Is the "crcifixion" just a metaphor?

[oldbadger]

If you'd like to discuss the crucifixion, let me know.

I would like to ask you about the crucifixion.
Is the "crucifixion" just a metaphor?
Is Jesus' story in the Gospels just a metaphor?

 

[oldbadger]

Yes.

He is no E.P. Sanders.

Night and day difference

Why did you mention EP Sanders? This was my question.

Originally Posted by oldbadger View Post
Grant's work was published in 1977. Is work from that era too early for you?

Yes or No?

So work from the 70's is not up to much? Correct?

 

[Desert Snake]

who is talking about the bible?
you have no clue what historians have for evidence, do you?

You think they use the bible?

They should use the Bible lol, the records otherwise are very scant. You seem to believe that there is non-biblical evidence for the narrative except for the resurrection?
That would be incorrect, there isn't.

 

[oldbadger]

No, actually it isn't, stop trolling my thread if you can't participate.

Well, begging your pardon, but a question about whether Jesus' crucifixion was faction or fiction has to impinge on the history of the event. Ergo HJ.

 

[Desert Snake]

Well, begging your pardon, but a question about whether Jesus' crucifixion was faction or fiction has to impinge on the history of the event. Ergo HJ.

So you believe in the NT narrative??

 

[outhouse]

So work from the 70's is not up to much? Correct?

No, just not cherry picked scholars that match your personal view.

Again, take a college course on it.

 

[oldbadger]

No, just not cherry picked scholars that match your personal view.

Again, take a college course on it.

Grant was not a cherry-picked scholar. An aggressive opponent told me to read it....... and so I did! And the work was exceptional.

But it is good to read that you do not discount work from, say, 60s and 70s.

EDIT:- I'll bet that you would not have done that......... read a book because an aggressive opponent TOLD you to. Is that a difference between us?

 

[oldbadger]

So you believe in the NT narrative??

I believe much of G-Mark. How about you?

 

[oldbadger]

Again, take a college course on it.

You tempt me to retort that you should read some books on it.
All your stuff seems to be ex-Wiki, including what you dug up on Harris Lines, which, byt the way, are evident in many people today, and diagnosis of reasons for the condition is usually extremely complicated.

 

[Desert Snake]

I believe much of G-Mark. How about you?

I basically believe the narrative, with possible embellishments, since we keep going off topic, answer me this, do you believe any of the Apostles wrote the Gospels, or supplied testimony to be translated, or, when the Gospels were compiled, any witness testimony was used?

 

[outhouse]

Grant was not a cherry-picked scholar. An aggressive opponent told me to read it....... and so I did! And the work was exceptional.

But it is good to read that you do not discount work from, say, 60s and 70s.

Theres work from the turn of the century on the first five books that is still a good foundation today.

The problem I have with your boy is he is a classist more then a biblical scholar, I like scholars who focus on biblical studies, your boy is all over the board and has less details but a decent generalization and overview. I don't need to be taught generally at this point, I need details.


Your boy has been out of the game to long, cultural anthropology has flat buried much of the older scholarships.

The socioeconomic division has only been recently figured out in more clarity.


Some will still argue to defend their work, some argue due to apologetics and bias. BUT the findings of Harris lines on all Galilean children combined with the parables of the poor, and all the recent digging in Galilee over the last 30 years leaves no doubt about how poor these people were.

Even the socioeconomic studies of the fishing industry leave no doubt.

 

[oldbadger]

I basically believe the narrative, with possible embellishments, since we keep going off topic, answer me this, do you believe any of the Apostles wrote the Gospels, or supplied testimony to be translated, or, when the Gospels were compiled, any witness testimony was used?

Yes. I believe that Mark could have dictated or written G-Mark, using Cephas' notes, his own memories and other oral reports.
G-Matthew includes a large number of verses apart from the synoptic verses and G-Q, which could well be his own memories of events, and so G-Matthew could be taken from three sources, including Levi, the publican and taxman.

 

[Desert Snake]

Yes. I believe that Mark could have dictated or written G-Mark, using Cephas' notes, his own memories and other oral reports.
G-Matthew includes a large number of verses apart from the synoptic verses and G-Q, which could well be his own memories of events, and so G-Matthew could be taken from three sources, including Levi, the publican and taxman.

Look, if you believe the narrative, it doesn't make sense to theorize a "Jewish cult arisen from a crucified anti-whatever(insert theory, people_).

Because that isn't the narrative. We don't have history to back up those claims. It doesn't fit the timeline. I argue that it doesn't fit the early Xian theology either.

 

[oldbadger]

Theres work from the turn of the century on the first five books that is still a good foundation today.

I don't spurn works from any age.

The problem I have with your boy is he is a classist more then a biblical scholar, I like scholars who focus on biblical studies, your boy is all over the board and has less details but a decent generalization and overview. I don't need to be taught generally at this point, I need details.

This boy was a gentleman who died ten years ago...... no boy.
His book was great and I learnd a lot. You will not learn anything from him.
To puff your expertise up is a serious mistake.

Your boy has been out of the game to long, cultural anthropology has flat buried much of the older scholarships.

It's a mistake to insult elderly people, deceased elderly people, as 'Boy', and he was never mine, He is one scholar who added to my knowledge.

Some will still argue to defend their work, some argue due to apologetics and bias. BUT the findings of Harris lines on all Galilean children combined with the parables of the poor, and all the recent digging in Galilee over the last 30 years leaves no doubt about how poor these people were.

This is a one liner. You take a single piece of info and you build a whole puzzle with it. I always warned my students against that.

Even the socioeconomic studies of the fishing industry leave no doubt.

I would gladly read anything that you have got on 1st cent Galilean fishing industry.

 

[outhouse]

His book was great and I learnd a lot. You will not learn anything from him.
To puff your expertise up is a serious mistake.


.

You have comprehensive issues I believe.


Its not about my expertise, its about where I choose to learn from.

And in this field the more recent the work, the better chance of figuring out what actually happened is huge.

Your ignoring the socioeconomic models of people who are professionals who live and eat this kind of stuff all day everyday.

 

[outhouse]

You tempt me to retort that you should read some books on it.
All your stuff seems to be ex-Wiki, including what you dug up on Harris Lines, which, byt the way, are evident in many people today, and diagnosis of reasons for the condition is usually extremely complicated.

You have no idea where this source is coming from.





Ill give you a small hint, Israel.



Don't give me the run around with Harris lines, when you did not eve know about them. The archeologist and scholars behind this claim it was from starvation.

You don't get to discount professors because you feel like it.

 

[outhouse]

I would gladly read anything that you have got on 1st cent Galilean fishing industry.

Galilean Fishing Economy

is a start.

 

[outhouse]

It's a mistake to insult elderly people, deceased elderly people,.

What I have learned about older people [too old] is that they are stubborn and set in their ways, and in this field, one needs to be open to change as new findings can have drastic changes on conclusions.


I cant stand debating old people, because there is no debate, no matter how well the empirical evidence may be, if one is set in his ways, there is no to little reasoning that will take place. Old people who are YEC are about the worst and make a great example of closed minds.


I do like learning from old people who have the right attitude, but I am finding less and less of these kinds.


Don't take it personal its not directed at you, but I need to vent from frustration. You did bring it up.

 

[oldbadger]

Look, if you believe the narrative, it doesn't make sense to theorize a "Jewish cult arisen from a crucified anti-whatever(insert theory, people_).

No? I'm not interested in how things developed after Jesus' death, I am interested in what happened during his life, death and just afterwards.

Because that isn't the narrative. We don't have history to back up those claims. It doesn't fit the timeline. I argue that it doesn't fit the early Xian theology either.

OK..... I am interested in Jesus's life and mission. I do not get involved with the theology...........

 

[oldbadger]

You have comprehensive issues I believe.

Well, I caught you out on some recently, didn't I?

Its not about my expertise, its about where I choose to learn from.

Like you said, you would not read a word from Grant, so you lose anything of value that he proposes.

And in this field the more recent the work, the better chance of figuring out what actually happened is huge.

So you do not value Crosson that much?

Your ignoring the socioeconomic models of people who are professionals who live and eat this kind of stuff all day everyday.

No I'm not..... I've been interested in the socio-economics of that time for yonks.