Secret Alias wrote:Can we all just agree to ignore anything that comes from John? He never has anything interesting to say.
You mean.
I'm very desperate to prove my failed theory before I die. That John constantly uses academia and what is accepted without question and tries to undermine my vivid imagination and constant rhetorical questions.
There is a difference in those who study the text for possibilities, and those who promote unsubstantiated conclusions from said study.
No things are not a simple dichotomy. There are many ways of approaching the text. I happen to like studying traditions. I think that basing your understanding on the earliest known reading (= Marcionite) of Paul is the best way to approach matters. I'd be happy to debate that with an intelligent person. But unfortunate you've not demonstrated yourself to be very smart.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
An example of how Galatians 1:1 - 5 and 2 Corinthians 12:1 - 5 were combined to contextualize the gospel from the Acts of Peter and Paul where Paul declares:
And this teaching has been given me, not from men, nor through men, but through Jesus Christ, who spoke to me out of heaven, who also has sent me to preach, saying to me, Go forth, for I will be with you; and all things, as many as you shall say or do, I shall make just.
Note here Paul understands the ascent to heaven precedes his mission. It sets in motion the gospel. This would again underscore that his ascent to heaven occurred at the Passion or very near to the beginning of Christianity.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
I wonder whether what happened to Paul - i.e. being raised from the dead to the heights of heaven is expected to happen to all Christians. He taught that the dead in Christ will one day rise from their graves to meet the Lord in the air. (1 Thessalonians 4:15– 17)
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
And if anyone doubts that interpolations crept into all discussions of resurrection look at Colossians 2:
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by[c] Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
The insertion of "circumcision" throughout is clearly secondary. It effectively renders the whole passage senseless
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
The bottom line is that i suspect that Paul was originally resurrected by Jesus (or perhaps better "Christ"). Yet every passage that alludes to it has been altered. Why?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias wrote:And if anyone doubts that interpolations crept into all discussions of resurrection look at Colossians 2:
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by[c] Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
The insertion of "circumcision" throughout is clearly secondary. It effectively renders the whole passage senseless
These can be explained by the multiple authors as a community who produced these text, and yes copies could have errors in them, and there could have been redactions and and I'm sure interpolations exist.
But lacking to understand the original context, can also lead one to make false assumptions.