Way OT (was: Re: Cyrillic alphabet on RISC OS)

In article <1165d9e14d.andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@tesco.net>, Andy McMullon
<andrew.mcmullon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <4de1d67ab5nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> David
> <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > In article <465d83df4d.andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@tesco.net>, Andy
> > McMullon <andrew.mcmullon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> In article <4ddf787c97nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> David
> >> <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> > As to Xianity... well, that's Paulinism, and as far as I recall
> >> > from my reading of the NT, most members of the church in
> >> > Jerusalem - the church supposedly founded by Jesus - were much
> >> > in favour of killing Paul, so far had he moved off message. Mind
> >> > you, the Jerusalem lot were a pretty hard core bunch demanding
> >> > total submission from new members or else doing away with them.
> >> > makes you wonder what Jesus was about, recruiting such as they,
> >> > don't it?
> >
> >> Now that's down to your own reading of the NT against, err, even
> >> the most liberal scholars...
> >
> > (Forgive the late reply but BT's news server doesn't seem to like
> > your posts and I've only just picked them up on UKU [Tiscali].)
> >
> > I'm sorry, Andy, but unless your reading is that Ananias and
> > Sapphira decided to drop dead of their own accord (or unless, as
> > some Xians have attempted to convince me, it was God himself who
> > did the foul deed), Acts clearly states that Peter and his crowd
> > were into killing folk who didn't give their wholehearted
> > submission - or perhaps it was just their wholehearted wealth that
> > Peter and his cronies were after.

> You have snipped rather too much there. My comment wasn't about that
> particular episode in Acts but about your rash and unsubstantiated
> claim that there was only a single original saying in the gospels
> that Jesus had not got from other Rabbis.

I'm afraid your posts are in danger of being as truthful as the
gospels. I'll quote your post in full below so you, and anyone else
interested in the truth, can see just what your comment appeared to be
in response to. If you accuse me of snipping too much and make the
claim which you did above, I accuse you of deliberately attempting to
mislead me in the positioning of your replies.

..........

In article <465d83df4d.andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@tesco.net>, Andy McMullon
<andrew.mcmullon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In article <4ddf787c97nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> David
> <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> > I've not the evidence to hand, and I can't be fagged to look it up,
> > but I think it well established that all the sayings _attributed to
> > Jesus_ are known to have been extant rabbinical sayings by the time
> > of the supposed Jesus, bar one.

> Funny that, I'm pretty sure that even the most liberal scholars
> don't go that far - but I can't be fagged to look it up either.

> > As to Xianity... well, that's Paulinism, and as far as I recall
> > from my reading of the NT, most members of the church in Jerusalem
> > - the church supposedly founded by Jesus - were much in favour of
> > killing Paul, so far had he moved off message. Mind you, the
> > Jerusalem lot were a pretty hard core bunch demanding total
> > submission from new members or else doing away with them. makes you
> > wonder what Jesus was about, recruiting such as they, don't it?

> Now that's down to your own reading of the NT against, err, even the
> most liberal scholars...

..........

Now, tell me again how your second sentence could ever be seen as a
reply to my first paragraph and not my second. Or apologise.

--
David - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk
http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/
.

Loading