So I’ve decided to bring the “Kathy” series to an end. However, we’ve had some fun in those threads when the conversation has gone off into interesting tangents, so I’d like to keep that part of it going for anyone who’s interested. These new threads will no longer focus on Kathy or the things we were discussing with her. So thanks for your time, Kathy! Take care.
There are no real rules for these threads. But to kick off the conversation, I’ll go back to the discussion on Paul that a few of us were having. Laurie views Deut 13 as a prophecy about Paul, so why don’t we take a quick look at it?
“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. 5 But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
6 “If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, 8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. 9 But you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. 10 You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 11 And all Israel shall hear and fear and never again do any such wickedness as this among you.
12 “If you hear in one of your cities, which the Lord your God is giving you to dwell there, 13 that certain worthless fellows have gone out among you and have drawn away the inhabitants of their city, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which you have not known, 14 then you shall inquire and make search and ask diligently. And behold, if it be true and certain that such an abomination has been done among you, 15 you shall surely put the inhabitants of that city to the sword, devoting it to destruction, all who are in it and its cattle, with the edge of the sword. 16 You shall gather all its spoil into the midst of its open square and burn the city and all its spoil with fire, as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. It shall be a heap forever. It shall not be built again. 17 None of the devoted things shall stick to your hand, that the Lord may turn from the fierceness of his anger and show you mercy and have compassion on you and multiply you, as he swore to your fathers, 18 if you obey the voice of the Lord your God, keeping all his commandments that I am commanding you today, and doing what is right in the sight of the Lord your God.
I can see how one could apply this to Paul. However, I can also see how Jews could have applied it to Jesus as well, especially if he was claiming divinity for himself. And I’m sure this could have applied to lots of people during Israel’s history. Why should we think it’s pointing to Paul specifically, and why wouldn’t it also apply to Jesus?
Finding Truth 
Drunk? I haven’t been drunk in AGES! You show me a drunk Irishman, and I’ll show you an Irishman!
LikeLike
So you drink all night and don’t get drunk? Interesting.
LikeLike
“I’d love to get drunk but I find it depressing.” – Me too! Luckily, I only drink when I’m depressed —
LikeLike
“LOL I’ll spare you the explanation.” – you’re in a sparing mood today, maybe I can finally catch a break!
LikeLike
I wonder if Laurie makes goat cheese.
LikeLike
“just maybe Paul did not say that”
Zoe, from what I understand, based on writing styles, it is suspected that there were other writers other than Paul.
——–
Will the real Paul stand up?
“Ehrman reserves most of his scrutiny for the writings of Paul, which make up the bulk of the New Testament. He says that only about half of the New Testament letters attributed to Paul – 7 of 13 – were actually written by him.
Paul’s remaining books are forgeries, Ehrman says. His proof: inconsistencies in the language, choice of words and blatant contradiction in doctrine.
For example, Ehrman says the book of Ephesians doesn’t conform to Paul’s distinctive Greek writing style. He says Paul wrote in short, pointed sentences while Ephesians is full of long Greek sentences (the opening sentence of thanksgiving in Ephesians unfurls a sentence that winds through 12 verses, he says).
“There’s nothing wrong with extremely long sentences in Greek; it just isn’t the way Paul wrote. It’s like Mark Twain and William Faulkner; they both wrote correctly, but you would never mistake the one for the other,” Ehrman writes.
The scholar also points to a famous passage in 1 Corinthians in which Paul is recorded as saying that women should be “silent” in churches and that “if they wish to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home.”
Only three chapters earlier, in the same book, Paul is urging women who pray and prophesy in church to cover their heads with veils, Ehrman says: “If they were allowed to speak in chapter 11, how could they be told not to speak in chapter 14?”
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/
LikeLike
May I suggest, Zoe, that you read Forged, a book by biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman? He suggests that at least 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus were forged letters, intended to appear as though they were written by Paul.
Often, as one studies the history of the Bible (and other literature of the time, as well), it will be seen that authors who have something they feel is essential to say, will write it, but knowing that no one is going to read anything by “Sam Lipshitz,” will instead sign it by a more famous author’s name, since the message to them, was more important than an author’s credit.
LikeLike
@Dave
Sorry I was a bit too vague. Last time I addressed this same question which was several months ago, I found there were so many distracters that I almost shouldn’t have said anything at all. But, that’s good though because I can express my thoughts better (hopefully).
I don’t think you need to make any assumptions as in an academic discourse or the foundation of a philosophical argument. Nor, do you need to state axioms as in a mathematical proof. This sounds more like presuppositionalism (the idea that you must presuppose God’s existence to have a coherent view of the world) which I’m sure we BOTH reject. I also find the other pillar of apologetics, evidentialism, to be almost as elusive. Think of all those apologists throwing rational arguments at you saying you should believe in God. All arguments are flawed because the human condition is one of imperfect knowledge and there is no escape. Before I go on I would add one more thing: the idea that there is a most rational belief (i.e., about God or politics or something) is a myth. Whatever is viewed as “most rational” is ultimately a construct. The truth is to generate your worldview you will have to make a grand subjective judgment, and that is just part of being human.
I can see that you have judged the bible to be man-made or at least these arguments are a huge concern for it being divinely inspired. I am sympathetic to this and these things drove me to atheism. Looking back I can see how I got there. Part of the problem is a lack of understanding of the cultural realities of when certain texts were written. But, even when we are generous with culture, there will still appear to be problems with our modern sensibility. I think all of these problems converge on the problem of evil. How you view the problem of evil will influence what you think is “reasonable” and how you see the bible. If you are leaning towards the Judeo-Christian deity cannot exist, then you will see problems as being worse than someone who leans towards the other side. So, I think the deepest question you’ve got to answer is whether or not it’s possible for God to be good. If the answer is no, then you won’t want this deity to exist and any sort of argument against this deity will be more convincing.
From the beginning of monotheism the problem of evil was central. If you think God’s creative power and intelligence can be inferred from the universe, you still have to wonder where all the evil comes from. The Adam and Eve myth say it is a curse from God. Even if the story is largely allegorical, this may well be a divine truth. But, if you accept this much, you’ve still got to deal with a personal problem of evil as well. It is the question of God’s moral character. That’s what Abraham dealt with. Abraham wasn’t wondering if God existed, rather whether God was trustworthy given the state of the universe.
Ultimately I’m suggesting to you that to view anything is divinely inspired is a complicated journey and starts deeper than tertiary analyses like “the bible appears man-made”. There are many many more issues that what I just talked about, but it’s getting long at this point, so I’ll stop. I’ll be curious to see your thoughts.
LikeLike
“So you drink all night and don’t get drunk? Interesting.”
I thought I once explained that in an email, possibly not. Of the many, MANY fascinating things I’ve done in my life, I once worked for a time as a bartender in a
strip jointGentleman’s Club (show of hands – who’s surprised?). The bar owner had been the bartender, before he bought the club from the previous owner – he then hired me to tend bar. Surprisingly, he wanted me to drink on the job – he felt that psychologically, it subliminally encouraged customers to drink more if the bartender always had a glass in his hand – who was I to argue?. He taught me to put a small amount in the bottom, for the flavor, and fill the rest with ice and soda, allowing me to drink all night and never really feel it. I still follow his tried and true advice.And to be honest – if I MUST – I haven’t had a drink of anything alcoholic in two weeks, and it’ll be yet another week before I’m anywhere near a liquor store – it’s performance art, SweetCheeks —
LikeLike
I DO know her goats are milk-goats, Nan, as opposed to meat-goats – though I wouldn’t venture a guess as to what they do with the rams. They probably end up smoking on a stone alter somewhere so that her g-d can “smell the sweet savor“.
Which reminds me,
Shazam– sorry, Shabat, will be over in a few hours, she should be back then to respond to all questions with answers straight from the smoking mountain.LikeLike
“altar” – clearly spell-check doesn’t check for context, only spelling, which is likely why it’s never called context-check. (heavy sigh)
LikeLike
Thanks Victoria & Arch. I am familiar with Ehrman. I’ve read Misquoting Jesus and Peter, Paul & Mary Magdaline; The Followers Of Jesus In History And Legend. As well, familiar with his stuff via various blogs. Only a moment to spare right now.
LikeLike
“…presuppositionalism (the idea that you must presuppose God’s existence to have a coherent view of the world) which I’m sure we BOTH reject.” vs “The truth is to generate your worldview you will have to make a grand subjective judgment, and that is just part of being human.”
And exactly how do you feel these differ?
LikeLike
Hey all, it’s after 9:30 p.m here and I’ve just had a chance to go through all the comments since this a.m. I ask ya – who needs TV? This blog thread is entertainment enough!!
. .. .big ol’ heathen smile. . .
LikeLike
Hi Brandon,
Thanks for taking the time to respond further. I am trying to understand your line of reasoning and right now my understanding is this: Rather than assuming a god exists philosophically, you are saying that IF one did exist we should start by asking ourselves if this god could be considered good given the problem of evil and that this mental exercise will expose any biases we may have. Am I correct so far?
Well, let’s say for a minute that the problem of evil did not exist. Aren’t we still at a standstill on the question of determining whether some text is divinely inspired or not?
I’m suggesting to you that we have no way of knowing whether a text is divinely inspired or not. Unless someone here is in direct communication with the deity “out there”, we have no way of knowing what that deity might say. Would this deity contradict itself? Maybe, maybe not. We don’t know. However, we do know a lot about humans and human nature and my statement “the bible appears man-made” is not based on a trivial analysis, but an in-depth analysis. I wonder if you would accept that the burden of proof is on you to show that the books in the bible are anything other than purely man-made. Especially since I would assume that you think all the other texts and scriptures in the world are man-made.
LikeLike
“I ask ya – who needs TV?”
“Days Of Our Lives,” “All My Children” and “As the World Turns” – a virtual trinity of entertainment, with a little “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” thrown in for laughs.
LikeLike
Ruth
“Why would any of the disciples attempt to covertly expose Paul as a false prophet? Why wouldn’t they just come right out and say it given the gravity of the situation in terms of allowing oneself to be deceived?”
Because Paul’s new religion was growing so fast, Luke probably new his book would eventually be destroyed if it didn’t fit in with his theology. When the bible was canonized, some books made the cut and others didn’t. Martin Luther also fought to remove books from the canon. In his 1522 bible he placed James, Jude, Revelation, and Hebrews at the back with a detailed discription of why they were not inspired. Basically because he felt that they went against Paul’s writings.
If he did come right out and say it, would we still have that book today? Maybe, but not likely.
Arch, it is called a buck, not a ram, and no we don’t eat them.
LikeLike
Brandon
“The key question for Christians to ask is, what does the cross and resurrection means for the law? How does it augment things? Paul thinks that the cross and resurrection make the law unnecessary which is most clearly stated in Ephesians 2. And, the author of Hebrews (which most modern scholars do not think was Paul) also thinks that the cross and the resurrection make the law unnecessary and this is interpreted from the New Covenant prophecy (Hebrews 8).”
We have been through this, quite painfully I might add, with Kathy already. As much as I hate to beat a dead horse, the plan of redemption for mankind is layed out in the 7 feasts, and had not been finished yet. In fact, it won’t be finished until the 1000 years of peace are over. I can give you scripture to back that up. I can even give you scripture that shows Messiah Will rebuild the temple and continue to offer sacrifices to YHWH during this time. The new covenant has not happened yet. Until everyone knows YHWH and you don’t have to teach your neighbor about him, this hasn’t taken place. After the feasts are fulfilled, the plan of redemption will be finished and the restoration of all things will take place.
LikeLike
And *has* not been finished.
I’m kinda surprised that Kathy left?!? Did anyone else think she would continue on to the open discussion?
Good night all!
LikeLike
“it is called a buck, not a ram, and no we don’t eat them.” – I did not know that goats shared a terminology with deer – I will file that away in my repository of knowledge, or as Victoria tell me, suppository —
I didn’t suggest you ate them – I rather envisioned you sacrificing them on stone altars, while mumbling some mumbo-jumbo.
LikeLike
“As much as I hate to beat a dead horse” – that’s a lot more fun than you might think!
“Until everyone knows YHWH and you don’t have to teach your neighbor about him, this hasn’t taken place.” – That could take awhile – among the more highly educated, he’s drawing a smaller crowd every year, so I guess the trick is to keep the Catholics overbreeding.
LikeLike
Maybe they could use a little Barry White, with “Keep On Doin’ It” —
LikeLike
“Did anyone else think she would continue on to the open discussion?”
I thought that possibly she might, but wasn’t surprised that she didn’t. She’d had nearly three months to convince us of something, anything, and she was further from that goal than when she started. Also, she was in over her head in both religion and politics, largely because she declines to read anything that doesn’t agree with her. And lastly, Paul Williams knew things about her she’d rather we never learned.
LikeLike
And then too, Nate – bless his little pea-pickin’ heart – didn’t exactly invite her to come on down!
“So thanks for your time, Kathy! Take care.” – I have fired people, using almost those exact same words.
LikeLike
“You realize, I trust, Dave, that the Bible’s flood story was plagiarized from an actual Mesopotamian flood, in 2900 BCE, that flooded an area equivalent to three counties, to a depth of 15 cubits (22.5 ft.), when the Euphrates River overflowed its banks.”
Arch, if only I had known this years ago when I was still a christian, perhaps I wouldn’t have donated to the ark encounter project. I don’t suppose they’d give me my money back now …
LikeLike