Page 71 of 79 FirstFirst ... 21616970717273 ... LastLast
Results 701 to 710 of 787

Thread: Morally Wrong Behavior vs. What the Civil Government Should Prohibit

  1. #701
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    27,736
    Amen (Given)
    2174
    Amen (Received)
    5747
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    Given that BP has listed himself as "heathen" I would assume he actually doesn't believe Paul's claim about the resurrection body, and is simply stating what he believes is the correct interpretation of Paul's words, without necessarily assenting to anything that Paul writes.
    Too bad, Carp used to be fun to talk to, but he jumped the shark a while back.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

  2. #702
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,521
    Amen (Given)
    32
    Amen (Received)
    1410
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    Given that BP has listed himself as "heathen" I would assume he actually doesn't believe Paul's claim about the resurrection body, and is simply stating what he believes is the correct interpretation of Paul's words, without necessarily assenting to anything that Paul writes.
    Good point.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  3. #703
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,271
    Amen (Given)
    2624
    Amen (Received)
    1921
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Tass, Ehrman completely disagrees with you. He says the mortal body is not discarded but transformed into the spiritual.
    Not so.

    According to Ehrman Paul says that “Jesus had a spiritual body at the resurrection. Spiritual bodies were physical. We too will be raised (for Paul) into spiritual bodies. At that time, we will not have “flesh,” because sin will no longer have any role to play in our existence”.

    https://ehrmanblog.org/did-paul-beli...e-resurrected/

    This is why for Paul the ‘empty tomb’, as found in the much later gospels, was an unnecessary concept. “Paul wasn’t writing five years after the burial; he was writing 25 years later, and he never mentions Joseph of Arimathea. Joseph of Arimathea is not mentioned until you get to the Gospel of Mark, 35 or 40 years after the fact.

    When Paul indicates that Jesus was buried, he may just as well have meant that he was buried in a communal grave, which is what far more frequently happened with crucified criminals. Paul said he got buried; he may simply have been tossed into a communal grave”.

    https://www.reasonablefaith.org/medi...-craig-ehrman/
    “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.

  4. #704
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    27,736
    Amen (Given)
    2174
    Amen (Received)
    5747
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Not so.

    According to Ehrman Paul says that “Jesus had a spiritual body at the resurrection. Spiritual bodies were physical. We too will be raised (for Paul) into spiritual bodies. At that time, we will not have “flesh,” because sin will no longer have any role to play in our existence”.

    https://ehrmanblog.org/did-paul-beli...e-resurrected/

    This is why for Paul the ‘empty tomb’, as found in the much later gospels, was an unnecessary concept. “Paul wasn’t writing five years after the burial; he was writing 25 years later, and he never mentions Joseph of Arimathea. Joseph of Arimathea is not mentioned until you get to the Gospel of Mark, 35 or 40 years after the fact.

    When Paul indicates that Jesus was buried, he may just as well have meant that he was buried in a communal grave, which is what far more frequently happened with crucified criminals. Paul said he got buried; he may simply have been tossed into a communal grave”.

    https://www.reasonablefaith.org/medi...-craig-ehrman/
    Tass, I gave you direct quotes from Erhman showing that the body is not destroyed. And from your own link Ehrman shows that the FLESH is not the physical body.

    This is one instance where it becomes crystal clear that we have to try to think in a way that we are decidedly not accustomed to if we want to understand Paul. For US, the body is made of flesh, so when we speak of flesh, we speak of the body. For Paul, the flesh and the body were two different things. That’s because, for him, “flesh” does not refer to what WE refer to when we refer to flesh. That is, we think of it as the meat that is hanging on our bones; but that is not what Paul is referring to. He does, of course, know that there is meat hanging on our bones, but that is what he thinks of as our body. It is not our flesh. “Flesh” is a technical term for Paul. It is the bad side of being human.

    The flesh is a term referring to our sinful nature NOT OUR PHYSICAL BODY. Do you even read your own links?
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

  5. #705
    tWebber Boxing Pythagoras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Faith
    Heathen
    Posts
    2,183
    Amen (Given)
    351
    Amen (Received)
    883
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    I would use the term as it was defined in its context. But that does not make the definition of the word in that context meaningful.

    By way of example, if someone said "Paul thought that black was white because back then, the word "black" actually meant "white," I would nod my head and say, "OK, but that doesn't make black actually white."
    You still seem to be misunderstanding. I'm not saying Paul thought "spiritual" meant something different. I'm saying that "spiritual" is not a very good translation for Paul's concept of πνευμα.

    Using your analogy, it'd be like Paul describing a color for which we have no modern English word, and having Paul's text translated as "black." This is a case of the translation failing to properly convey Paul's meaning; it is not a case of Paul saying contradictory things.

    So your claim, I think, is that Paul was saying that the resurrected Jesus was physical in some kind of "higher quality" or with some transcendent attribute that "normal" physical bodies don't have. Fine. Now 1) define what this "higher order" is
    That is a more difficult question. We can speculate, based upon the positions espoused by other writers, but Paul's particular syncretism of Hellenic cosmology and Jewish beliefs was very likely unique, given his devotion to this totally new and radically different sect of Judaism which came to be Christianity. However, it is likely safe to think that Paul thought of it as "higher" both in the sense of being better in quality and in the sense of being literally, physically, from a higher physical source. To Paul, πνευμα (often translated "wind," "breath," or "spirit") physically came from οὐρανός (often translated "sky" or "heaven"). Incidentally, οὐρανός is another word which I think is poorly translated by modern English, as neither "sky" nor "heaven" quite means to us what οὐρανός meant to ancient Greek thinkers.

    and 2) demonstrate that it actually can and/or does exist.
    As has been mentioned by others, I am not a Christian. I'm not even a theist. I am simply attempting to understand what Paul intended by his writing in exactly the same manner as I would treat Plato or Aristotle or Philo or Iamblichus.
    "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
    --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

  6. #706
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,521
    Amen (Given)
    32
    Amen (Received)
    1410
    Quote Originally Posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    You still seem to be misunderstanding. I'm not saying Paul thought "spiritual" meant something different. I'm saying that "spiritual" is not a very good translation for Paul's concept of πνευμα.

    Using your analogy, it'd be like Paul describing a color for which we have no modern English word, and having Paul's text translated as "black." This is a case of the translation failing to properly convey Paul's meaning; it is not a case of Paul saying contradictory things.
    This is an excellent explanation, and clears up the confusion very well. Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    That is a more difficult question. We can speculate, based upon the positions espoused by other writers, but Paul's particular syncretism of Hellenic cosmology and Jewish beliefs was very likely unique, given his devotion to this totally new and radically different sect of Judaism which came to be Christianity. However, it is likely safe to think that Paul thought of it as "higher" both in the sense of being better in quality and in the sense of being literally, physically, from a higher physical source. To Paul, πνευμα (often translated "wind," "breath," or "spirit") physically came from οὐρανός (often translated "sky" or "heaven"). Incidentally, οὐρανός is another word which I think is poorly translated by modern English, as neither "sky" nor "heaven" quite means to us what οὐρανός meant to ancient Greek thinkers.

    As has been mentioned by others, I am not a Christian. I'm not even a theist. I am simply attempting to understand what Paul intended by his writing in exactly the same manner as I would treat Plato or Aristotle or Philo or Iamblichus.
    Maybe one of the theists can answer the questions...?

    Meanwhile, this entire discussion underscores the observation that people claiming to certain knowledge based on biblical texts are making claims they simply cannot substantiate. I've noted that we have only fragmentary evidence, and no originals sources, and it was a different culture in a different time, but I've also noted that these documents were written in a different language where 1-to-1 translation is simply not possible. Something is always lost in translation, for the reason you note here. We can approximate, but we often cannot equate when moving from one language to another.
    Last edited by carpedm9587; 05-12-2020 at 05:08 AM.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  7. #707
    tWebber Boxing Pythagoras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Faith
    Heathen
    Posts
    2,183
    Amen (Given)
    351
    Amen (Received)
    883
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    This is an excellent explanation, and clears up the confusion very well. Thanks!
    My pleasure! I've written a post on my own blog about a subject I refer to as "theologically loaded language" which discusses this topic (if you're interested, PM me and I'll send you the link). I've also been considering attempting to write my own translations of the canonical gospels which avoid these confusing English terms as much as possible, along with some basic commentary noting the problematic vocabulary and my translation choices. Unfortunately, that undertaking would be enormously time consuming, and as someone who already has one full-time and two part-time jobs, it isn't on my horizon anytime soon.
    "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
    --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

  8. #708
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    18,042
    Amen (Given)
    2249
    Amen (Received)
    1751
    I think that this reading of Paul negates the idea that is espoused by many today of "a ghost in the machine." What need would a physical spirit have for a physical body? Also, Jesus was said to be raised as a physical body as reported by those who had seen him post resurrection. That would seem to be in contratiction with Pauls understanding, if indeed that was Pauls view.

  9. #709
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,271
    Amen (Given)
    2624
    Amen (Received)
    1921
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Tass, I gave you direct quotes from Erhman showing that the body is not destroyed. And from your own link Ehrman shows that the FLESH is not the physical body.
    You misunderstand Paul’s beliefs as described by Ehrman. In Christianity, Paul introduced the concept of the spiritual body (sōma pneumatikos), which is neither fleshly nor an insubstantial spirit but something else again. What is “not destroyed” is the ‘spiritual body’. In Paul’s mind, this was also a physical body - but not the sort of “physical body” we would understand (i.e. the body of flesh and blood).

    So, for Paul the corpse is of little importance. This is why Ehrman argues that it was of no account to Paul whether Jesus fleshly body was in a tomb or tossed into a common burial pit. It is the ‘spiritual body’ which is what it’s all about. This is what gets resurrected and this is what was seen by Paul on the road to Damascus - as well as to those listed in 1 Corinthians 15 who saw Jesus after his crucifixion.
    Last edited by Tassman; 05-12-2020 at 10:20 PM.
    “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.

  10. #710
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    27,736
    Amen (Given)
    2174
    Amen (Received)
    5747
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    You misunderstand Paul’s beliefs as described by Ehrman. In Christianity, Paul introduced the concept of the spiritual body (sōma pneumatikos), which is neither fleshly nor an insubstantial spirit but something else again. What is “not destroyed” is the ‘spiritual body’. In Paul’s mind, this was also a physical body - but not the sort of “physical body” we would understand (i.e. the body of flesh and blood).

    So, for Paul the corpse is of little importance. This is why Ehrman argues that it was of no account to Paul whether Jesus fleshly body was in a tomb or tossed into a common burial pit. It is the ‘spiritual body’ which is what it’s all about. This is what gets resurrected and this is what was seen by Paul on the road to Damascus - as well as to those listed in 1 Corinthians 15 who saw Jesus after his crucifixion.
    Tass, that is utter nonsense.

    Glorifying a body is different from replacing a body (for an example of a glorified body, see the traditions about Jesus’ Transfiguration)

    When Paul says “we shall all be changed” (1 Cor. 15:51) he does *not* say “we will all shed our bodies.” The body is transformed/changed, not abandoned.

    In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, it is the same person, the bodily Jesus, who dies, is buried, is raised, and who appeared to other, including Paul.

    https://ehrmanblog.org/did-paul-thin...-july-14-2017/
    According to Erhman the BODY is not abandoned it is TRANSFORMED. It is not REPLACED. WE do NOT shed our bodies.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •