No, I said I didn’t know what you meant by “Hebraic doctrines” and “non-Hebraic doctrines”. This term is not used in the scholarship I cited, and seems to be your own coinage. So I asked you what you mean by it.
This might help you.
“It is generally accepted that in biblical thought there is no separation of body and soul and, consequently, the resurrection of the body is central. The idea of an immortal soul is not a Hebrew concept but comes from Platonic philosophy. It is, therefore, considered a severe distortion of the NT to read this foreign idea into its teaching.”
Walter Vogels, “Review of The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality by Barr, James,” Critical Review of Books in Religion (1994): 80.
“That the idea of the soul’s immortality as disembodied state beyond death is not popular amongst Christian theologians or among Christian philosophers today has already been acknowledged.”
Brian Hebblethwaite, Philosophical Theology and Christian Doctrine (John Wiley & Sons, 2008), 113.
You haven’t addressed the original topic once. You didn’t answer any of the questions Brad posed.
Well bad luck, it’s a fact.
[quote=“Eddie, post:115, topic:619”]
I would think that a Catholic could say the same thing about many points of Christadelphian[/quote]
Of course, and it would be perfectly valid. I wouldn’t take the least offence.