PEW: I am convinced there is no better way to learn about one who reads VOCIFEROUSLY, and by extension their take on reality and the great questions of the ages, than to discuss the books that helped shape their PRINCIPALS and beliefs.
RYSDYK: Principal and principle are not (yet) interchangeable.
Neither are "Vociferous" and VORACIOUS interchangeable. One would think from Pew's introduction that Clarfield is like the Ethiopian eunuch reader of Isaiah's prophecy who had not, yet, learned to read silently. Thus Philip heard the eunuch reading Isaiah VOCIFEROUSLY in Acts Ch. 8, vss 26-31. The Ethiopian may have been reading it voraciously as well. In sum, Pew is a musical guy, more than a scholarly guy, which is why an anti-woke musical scholar impresses him. And Clarfield is a very impressive sort of well-read, well-travelled and "does well" sort of person --- the old renaissance sort of guy. He can THINK-well, MAKE-music and DO-international-project sorts of things! It is called the integration of the speculative, practical and productive INTELLECTS of human beings, or the understanding, making and doing aspects of the human intellectual power. Few people equally develop the power of the 3 basic ends [understanding, making and doing] of the human intellect. But Clarfield apparently has done a good job developing his intellect to obtain all 3 sorts of ends. So did Leonardo and Michelangelo --- the renaissance men/masters.
Pew, being a business/music sort of guy makes the odd anti-university-Geek or pro-blue-collar sorts of mistakes. And Clarfield, being Jewish and practical is arguably not partial to the "miraculous". Thus, arguably, his fascination by the so-called "Gospel of Thomas". Right! One account of Christ's life without a crucifixion and resurrection (Gospel of Thomas) apparently trumps 4 Gospel accounts with that account being the essential PRINCIPLE of all 4 accounts. Then add St. Paul's caveat, to wit: If Christ did not rise from the dead, we are the most unfortunate (read CRAZY) of men.
Everybody has their "kinks". If you don't think so, then read Kemosabe's occasionally relevant (often inept) quotations! But Carfield saw "Woke" coming from the 1970's --- which is impressive. Then he worked out an actual anthropology, business and government consulting career away from "Woke" influences by leaving Canada. I saw "woke" coming from the 1980's when my University started going "anti-Science", despite being clueless as to what scientists/technologists actually do with actual theories in their laboratories and researches. The so-called "philosophers of science" were the dumbest, with the exception of Thomas Kuhn, an actually honest Marxist, who knew some science, but mistakenly called paradigm-shifts "Scientific Revolutions", rather than break-throughs.
In short, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I'm making Clarfield my new favourite anthropologist, given that Hymie Rubenstein seems to be infatuated with a German descent lawyer wind-bag named Brian Giesbrecht, who ought to be stripped, whipped and crucified on the steps of any Manitoba Court House for his "blaming everybody other than lawyers" for all the woke crap that modern lawyers and modern professors generate.
The Gospel of Thomas does not have evidence to back the claim of authenticity i.e. apocrophal, doubtful authenticity.
The reason that the early Christian Church rejected it because there is no evidence that it is
truthful/factual.
"This suggests that the accounts of the Crucifixion in the New Testament may have been later additions, not part of the essence of early Christianity."
That is not factual.
The crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus were the basis of Christianity from the beginning.
PEW: I am convinced there is no better way to learn about one who reads VOCIFEROUSLY, and by extension their take on reality and the great questions of the ages, than to discuss the books that helped shape their PRINCIPALS and beliefs.
RYSDYK: Principal and principle are not (yet) interchangeable.
Neither are "Vociferous" and VORACIOUS interchangeable. One would think from Pew's introduction that Clarfield is like the Ethiopian eunuch reader of Isaiah's prophecy who had not, yet, learned to read silently. Thus Philip heard the eunuch reading Isaiah VOCIFEROUSLY in Acts Ch. 8, vss 26-31. The Ethiopian may have been reading it voraciously as well. In sum, Pew is a musical guy, more than a scholarly guy, which is why an anti-woke musical scholar impresses him. And Clarfield is a very impressive sort of well-read, well-travelled and "does well" sort of person --- the old renaissance sort of guy. He can THINK-well, MAKE-music and DO-international-project sorts of things! It is called the integration of the speculative, practical and productive INTELLECTS of human beings, or the understanding, making and doing aspects of the human intellectual power. Few people equally develop the power of the 3 basic ends [understanding, making and doing] of the human intellect. But Clarfield apparently has done a good job developing his intellect to obtain all 3 sorts of ends. So did Leonardo and Michelangelo --- the renaissance men/masters.
Pew, being a business/music sort of guy makes the odd anti-university-Geek or pro-blue-collar sorts of mistakes. And Clarfield, being Jewish and practical is arguably not partial to the "miraculous". Thus, arguably, his fascination by the so-called "Gospel of Thomas". Right! One account of Christ's life without a crucifixion and resurrection (Gospel of Thomas) apparently trumps 4 Gospel accounts with that account being the essential PRINCIPLE of all 4 accounts. Then add St. Paul's caveat, to wit: If Christ did not rise from the dead, we are the most unfortunate (read CRAZY) of men.
Everybody has their "kinks". If you don't think so, then read Kemosabe's occasionally relevant (often inept) quotations! But Carfield saw "Woke" coming from the 1970's --- which is impressive. Then he worked out an actual anthropology, business and government consulting career away from "Woke" influences by leaving Canada. I saw "woke" coming from the 1980's when my University started going "anti-Science", despite being clueless as to what scientists/technologists actually do with actual theories in their laboratories and researches. The so-called "philosophers of science" were the dumbest, with the exception of Thomas Kuhn, an actually honest Marxist, who knew some science, but mistakenly called paradigm-shifts "Scientific Revolutions", rather than break-throughs.
In short, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I'm making Clarfield my new favourite anthropologist, given that Hymie Rubenstein seems to be infatuated with a German descent lawyer wind-bag named Brian Giesbrecht, who ought to be stripped, whipped and crucified on the steps of any Manitoba Court House for his "blaming everybody other than lawyers" for all the woke crap that modern lawyers and modern professors generate.
Kevin James Byrne
The Gospel of Thomas does not have evidence to back the claim of authenticity i.e. apocrophal, doubtful authenticity.
The reason that the early Christian Church rejected it because there is no evidence that it is
truthful/factual.
"This suggests that the accounts of the Crucifixion in the New Testament may have been later additions, not part of the essence of early Christianity."
That is not factual.
The crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus were the basis of Christianity from the beginning.
I expected better from Woke Watch Canada.
Principal and principle are not (yet) interchangeable.
“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” – Lucius Annaeus Seneca
“In reality there are as many religions as there are individuals.” – Mahatma Gandhi
“All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry.” – Edgar Allan Poe
Some of the best minds in human history have been and are believers.