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

Re: birch bark b*ll*x

Expand Messages
  • Ian Hutchesson
    ... Polemics, Joe? Naaa, I don t have an agenda -- other than coherent balanced analysis along scientific lines , if you want to call that an agenda. ...
    Message 1 of 20 , May 4, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      At 09.22 03/05/99 -0700, joseph baxter wrote:
      >Tone down the polemics, Ian,

      Polemics, Joe? Naaa, I don't have an agenda -- other than "coherent
      balanced analysis along scientific lines", if you want to call that an agenda.

      >I think you have forgotten the context of our
      >discussion,

      Definitely not. My first comment was to Jack for asking "Birch Bark
      Scripture? Wuzzat?" It was you who introduced this "Birch Bark Scripture"
      stuff and I merely commented on the evidence -- or better the lack of it.

      >which had to do with hypotheses, such as the hypothesis re the
      >name of the man,

      As to such a hypothesis, I have already stated my position: the texts are
      in Greek and probably none was written anywhere near Judea; no-one has
      established a historical person at the core of the Jesus literature, so one
      can't make presuppositions as to a non-historical person's place of
      residence; all we therefore have is a Greek name of a literary personality.

      >and hypotheses to explain certain reported Asian facts
      >such as the Seat of Solomon temple inscriptions, and other *reported*
      >facts, including the one you are currently frothing at the mouth about.

      It's hard for you to overcome the necessity to believe. It overshadows your
      ability to test your surrogate hypotheses. All fall down with the
      incredible notion of a Jesus surviving his crucifixion, the first hurdle
      you have failed to deal with. (The second is lack of credible dating for
      your "Asian facts".)

      >(If
      >you have a hypothesis which explains the large body of reported Asian
      >facts, or any of these reported facts, that is fair game for discussion.)

      Naturally, as indications of a Jesus in India started cropping up with
      Mirza and the "discovery" of the tomb of Jesus, I can see no reason for
      looking further afield.

      >I will respond to your message as time permits.

      It might be better, if you can't add anything substantive (as you haven't
      so far), that you get the substance first.


      Cheers,


      Ian
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.