Originally posted by JimL
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
Genesis 2:2 He rested on the seventh day from all the work he had undertaken.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostThe bolded appears to be a direct, unattributed quote from here: http://mythikismos.gr/?cat=4
just after the section break.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ight-earliest/“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
Sailhammer's point rests on the meaning of the Hebrew, something which you very obviously want to avoid discussing, because you have no idea.
This is the point being made, not the meaning of the Hebrew. It's the unsubstantiated premise of his arguments that I’m questioning.“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostYeah, but at least we actually engage with the arguments instead of simply attacking the source as non-credible.“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostWell, you're wrong as usual.
My source was not Carrier, although he's a well qualified scholar, but Dr Hugh Houghton, of the University of Birmingham, who translated the work. He said it was an approach which modern Christians could learn from. "For people teaching the Bible in the fourth century, it's not the literal meaning which is important, it's how it's read allegorically.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ight-earliest/
You know plagiarism is against our rules right? If it were more than a few words you would probably have gotten dinged.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostAs a biblical inerrantist Sailhamer’s theology is inevitably going to be coloured by his literal view of the creation narratives, which have been shown by science to be false.
This is the point being made, not the meaning of the Hebrew. It's the unsubstantiated premise of his arguments that I’m questioning.
Show us why what he said is wrong, with quotes and counter arguments about the points he actually makes. Bet you can't. I'm already up 1-0....>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostWell, you're wrong as usual.
My source was not Carrier, although he's a well qualified scholar, but Dr Hugh Houghton, of the University of Birmingham, who translated the work. He said it was an approach which modern Christians could learn from. "For people teaching the Bible in the fourth century, it's not the literal meaning which is important, it's how it's read allegorically.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ight-earliest/
Tassman: Your Honour, I'm not guilty of breaking the speed limit as I was going 25 over it, not 30 like the officer said.
Judge: Thanks for admitting you broke the law. Case closed, the verdict is guilty....>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostYou're an ass. You' re still proving my point. Sailhammer's argument was about what precisely the text means to say, with reference to the Hebrew. Your moaning about inerrancy is a red herring. You might as well argue that noone can know the actual intended meaning of a passage in the Koran if they are a Muslim.
Show us why what he said is wrong, with quotes and counter arguments about the points he actually makes. Bet you can't. I'm already up 1-0.“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostThe text is in the context of the literal seven day Creation narrative of Genesis...as per the OP. If you are suggesting that the “actual intended meaning” being expounded by Sailhamer (not Sailhammer BTW, you keep getting it wrong) is that Genesis is only intended as allegory or poetry rather than literally true then there’s no problem. But is he, as a member of a Baptist faculty which is committed to biblical inerrancy, really[I] arguing that say, Adam and Eve are merely allegorical figures etc, etc etc?Last edited by Adrift; 11-17-2017, 07:54 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostHuh? What are you talking about? John Sailhamer didn't suggest a literal seven day creation narrative. I mean, that's the whole reason I brought him up to OBP all the way back in post #68. I figured you knew that, and that's why you decided to jump in with your two cents. What have you been arguing about this whole time?“He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostMore and more Scholars are coming to the conclusion that Jesus is mythological historocity. I'm no scholar, and I came to that conclusion some 30 or so years ago.
Comment
-
More and more scholars are coming up with strange stories that do no more than give atheists less and less to disbelieve.
And that's a paraphrase of what one scholar said.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
-
-
Would that be this Joseph Campbell, or another one?
Campbell's scholarship and understanding of Sanskrit has also been questioned. Masson, a Sanskrit scholar, said that he once met Campbell, and that the two "hated each other at sight". Masson commented that, "When I met Campbell at a public gathering, he was quoting Sanskrit verses. He had no clue as to what he was talking about; he had the most superficial knowledge of India but he could use it for his own aggrandizement. I remember thinking: this man is corrupt. I know that he was simply lying about his understanding".[65] According to Richard Buchen, the editor of the third edition of The Hero With a Thousand Faces, Campbell could not translate Sanskrit well.[66]
Ellwood observes that The Masks of God series "impressed literate laity more than specialists"; he quotes Stephen P. Dunn as remarking that in Occidental Mythology Campbell "writes in a curiously archaic style – full of rhetorical questions, exclamations of wonder and delight, and expostulations directed at the reader, or perhaps at the author's other self – which is charming about a third of the time and rather annoying the rest." Ellwood notes that "Campbell was not really a social scientist, and those in the latter camp could tell" and records a concern about Campbell's "oversimpification of historical matters and tendency to make myth mean whatever he wanted it to mean".[63]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 tabibito View PostWould that be this Joseph Campbell, or another one?
Campbell's scholarship and understanding of Sanskrit has also been questioned. Masson, a Sanskrit scholar, said that he once met Campbell, and that the two "hated each other at sight". Masson commented that, "When I met Campbell at a public gathering, he was quoting Sanskrit verses. He had no clue as to what he was talking about; he had the most superficial knowledge of India but he could use it for his own aggrandizement. I remember thinking: this man is corrupt. I know that he was simply lying about his understanding".[65] According to Richard Buchen, the editor of the third edition of The Hero With a Thousand Faces, Campbell could not translate Sanskrit well.[66]
Ellwood observes that The Masks of God series "impressed literate laity more than specialists"; he quotes Stephen P. Dunn as remarking that in Occidental Mythology Campbell "writes in a curiously archaic style – full of rhetorical questions, exclamations of wonder and delight, and expostulations directed at the reader, or perhaps at the author's other self – which is charming about a third of the time and rather annoying the rest." Ellwood notes that "Campbell was not really a social scientist, and those in the latter camp could tell" and records a concern about Campbell's "oversimpification of historical matters and tendency to make myth mean whatever he wanted it to mean".[63]
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, Yesterday, 06:28 PM
|
1 response
14 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 10:14 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
33 responses
174 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by alaskazimm
Yesterday, 03:21 PM
|
||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
153 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
103 responses
568 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-18-2024, 11:43 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-07-2024, 10:17 AM
|
39 responses
251 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-12-2024, 02:58 PM
|
Comment