iskander wrote:outhouse wrote:iskander wrote:
Doherty is irrelevant to the meaning of gal 3:1 as in this thread
.
Doherty is irrelevant to the origin of Christianity. He did what he did, he is done doing things, and what he did in his whole life's work failed being so far out of context, it never gained any traction what so ever. It was a complete perversion of Pauline studies, which has a wide birth of study.
I don't know much about Mr Doherty. Some years ago I bought his book , neither man nor god, but I could not be interested enough to finish it. I have given the book away.
I have always respected honest work
http://bcharchive.org/2/thearchives/for ... .html?f=60
Roo Bookaroo was questioning the contribution of Mr. Doherty on this thread
http://bcharchive.org/2/thearchives/sho ... 16&page=56
My contribution was to equal Luther and Doherty as luther replied to Erasmus
Luther response to Erasmus
De Servo Arbitrio
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/luther/bondage.html
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshol...r_arbitrio.pdf
Exordium
Quote:
For you [Erasmus] say—'so great a number of the most learned men, approved by the consent of so many ages, has no little weight with you. Among whom were, some of the most extensively acquainted with the sacred writings, and also some of the most holy martyrs, many renowned for miracles, together with the more recent theologians, and so many colleges, councils, bishops, and popes: so that, in a word, on your side of the balance are (you say) learning, genius, multitude, greatness, highness, fortitude, sanctity, miracles, and what not!—But that, on my side, are only a Wycliffe and a Laurentius Valla... who in comparison with the others, are of no weight whatever; that Luther, therefore, stands alone, a private individual, an upstart, with his followers, in whom there is neither that learning nor that genius, nor multitude, nor magnitude, nor sanctity, nor miracles. But these things have no effect upon us, for we say to you, as the wolf did to the nightingale, which he devoured,
I confess, my friend Erasmus, that you may well be swayed by all these. These had such weight with me for upwards of ten years, that I think no other mortal was ever so much under their sway. And I myself thought it incredible that this Troy of ours, which had for so long a time, and through so many wars stood invincible, could ever be taken. And I call God for a record upon my soul, that I should have continued so, and have been under the same influence even unto this day, had not an urging conscience and an evidence of things, forced me into a different path.... But this is not a time for setting forth a history of my own life or works; nor have I undertaken this discussion for the purpose of commending myself
We (Luther) will grant, therefore, that we are private individuals and few, and you( Erasmus) public characters and many; we ignorant, and you the most learned: we stupid, and you the most acute: we creatures of yesterday, and you older than Deucalion; we never received, and you approved by so many ages; in a word, we sinners, carnal, and dolts, and you awe-striking to the very devils for your sanctity, spirit, and miracles.- Yet allow us the right to ask of you that reason for your doctrine, which your favourite Peter has commanded you to give. We ask it of you in the most modest way
Roo was saying that academia was against Doherty and I pointed out that academia was also against the Mighty Luther!