Re: Birth narratives (Ian)
- At 00.33 02/12/98 -0500, you wrote:
>At 04:25 AM 12/2/98 +0100, Ian Hutchesson wrote:If you accept some form of solution of the synoptic problem, this post is
>>I have received no serious challenges on either text-critical or linguistic
>Funny, that's exactly how I've felt about the lack of a serious rebuttal
>from your part to well-reasoned objections on text-critical or linguistic
>grounds. For example, you have yet to cite a single manuscript of Mark
>that omits "from Nazareth" from 1:9.
- Sorry to have to say so, Chris, but you've unacceptably confused 'truth'
> with 'belief'. The notion of something being "true for person x" is nothingThank's for picking me up on that
> more than another way of saying that x believes something to be true.
> Everyone has fundamental beliefs, of course, but it's misleading to callI don't have a problem with that
> these beliefs 'fundamental truths'. When your distinction is reworded as
> one between "fundamental belief" and "universal belief", it makes much more
> BTW, the bit about the "believer's hat" was my way of trying to capture theSurely the important thing for the believer 'doing history' is to declare their interest - that way the reader knows how many grains of salt to take to make the results more palletable (sp?).
> same idea that Mahlon and Bob have spoken of as "bracketing-off" one's
> beliefs about the divinity of a person when one is "doing history" related
> to that person. I have my doubts as to whether or how far this is possible,
> but I'm willing to take their word for it that it is possible, since
> they're the ones who find themselves in that situation.
See the original message at http://www.egroups.com/list/crosstalk/?start=3936