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

Re: [GTh] Gospel of Judas

Expand Messages
  • Ron McCann
    Jack, Aren t you blowing hot and cold with the same breath here? You seem to say you think the letter from Jesus to Abgar might be genuine but Abgar s is not-
    Message 1 of 47 , Apr 30, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Jack,

      Aren't you blowing hot and cold with the same breath here?
      You seem to say you think the letter from Jesus to Abgar might
      be genuine but Abgar's is not- and yet you explain how Abgar's
      original letter ended up back in Edessa because it was the practice
      then to send the original back with the reply.

      Did I misread you?- or are we doing a reprise of 1948? (grin).

      Ron

      At 04:31 PM 30/04/06, Jack. wrote:

      >----- Original Message -----
      >From: "Ron McCann" <ronmccann1@...>
      >To: <gthomas@yahoogroups.com>
      >Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 4:51 PM
      >Subject: RE: [GTh] Gospel of Judas
      >
      >
      > > Doesn't the word "saviour" used in the Abgar letter raise any red flags
      > > for
      > > anyone?
      > >
      > > Ron McCann
      > > Saskatoon, Canada.
      >
      >There are more red flags in Abgar's letter than in Moscow on May 1st.
      >
      >Jack Kilmon
      >San Marcos, Texas
      >
      >
      >
      >------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >Gospel of Thomas Homepage: http://home.epix.net/~miser17/Thomas.html
      >Interlinear translation: http://www.geocities.com/mwgrondin/x_transl.htm
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • pmcvflag
      Hey Jack Sorry I left your post hanging there for so long. I know the conversation has kind of moved on, but I thought now that I can I would still jump back
      Message 47 of 47 , May 28 10:40 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hey Jack

        Sorry I left your post hanging there for so long. I know the
        conversation has kind of moved on, but I thought now that I can I
        would still jump back there and answer your point.

        >>>I don't agree. Eusebius appears to have had much more common
        sense and he did have the resources of Pamphilus' Library in
        Carsarea. Eusebius was sympathetic to Arius and, post Nicaea I,
        charged Alexander for misrepresenting Arius..which took a lot of
        testicular fortitude, IMO.<<<

        Understood. However, I would point out that the evidence you give
        for believing Eusebius is based essentially on personal impression
        and anecdote. I concede that generally that is all we have to go on
        in most cases like this. My own observations about Eusebius are
        generally based on equally questionable evidence ;)

        For instance, I believe that Eusebius made up the whole Constantine
        conversion story for political gain. I also don't write out the
        possibility that he was directly involved in the Testimonium
        Flavianum hoax.

        Of course, it would be unfair to attack Eusebius in order to
        question the Abgar letters, so I don't mean to do so. Just because
        he may have forged other documents doesn't mean he forged these. I
        have heard the theory that it was Abgar iv who forged them (obvious
        motive), but again that is speculation.

        I would be more interested to hear in more detail your textual
        criticism of this situation. More directly Jesus' response is
        obviously dependant on John, and indirectly against Thomas. The
        theology it presents is obviously late (just as "churchy" as the
        supposed Abgar letter). Since I have never actually seen a serious
        academic critical analysis that placed any part of these letters
        (whether Abgar's or Jesus' side) to a little before Eusebius (if not
        by Eusebius), I am willing to hear a case for earlier dates...
        though I still can't take an argument for an actual origin in Jesus
        himself seriously.

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