The discussion on Phil 2 is good. Crossley's take that 'in the form' is like 'Adam like God' in Genesis seems like a desperate attempt to support his a priori reading of the NT without a Christian perspective, as he proposed in his final remarks.
And his denial of Paul's high Christology is really an argument from silent.
Have both of you thought of doing a follow-up book on the origin of Christianity? Responding to the further responses in more detail?
Got pretty heated at some points, but good discussion.
ReplyDeleteHi Mike,
ReplyDeleteThe discussion on Phil 2 is good. Crossley's take that 'in the form' is like 'Adam like God' in Genesis seems like a desperate attempt to support his a priori reading of the NT without a Christian perspective, as he proposed in his final remarks.
And his denial of Paul's high Christology is really an argument from silent.
Have both of you thought of doing a follow-up book on the origin of Christianity? Responding to the further responses in more detail?