truthfulness

Tao_Equus, I'm not sure what to make of redaction theories based upon writing style. I've read one book on it Who Wrote the Bible. It was buggy reading but fast moving. I was challenged that redaction theory is a serious subject, however I felt that the author misread some easy to read passages. That was annoying, but it underscores the problem I've had with this whole thing: Often its guesswork. I'm told you have to guess when trying to decide which redactors to read, since there is disagreement between them. They also have scholarly clicks, high-fiving, and every other thing you find in Academia. Anyway, there is an enormous pile of material to read about redaction theories.
 
Dream said:
Tao_Equus, I'm not sure what to make of redaction theories based upon writing style. I've read one book on it Who Wrote the Bible. It was buggy reading but fast moving. I was challenged that redaction theory is a serious subject, however I felt that the author misread some easy to read passages. That was annoying, but it underscores the problem I've had with this whole thing: Often its guesswork. I'm told you have to guess when trying to decide which redactors to read, since there is disagreement between them. They also have scholarly clicks, high-fiving, and every other thing you find in Academia. Anyway, there is an enormous pile of material to read about redaction theories.
Click to expand...

I understand your point. And as this is all written in Latin or Greek we cannot for ourselves reach value judgements. But if you cannot trust the scholars to some extent where are we left? Are they any less trustworthy than the early Roman Church? Who truly had an agenda in writing such a 'controlling' piece of work?

Tao
 
Dream said:
The Wikipedia seems to do a good job of summarizing the contentions over Pauline authorship among the various scholars. Its got a bibliography, etc.

Authorship of the Pauline epistles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Nice piece but to me it calls into question whether anything attributed to Pauline authorship can be trusted. And it is the same whenever you scrutinize the bible, always you find this meddling by politicians in Rome. None of it is trustworthy.

Tao
 
DrFree said:
The ethical question we should ask then is not "Why be truthful?" but "Why not be untruthful?" One approach to an answer is that untruthfulness breaks down the bonds of community. (Oddly, the opposite hypothesis, that truthfulness builds the bonds of community, seems much more difficult to establish.)

This is a corollary of the more general claim that immoral behavior harms community. There is even some evidence, in the form of computer simulations, that abstract communities gradually reject and eliminate such behavior in the course of community evolution.
Click to expand...
Lies facilitate normal social interactions. It is sometimes unclear at what point it is more ethical to be rude and honest than it is to be compassionate and dishonest.

But what about being truthful with oneself? More problems in the world arise from the actions of persons who are either chronically inauthentic or simply deluded about who they are and what they want out of life.
 
I was just at the bookstore and looking at the small section on Philosophy, etc. and came across a book called the Anthology of Atheism with several different authors. I randomly opened it and somebody was talking about how Paul never seemed to quote Jesus but instead would argue to make his own points, and that this somehow meant that Paul's works were not Christian? Don't answer that. Anyway, I was actually looking for books about/by Spinoza. I was going to get the Cambridge Companion to Spinoza, but I didn't want to pay 30$ for it. Worse, the inexpensive Dover copy of Spinoza's works was typeset using the "Headache Ultralight" font. Fortunately, Spinoza's works are on gutenberg.org , so I'll just browse them in the font of my choice.
 
Dream said:
I randomly opened it and somebody was talking about how Paul never seemed to quote Jesus but instead would argue to make his own points, and that this somehow meant that Paul's works were not Christian? .
Click to expand...


i like this verse in.... 1 CORINTHIANS 2;1-5....
And so I, when I came to YOU, brothers, did not come with an extravagance of speech or of wisdom declaring the sacred secret of God to YOU. 2 For I decided not to know anything among YOU except Jesus Christ, and him impaled. 3 And I came to YOU in weakness and in fear and with much trembling; 4 and my speech and what I preached were not with persuasive words of wisdom but with a demonstration of spirit and power, 5 that YOUR faith might be, not in men’s wisdom, but in God’s power.
1 CORINTHIANS 2;1-5


An Example Worthy of Imitation. In view of his faithfulness in copying Christ’s example, the apostle Paul could say: "Become imitators of me." (1Co 4:16; 11:1; Php 3:17)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top