced that Jesus made that claim. It is plausible, however it is not what got him executed, he was executed for being a threat to the public peace.
Quote:Firefighter01Firefighter01
See John 4:25-26 King James Version (KJV)
25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.
26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.
How do you know what he was supposed to be executed for?
(September 22, 2016 at 8:13 am)Firefighter01 Wrote: It sounds like they have a pre-supposition that God and Jesus exist, so yes, they have a strong belief and would be extremely biased like most.
Quote:Aractus
Everyone has biases. Scholars - the respected ones anyway - are not those who have simply done a course. It's those who are actively engaged in the area. Good scholars are ones that keep their preconceived beliefs in check, just as any good doctor would do as well. The difference though is that doctors have a much more difficult time getting educated in the first place, and the standards set at the point of education is what ensures that we are left with competent people to go into practise.
Sure, but how could indoctrinated scholars possibly keep their preconceived beliefs in check?
