Re: [gthomas] Re: Kuchinsky's GThom dating argument
- To "lost" Donald David McCann's:
> > I am getting lost here [...] I just don't understand this last exchange.offered Rick Hubbard, on 7 Aug 2000:
> > How can anybody debate if Jesus was Jewish?
> > Is everything up for debate in moderm scholarship?
>With respect to the "Jewishness of Jesus," that seems to be one of thoseNot unlike, let us say, of the "certainty in mainstream scholarship"
>topics about which there is a good deal of certainty in mainstream
of the Catholic Middle Ages, say, about the relative movement and
the positions of the Sun and Gaia and of the planets. Ask Galileo Galilei.
>But that relative certainty does not preclude debate on theYou don't say! Two possibilities, neatly taking care the all. How
>issue. On one hand some dispute his "Jewishness" because to accept that
>conclusion would somehow interfere with their own assumptions or
>eccentric indulgences. Others, as I suggested, debate the issue simply
>because they are uninformed about the strength of the evidence which
>suggest that he *was* Jewish.
wonderfully simple, and all exhaustive are the two solutions,
and how easily disposing of the"uninformed" "debaters". So didactic.
>In any case, hang in there and always feel free to ask forIsidoros,
who apologizes here (too) for the lateness to re-enter the fray-- and,
remembers, especially in lieu of the above offered "clarifications",
that has indeed asked for a certain "definitions" ("please" he pleaded)
before long. Yet, all one continues to read are the same "historical
suppositions". This 2000 years o()d debate goes on in part because
people will not question the "given".