Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: GThomas (Shahina)

Expand Messages
  • Tom Simms
    ... [... Snip ...] ... Resurrections, real? You set out superstition and call it history? Be sensible, for once. However, you re right, for once, you re no
    Message 1 of 11 , Feb 2, 1999
      On Tue, 2 Feb 1999 21:41:40 +0100, antonio.jerez@... writes:
      >Antonio Jerez wrote:
      >>>Shahina,

      [... Snip ...]

      >After dying God resurrected him and gave him a new resurrection body that
      >is not like normal bodies. There is no talk about Jesus surviving the ordeal on
      >the cross and thereafter walking along with his normal body all the way to
      >Kashmir. That is pure Ahmadiyya guesswork. You could just as well guess that
      >he flew to Mars. The Ahmadiyya belief is neither supported by the Quran since
      >Allah has nothing to say about Jesus going to Kashmir. Again the Ahmadiyya
      >are in the world of phantasy and guesswork.
      >
      >P.S And I am not saying this as a Christian apologist. I am no Christian, just
      >a historian of religions who try to go where the evidence leads me.

      Resurrections, real? You set out superstition and call it
      history? Be sensible, for once.

      However, you're right, for once, you're no Christian...

      >
      >Best wishes
      >
      >Antonio
      >

      Tom Simms
    • Ian Hutchesson
      ... ordeal on ... since ... just ... Tom has this habit of becoming aphasic. Would you try, Tom, to read what you are commenting on before commenting? ... I
      Message 2 of 11 , Feb 2, 1999
        At 20.32 02/02/99 AST, Tom Simms wrote:
        >On Tue, 2 Feb 1999 21:41:40 +0100, antonio.jerez@... writes:
        >>Antonio Jerez wrote:
        >>>>Shahina,
        >
        > [... Snip ...]
        >
        >>After dying God resurrected him and gave him a new resurrection body that
        >>is not like normal bodies. There is no talk about Jesus surviving the
        ordeal on
        >>the cross and thereafter walking along with his normal body all the way to
        >>Kashmir. That is pure Ahmadiyya guesswork. You could just as well guess that
        >>he flew to Mars. The Ahmadiyya belief is neither supported by the Quran
        since
        >>Allah has nothing to say about Jesus going to Kashmir. Again the Ahmadiyya
        >>are in the world of phantasy and guesswork.
        >>
        >>P.S And I am not saying this as a Christian apologist. I am no Christian,
        just
        >>a historian of religions who try to go where the evidence leads me.
        >
        > Resurrections, real?

        Tom has this habit of becoming aphasic. Would you try, Tom, to read what
        you are commenting on before commenting?

        > You set out superstition and call it
        > history?

        I don't often agree with Antonio, but at least when I comment, I try to
        represent his views rather than imputing ideas that are not his.

        > Be sensible, for once.

        This is Tom's empty rhetoric. It's a shame that he bothers wasting his
        breath on such comments when someone challenges one of his sillier
        hobby-horses.

        Get real, Tom. Either respond to what the person actually says or shut up.
        You do this sort of thing a little too often.

        To say what a text's presuppositions are does not reflect what was history.

        To say that that text necessarily contains historical information is
        unjustified.

        To say that that text should be understood when filtered through later
        texts is misguided.

        And to say that, despite the fact that that text denies your
        interpretation, it can be read to support your position with a little
        tweaking clearly based on materials whose contexts are never shown to be
        relevant is disreputable.


        Ian

        > However, you're right, for once, you're no Christian...
        >
        >>
        >>Best wishes
        >>
        >>Antonio
        >>
        >
        >Tom Simms
        >
        >
      • joe baxter
        ... I have after all read some of your statements ... others ... I am not afraid to admit my ignorance about much of this world. So why not share with us the
        Message 3 of 11 , Feb 2, 1999
          At 09:41 PM 2/2/99 +0100, Antonio wrote:
          >Antonio Jerez wrote:
          >
          >>>Shahina,
          >>>I think you have a lot to learn, both about the origins of the Quran
          >>>and the New Testament. But for an excellent survey of what the
          >>>Quran has to say about Jesus I would advise you to start with
          >>>Jeffrey Parrinder's "Jesus in the Quran". Hopefully you will find
          >>>that those Quranic verses that talk about Jesus "survival" on the
          >>>cross are not as clearcut as you and some other muslims believe.


          I have after all read some of your statements
          >earlier on Crosstalk, and I must confess that so far you haven't shown much
          >knowledge about what kind of literatures the NT is and in what way the ancient
          >Jews went about doing Midrash, Pesher and Haggadah. You are definitely not
          >alone on the list in having this problem. Joe Baxter, Tom Simms and a few
          others
          >are also in dire need of taking a beginners course on this subject.

          I am not afraid to admit my ignorance about much of this world. So why not
          share with us the point or points you wish to make that relate to the
          subject. Conclusory swipes are not helpful to those of us, in dire need, as
          you say.


          There is no talk about Jesus surviving the ordeal on
          >the cross and thereafter walking along with his normal body all the way to
          >Kashmir. That is pure Ahmadiyya guesswork. You could just as well guess that
          >he flew to Mars.
          Again the Ahmadiyya
          >are in the world of phantasy and guesswork.

          Your ridicule is really not helpful. If you have a point, stick to the
          evidence. The Amadiya do not suggest that Yeshu got down from the cross and
          walked to Kashmir. Nor is their view guesswork. There is a very old Asian
          tradition, and many records concerning Yuzu Asaph. If your point is
          correct, dealing directly with the evidence should be helpful.

          In truth, it is the scholars, not the lay folk who are at fault here. Their
          arrogant confidence that Yeshu died and that the post-resurrection
          experiences were mass hallucinations has its own aura of ignorance. Only the
          overly educated could confidently believe such things and dismiss contrary
          points of view as trips to Mars.

          Keep in mind my friend, the church destroyed many of the texts. But for some
          incredible good fortune, we wouldn't know about GThomas. We lost 2000 lines
          of GHebrews. What else was destroyed? Do you think these manuscripts were
          destroyed because they agreed with the 4G? Simply stick to the evidence and
          be a little more humble to the possibility that the truth may be very
          different than what you have imagined. We have no reporting of what happened
          to most of the Apostles.

          With kind regards,

          Joe
        • Tom Simms
          ... .. ... .. Run out of people to flay, Igor? Tom
          Message 4 of 11 , Feb 3, 1999
            On Wed, 03 Feb 1999 04:23:26 +0100, mc2499@... writes:
            >At 20.32 02/02/99 AST, Tom Simms wrote:

            ..

            >Ian
            >

            ..

            Run out of people to flay, Igor?

            Tom
          • Antonio Jerez
            ... Amen to all of that, Ian. It does look increasingly certain that Tom has had his head pickled in the sands of the egyptian deserts for too long. At least
            Message 5 of 11 , Feb 3, 1999
              Ian Hutchesson commented on Tom Simms:

              >Get real, Tom. Either respond to what the person actually says or shut up.
              >You do this sort of thing a little too often.
              >
              >To say what a text's presuppositions are does not reflect what was history.
              >
              >To say that that text necessarily contains historical information is
              >unjustified.
              >
              >To say that that text should be understood when filtered through later
              >texts is misguided.
              >
              >And to say that, despite the fact that that text denies your
              >interpretation, it can be read to support your position with a little
              >tweaking clearly based on materials whose contexts are never shown to be
              >relevant is disreputable.


              Amen to all of that, Ian. It does look increasingly certain that Tom
              has had his head pickled in the sands of the egyptian deserts for
              too long. At least he hasn't become more clearheaded the years
              I've known him.
              Tom reminds me of a linguistics professor we have here in town
              by the name of Alvar Ellegard. This man has for the last ten years
              been propagating in books, articles and conferences that Jesus
              was never crucified by Pilate - instead he lived about 150 years
              earlier and was in reality the Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran.
              Increadibly enough a lot of people here in Sweden have been paying
              attention to this drivel. Now he threatens to publish another book in
              the Anglo-saxon countries. Since I am fed up with the man I decided
              to call the regional daily newspaper a few weeks ago and asked them
              to interview me about the historical Jesus and the professors nonsensical
              ideas. Surprisingly they immediately hooked up on my idea. Next Wednesday
              there is going to be a whole page in Goteborgs-Posten about me and my
              Jesus studies. One of my more controversial assertions will probably be
              that Sweden is an exegetical backwater - until now there hasn't been a
              historical Jesus research worth the name. Unfortunately the swedes have
              so far mostly had to be content with the mad ramblings of people like Ellegard
              or the theories of pseudohistorians at the theological institutions connected to
              the Universities. Among those pseudohistorians I count professors like Birger
              Gerhardsson and Harald Riesenfeldt.

              Best wishes

              Antonio
            • Antonio Jerez
              ... I ve been two years on this list and I have come to the point where I don t find it the least useful to get into prolonged discussions with beginners who
              Message 6 of 11 , Feb 3, 1999
                Joe Baxter responded to Antonio Jerez:

                >I am not afraid to admit my ignorance about much of this world. So why not
                >share with us the point or points you wish to make that relate to the
                >subject. Conclusory swipes are not helpful to those of us, in dire need, as
                >you say.

                I've been two years on this list and I have come to the point where
                I don't find it the least useful to get into prolonged discussions with
                beginners who start from ground zero on a new subject like Second
                Temple Judaism. The beginners are therefore welladvised to read at least
                a minimum of the relevant litterature before they get into discussions
                with the scholars on the list. There are many people on this list, myself
                included, who will certainly help with advise about what kind of litterature
                to start with.

                Best wishes

                Antonio
              • Ian Hutchesson
                ... I ll pour on some soothing oil, if you promise to stay away from the flames. -Igor
                Message 7 of 11 , Feb 3, 1999
                  Tom Simms wrote:
                  >..
                  >
                  >>Ian
                  >>
                  >
                  >..
                  >
                  > Run out of people to flay, Igor?
                  >
                  >Tom

                  I'll pour on some soothing oil, if you promise to stay away from the flames.


                  -Igor
                • Tom Simms
                  ... [... Snip ...] ... Apparently both of you believe in a personal god who takes part in your daily lives and in the actual resur- rection of Jesus by god. I
                  Message 8 of 11 , Feb 3, 1999
                    On Wed, 3 Feb 1999 17:49:53 +0100, antonio.jerez@... writes:
                    >Ian Hutchesson commented on Tom Simms:
                    >>Get real, Tom. Either respond to what the person actually says or shut up.

                    [... Snip ...]

                    >Amen to all of that, Ian.

                    Apparently both of you believe in a personal god who
                    takes part in your daily lives and in the actual resur-
                    rection of Jesus by god.

                    I don't. That's MY presupposition dealing with the
                    Crucifixion.

                    It does look increasingly certain that Tom
                    >has had his head pickled in the sands of the egyptian deserts for
                    >too long.

                    In Egypt, I THINK people today don't have the Ancient
                    Beliefs, I see no evidence for them so doing, but I
                    DON'T KNOW for sure.

                    >At least he hasn't become more clearheaded the years
                    >I've known him.

                    Pure Bile. I must have struck a nerve.

                    >Tom reminds me of a linguistics professor we have here in town
                    >by the name of Alvar Ellegard. This man has for the last ten years
                    >been propagating in books, articles and conferences that Jesus
                    >was never crucified by Pilate - instead he lived about 150 years
                    >earlier and was in reality the Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran.

                    In the 1980's, and before the full publication of the
                    Dead Sea Scrolls, this was a popular and well supported
                    view. Right now, our sister List, Orion, is still
                    debating the issue and in particular the matter of the
                    Essenes.

                    >Increadibly enough a lot of people here in Sweden have been paying
                    >attention to this drivel. Now he threatens to publish another book in
                    >the Anglo-saxon countries. Since I am fed up with the man I decided
                    >to call the regional daily newspaper a few weeks ago and asked them
                    >to interview me about the historical Jesus and the professors nonsensical
                    >ideas. Surprisingly they immediately hooked up on my idea. Next Wednesday
                    >there is going to be a whole page in Goteborgs-Posten about me and my
                    >Jesus studies. One of my more controversial assertions will probably be
                    >that Sweden is an exegetical backwater - until now there hasn't been a
                    >historical Jesus research worth the name. Unfortunately the swedes have
                    >so far mostly had to be content with the mad ramblings of people like Ellegard
                    >or the theories of pseudohistorians at the theological institutions connected
                    >to the Universities. Among those pseudohistorians I count professors like
                    >Birger Gerhardsson and Harald Riesenfeldt.

                    Interesting that you would go public in such an academic
                    backwater. My text, _Behind The Bible_, has been in print
                    since 1990 and has sold to five continents. Just now I have
                    finished the last arrangements with Amazon.com and it will
                    be on their list before the end of this present month.

                    Now if you and Ian would please tell me 1. what is god; and
                    2. how he raised Jesus from the dead; and, 3. got him to
                    heaven, and do so in non-theological terms explicable in
                    today's physics and cosmology, then I'll shut up.

                    Now, if you offer that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul,
                    James or any others of that time believed that God raised
                    Jesus from the dead and then raised him to heaven is what
                    happened, I can't disagree they did so. I don't accept what
                    they believed happened is an historical reality. The his-
                    torical reality is that they believed so. Just what do you
                    believe happened that made the people named believe so?

                    I expect that because Seneca reports it was allegedly
                    witnessed, the Emperor's peculiar gait being the point of
                    certification, that you, Antonio, and you, Ian, believe took
                    place the ascension of Claudius to heaven on his deifictaion
                    in 54 CE. If you do, I have for your purchase some wonder-
                    ful shore lots here, available for showing only by appoint-
                    ment.

                    >B___ w_____ (being pure hypocrisy, sheilding his venom)
                    >
                    >Antonio
                    >

                    Otherwise, hogwash, Antonio and likewise, Ian,

                    Tom Simms
                  • Ian Hutchesson
                    ... Dearest of Toms, I thought we were dealing with analyses of biblically related texts, not life the universe and everything. But if you insist on such off
                    Message 9 of 11 , Feb 3, 1999
                      > Now if you and Ian would please tell me 1. what is god; and
                      > 2. how he raised Jesus from the dead; and, 3. got him to
                      > heaven, and do so in non-theological terms explicable in
                      > today's physics and cosmology, then I'll shut up.

                      Dearest of Toms,

                      I thought we were dealing with analyses of biblically related texts, not
                      life the universe and everything.

                      But if you insist on such off topic questions, let me join in:

                      What colour underpants are you wearing today? Are they too tight for you?
                      Did you change them this morning?

                      Perhaps if you get back on track, I will too! We are dealing with texts and
                      what those texts say, whether you or Bob or anyone else understands that or
                      not.


                      Ian

                      As to what you want to know, I can only pass on texts on this list, so read
                      Job chapter 38 following.
                    • joe baxter
                      ... I have after all read some of your statements ... others ... Joe s reply: I am not afraid to admit my ignorance about much of this world. So why not share
                      Message 10 of 11 , Feb 5, 1999
                        >Antonio Jerez wrote:
                        >
                        >>>Shahina,
                        >>>I think you have a lot to learn, both about the origins of the Quran
                        >>>and the New Testament.

                        I have after all read some of your statements
                        >earlier on Crosstalk, and I must confess that so far you haven't shown much
                        >knowledge about what kind of literatures the NT is and in what way the ancient
                        >Jews went about doing Midrash, Pesher and Haggadah. You are definitely not
                        >alone on the list in having this problem. Joe Baxter, Tom Simms and a few
                        others
                        >are also in dire need of taking a beginners course on this subject.

                        Joe's reply:

                        I am not afraid to admit my ignorance about much of this world. So why not
                        share with us the point or points you wish to make that relate to the
                        subject. Conclusory swipes are not helpful to those of us, in dire need, as
                        you say.

                        More Antonio:

                        There is no talk about Jesus surviving the ordeal on
                        >the cross and thereafter walking along with his normal body all the way to
                        >Kashmir. That is pure Ahmadiyya guesswork. You could just as well guess that
                        >he flew to Mars.
                        Again the Ahmadiyya
                        >are in the world of phantasy and guesswork.

                        Joe's reply:

                        Your ridicule is really not helpful. If you have a point, stick to the
                        evidence. The Amadiya do not suggest that Yeshu got down from the cross and
                        walked to Kashmir. Nor is their view guesswork. There is a very old Asian
                        tradition, and many records concerning Yuzu Asaph. If your point is
                        correct, dealing directly with the evidence should be helpful.

                        In truth, it is the scholars, not the lay folk who are at fault here. Their
                        arrogant confidence that Yeshu died and that the post-resurrection
                        experiences were mass hallucinations has its own aura of ignorance. Only the
                        overly educated could confidently believe such things and dismiss contrary
                        points of view as trips to Mars.

                        Keep in mind my friend, the church destroyed many of the texts. But for some
                        incredible good fortune, we wouldn't know about GThomas. We lost 2000 lines
                        of GHebrews. What else was destroyed? Do you think these manuscripts were
                        destroyed because they agreed with the 4G? Simply stick to the evidence and
                        be a little more humble to the possibility that the truth may be very
                        different than what you have imagined. We have no reporting of what happened
                        to most of the Apostles.

                        Antonio's reply:

                        >I've been two years on this list and I have come to the point where
                        >I don't find it the least useful to get into prolonged discussions with
                        >beginners who start from ground zero on a new subject like Second
                        >Temple Judaism. The beginners are therefore welladvised to read at least
                        >a minimum of the relevant litterature before they get into discussions
                        >with the scholars on the list.


                        "Jesus said, 'Those who know all, but are lacking in themseves, are utterly
                        lacking.' "

                        Gospel of Thomas 67
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.