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

Re: 'Chrestus' = Christ

Expand Messages
  • y.kuchinsky@utoronto.ca
    ... I beg to disagree, Earl. My acceptance of Stephen s historicity is critical. ... So you will give Eisenman s arguments now? ... I don t think you ve read
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 27 7:07 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, 26 Feb 1999, Earl D wrote:

      > Yuri's uncritical acceptance of Acts' character of Stephen is in the
      > same category.

      I beg to disagree, Earl. My acceptance of Stephen's historicity is

      > Robert Eisenman is not the first or only scholar to reject him as a
      > construct,

      So you will give Eisenman's arguments now?

      > and a recent post quoted a long passage from Schoeps to that effect.

      I don't think you've read that passage carefully. Schoeps does not reject
      the historicity of Stephen in that passage.

      > I won't go so far as to claim that Stephen is entirely fictional
      > (though he may well be),

      So you don't have a clear position on this issue? I find this quite

      > just that Acts cannot be used to testify to his secure existence,

      "Secure" needs to be defined. How secure do you want it to be?

      > and certainly that we cannot rely on Acts' portrayal of the Stephen
      > martyrdom as accurate historical reporting.

      And where did I say this? There seem to be at least two sources used in
      this account. It is a creation of Luke.

      > Yuri's "Big Bang" scenario based on Stephen is not borne out in the
      > 1st century record.

      Remains to be demonstrated.



      Yuri Kuchinsky || Toronto


      The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
      equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.