Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site phs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mcnc!duke!phs!lisa
From: lisa@phs.UUCP (Jeff Gillette)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Wingate - firing blanks again
Message-ID: <971@phs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Nov-84 19:30:30 EST
Article-I.D.: phs.971
Posted: Mon Nov 12 19:30:30 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Nov-84 07:22:08 EST
Organization: Duke Physiology
Lines: 81

<>

<Charlie Wingate and Yirmiyahu BenDavid>

> How are we supposed to understand your argument when you won't even 
> tell us what your position means?  
>
> ****************************
> Yiri responds
> When you have read both Parkes and Bagatti contact be by mail and
> we'll take another look.
> ...	...	...	...	...	...
> Parkes and Bagatti were/are christians and you won't even learn from 
> them. 
> ...	...	...	...	...	...
> If you would read Parkes... and Bagatti... you might at least have a 
> shot at getting a glimmer (if you could open up your mind).  Ah, but 
> not you. You couldn't be missing such things. Not you.  That's unthinkable.

Funny thing.  I *have* read Parkes and Bagatti, and both seem to go against
Yirmiyahu's primary assertions.  Both Parkes and Bagatti claim that Jesus 
(neither writers use Yirmiyahu's preference - Y'shua) made authority claims
far beyond the limits acceptable to First Century Judaism.  Both claim that
early followers of Jesus were *Christians* (not just another Jewish sect).
Both accept the *whole* of the Gospels, not just those passages that "fit"
Jewish culture.  I documented these points with full quotations and 
references several weeks ago.  When will Yirmiyahu either prove (by similar
quotations and references) that I have misunderstood Parkes and Bagatti,
or quit misleading netters by claiming these fine scholars as authorities
for his own creative imagination.



> Among others, you have a great confusion between
>  1) understanding the N'tzarim writings as a historical document, what
>     it most likely read, and what was meant by the Jews who wrote it
>     and the Jews to whom it was written
>  2) asserting one's beliefs about the implications of the writings, and
>  3) intractable insistence upon absolute faith in a perverted version
>     of #1
> My interest is in #1. Your defiantly committed to 3 and asking me to
> leave the scholarly aspect of it and get involved in #2. 

Are we near a resolution on one major point?  Yirmiyahu claims that his 
interest is in the historical documents of early Christians (whom he calls
N'tzarim).  From earlier submissions, Yiri has identified these writings
as the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament available to us.  Agreed.

Let me suggest, then, that, since these early manuscripts record the 
beliefs of the gospel and epistle writers, and their interest in the
implications of the life and death of Jesus (Yeshua), it is a worthy
task for us to explore the beliefs and implications of these writings.

Let me also suggest that by accepting the earliest manuscripts as 
authentic, as seen in the Nestle and United Bible Societies texts
(as Yirmiyahu affirms), we can eliminate any "intractable insistence upon
... a perverted version."


Again, Charlie challenges Yiri to read Christian theologians who represent
broad aspects of Christian thought (rather than his single source - a former 
Baptist who found Judaism more to his liking).

> Yiri responds:
> I can't imagine why I would want to learn more about something which I 
> know became perverted over a millenia before those authors got out of 
> their diapers.

No insult to Baptists intended, but there was no Baptist denomination 
a millennium (note the spelling and the singular form Yiri :-) ago.  I 
will allow Baptist netters to speak for themselves; Yiri has not read the
books that have influenced my [Presbyterian] theology, and I find his picture
of "Christianity" bears absolutely no relationship to the Christian faith 
believed and practiced in my denomination.  Thus, I assume that Yiri's 
attacks on "antinomian" and "antisemitic" "Christianity" must be directed
toward some other sect or schism!


	Jeff Gillette		...!duke!phs!lisa
	The Divinity School
	Duke University