Posted: May 07, 2012 9:47 pm
by Cito di Pense
IgnorantiaNescia wrote:What I want to know is how you figure out what these words mean.

Depends on what's in it for me. In the case of Ehrman, it looks like a long series of contracts with publishers. The words appear to reflect reflect religious beliefs. I have no idea whether they refer to actual persons or events, and neither do you, though you think you do.

IgnorantiaNescia wrote: do you think Paul is untrustworthy (here) or do you accept Carrier's explanation?

I don't know who wrote the words attributed to 'Paul', and neither do you, though you think you do.

IgnorantiaNescia wrote:Who said my position is binary?

You seem to infer that someone not defending the concept of historicism is defending 'mythicism'. All I say is that you don't know anything historical about the individuals who wrote down your texts. They're testimonials, anecdotes, with a bit of raving lunacy thrown in for spice. I guess you'd say I'm someone who does not take bible scholarship seriously at all, let alone taking the texts themselves seriously, and I've explained to you why.