13 Mar 12
3 edits
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Of course it makes a difference. The gospels were redacted by Pauline Christians. And in any case: the essence of Jesus has nothing to do with his words.
'It seemed to me' ... 'I asked a swami about that' ... Impressive.
What did Jesus actually teach? What knowledge did he explicitly impart - in words that survive in the Gospels?
Of course it makes a difference. The gospels were redacted by Pauline Christians. And in any case: the essence of Jesus has nothing to do with his words.
Can you give us some major examples ?
I hope it will be things effecting the major tenets of my faith, ie.
1.) The incarnation of God as man
2.) Living a sinless and perfect life
3.) Dying a redemptive death by which sinners are justified forever
4.) Coming to indwell the followers in a spiritual form
5.) Physically coming again to the earth
6.) Judging the world in general and His own people
7.) Reigning forever in His kingdom.
These are major aspects of the Christian faith. Can you demonstrate how Paul's words contradict and teach OTHERWISE as Jesus speaks in the Gospels ?
I hope you will not hide behind "But we have no idea what Jesus actually SAID."
If that is the case then how do you know Paul contradicted Him ? So decide which criticism you want to run with first.
1.) Paul contradicted Jesus or
2.) No one knows who contradicted Jesus because we don't know what Jesus said.
13 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillI don't think there's any contradiction between Paul's writings and the evangels, nor do I believe in a conspiracy by Paul to pervert the 'true words of Jesus'. I only brought it up because ThinkOfOne is a true believer in the Pauline conspiracy.Of course it makes a difference. The gospels were redacted by Pauline Christians. And in any case: the essence of Jesus has nothing to do with his words.
Can you give us some major examples ?
I hope it will be things effecting the [b]major tenets of my faith, ie.
1.) The incarnation of God as man
2.) Living a sinless an d Jesus or
2.) No one knows who contradicted Jesus because we don't know what Jesus said.[/b]
If every copy of the Bible were destroyed, the text lost utterly, would that make it impossible to find the Christ?
13 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadWow. Would it really kill you to just say, "I guess I did miss that when I read your post and yes, it does say it clearly."?
And I am thinking you are not intellectually honest enough to answer my questions, so you are nitpicking as an avoidance tactic.
Seems much more likely that YOU are "avoiding" having to admit you made a mistake by instead accusing me of "not intellectually honest enough to answer my questions, so you are nitpicking as an avoidance tactic."
Listen, I have no reason to "avoid" your questions. I've found them awkward to address directly because they seem to be pregnant with assumptions about my beliefs that don't apply to me. The fact that you further couch those questions within an overzealous attempt to "prove" that those assumptions (that don't apply to me) demonstrate a lack of "intellectual honesty" on my part makes it all the more awkward. The fact that you seemed to have misinterpreted or missed part of my post altogether and refused to acknowledge it, compounded things further. So if anything, your questions have been more "amusing" than anything else. As such, there's been no reason for me to "avoid" them.
Let's take a look at part of what I had written:
. I certainly don't see the Bible as "the inerrant word of God" or even that all words/actions attributed to Jesus were spoken/done by him.
However, I do believe that, by and large, the words that were attributed to Him while he walked the Earth are reasonably sound and reasonably coherent within themselves and that many of them fly in the face of the mythology and beliefs that have been created around Him since His death.
It's really quite simple. I find value in the words that were attributed to Jesus while He walked the Earth because I find them reasonably sound and reasonably coherent within themselves. I don't find much value in the mythology and beliefs that the NT writers have wrapped around them. At best, they only echo what He had to say. At worst they fly in the face of what He had to say. If Christians would follow His words as He commanded instead of following the mythology and beliefs of the NT writers, the world would be a much better place.
So as test of YOUR "intellectual honesty", keep the above in mind and reread through our discussion - especially your posts to me. I think you'll find them seriously overzealous and that they make many assumptions that don't apply.
If you have any further questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Just take care to ask them as open questions instead of loading them with assumptions that may or may not apply and attempts to prove a lack of intellectual dishonesty.
13 Mar 12
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWho said that, "he'd never reconciled the obvious differences between the discourses of the Lord Jesus Christ and the delineation of the mystery spiritual life mostly fleshed out by Paul"? Or that it was a "source of pride"?Or any number of other unwarranted assumptions you make here?
Retired, practicing, newly ordained; pastor, associate pastor, youth leader, choir director, pew sitter: they are all equal in at least one regard. Ignorance is rampant among today's Christians, irrespective of position, education or denomination.
Of course the red letter words are decisively different than the entire rest of the Bible! Where is the i ...[text shortened]... g. However, to fail on such a momentous portion of Scripture is nothing short of abysmal.
Like usual, you're really something.
Originally posted by KellyJayYou certainly are a prideful one. You and RJH are like peas in a pod in that respect. That and your reading and writing skills.
Half this thread is of different people complaining to you, your pushing it all off
on all of them, I'd step back and listen to what everyone else is saying.
Kelly
13 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagelol. Who said anything about "conspiracy"? But I guess it "plays better".
I don't think there's any contradiction between Paul's writings and the evangels, nor do I believe in a conspiracy by Paul to pervert the 'true words of Jesus'. I only brought it up because ThinkOfOne is a true believer in the Pauline conspiracy.
If every copy of the Bible were destroyed, the text lost utterly, would that make it impossible to find the Christ?
Like I told TW:
"If Christians would follow His words as He commanded instead of following the mythology and beliefs of the NT writers, the world would be a much better place."
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIf all Christians followed the Boy Scout code, the world would be a better place. - Without the mythos, Jesus is little more than a bag of platitudes leavened with a scattering of cryptic allusions to things not of this world. But how do you, personally, interpret references to the Kingdom, the Father, etc, absent said mythos? What's the point of making Jesus' words your moral compass when plain common sense would do just as well?
lol. Who said anything about "conspiracy"? But I guess it "plays better".
Like I told TW:
"If Christians would follow His words as He commanded instead of following the mythology and beliefs of the NT writers, the world would be a much better place."
13 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Who said that, "he'd never reconciled the obvious differences between the discourses of the Lord Jesus Christ and the delineation of the mystery spiritual life mostly fleshed out by Paul"? Or that it was a "source of pride"?Or any number of other unwarranted assumptions you make here?
Like usual, you're really something.
Who said that, "he'd never reconciled the obvious differences between the discourses of the Lord Jesus Christ and the delineation of the mystery spiritual life mostly fleshed out by Paul"?
It sounds like my words, but the tell-tale sign is that you put them in quotes, inferring that, indeed, they are the words of someone other than yourself. I'm guessing that someone is me?
That being said, when you load your OP with words such as "acknowledged" (as though a party is admitting something previously denied and/or ignored), and "refreshingly honest" (said acknowledgment has apparently been a source of irritation in the past), you are either intentionally or unintentionally leaning the reader in the direction I chose.
Moreover, with your description that the pastor had "essentially" made the Bible his Lord instead of God Himself, you are leaving no room for ambiguity. A Christian who is obeying the commands (and they be few) of the spiritual life is in no danger of losing sight of the object of his worship and affection. He does not have to worry about glossing over whole portions of Scripture--- let alone an entire dispensational age--- by simply labeling them 'troublesome' and then dutifully going about trying to live a New Testament-sans-the-Gospels life.
God has given us Scripture, the whole of it, for our entire edification. What I just demonstrated for you is exactly what you continue to lose sight of: everything must be considered within the context of when it was written, to whom, by whom and for what purposes. You attempted to weasel out of the insinuation of your OP, by isolating single passages of my response without the context of their original setting. By harkening back to both the OP as well as my response to the same, you are left with something closer to the truth than what you offered.
What you do with that is your own business, of course.
14 Mar 12
5 edits
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I don't think there's any contradiction between Paul's writings and the evangels, nor do I believe in a conspiracy by Paul to pervert the 'true words of Jesus'. I only brought it up because ThinkOfOne is a true believer in the Pauline conspiracy.
If every copy of the Bible were destroyed, the text lost utterly, would that make it impossible to find the Christ?
If every copy of the Bible were destroyed, the text lost utterly, would that make it impossible to find the Christ?
I don't know.
The so-called "Dark Ages" were a time when the religionists severely limited the access of the public to the Bible. I am sure that this contributed greatly to the spiritual and intellectual darkness of the time. Look at the faces of the people in the paintings of that time. Its eerie.
But I don't know about a totally absent Bible. Sometimes I have a suspicion that perhaps life under the Antichrist, will be as close to that as it can get.
But that is just an opinion which could be erroneous. But Revelation 14 shows that during that darkest of times, an eternal gospel is announced not by man, but supernaturally from the air by angelic being/s:
"And I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having an eternal gospel to announce to those dwelling on the earth, even to every nation and tribe and tongue and people, Saying with a loud voice,
Fear God and give Him glory because the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who has made heaven and earth and the sea and the springs of waters." (Rev. 14:6,7)
1.) This announcement is made in the midst of the darkest time of the great tribulation.
2.) This announcement is made by an angel and not by human servants of God.
3.) It does not mention Christ or His redemption. It mentions God the Creator who is about to judge the world.
4.) It appears to be announced to neutralize the proclamation of the Antichrist that all the world should worship him as God and his image.
Sometimes, I think that the Bible will be very hard to obtain in these terrible days. I could be mistaken though.
14 Mar 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI didn't miss it, nor did I think it was clear. I asked for clarification, but instead of clarifying you wish to create an argument about a somewhat irrelevant issue (ie whether or not you were clear in the first place). All this is obviously because you don't want to answer the main questions I asked.
Wow. Would it really kill you to just say, "I guess I did miss that when I read your post and yes, it does say it clearly."?
It's really quite simple. I find value in the words that were attributed to Jesus while He walked the Earth because I find them reasonably sound and reasonably coherent within themselves.
But finding value in them, and finding them 'reasonably sound' is not the same as believing they were actually said by Jesus. Not the same thing at all. Nor is it the same as believing that they are an accurate representation of Jesus' message or what he, or God, wants us to believe.
You could just as easily make your argument but use Mohammed, or David, or even Gandalf instead.
I don't find much value in the mythology and beliefs that the NT writers have wrapped around them. At best, they only echo what He had to say. At worst they fly in the face of what He had to say.
But you are yet to give a good argument as to why you think that what is recorded in the Gospels is a more accurate representation of 'what he had to say' than what is recorded by Paul and other writers.
If Christians would follow His words as He commanded instead of following the mythology and beliefs of the NT writers, the world would be a much better place.
And I am claiming that 'his words' are themselves "mythology and beliefs of the NT writers". That you refuse to address this point is why I am accusing you of intellectual dishonesty.
Its really very simple:
You accused someone in the OP of unjustifiably taking the Pauline writings over the Gospels. You called him intellectually honest for admitting that he did so.
I am accusing you of unjustifiably taking the Gospels over the Pauline writings. I am calling you intellectually dishonest for refusing to admit that you do so.
14 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneListen, Buddy, just find me an error in the Holly Bible that the Scholars have
Wow. Would it really kill you to just say, "I guess I did miss that when I read your post and yes, it does say it clearly."?
Seems much more likely that YOU are "avoiding" having to admit you made a mistake by instead accusing me of "not intellectually honest enough to answer my questions, so you are nitpicking as an avoidance tactic."
Listen, I h ot apply and attempts to prove a lack of intellectual dishonesty.
not explained why it is not an error. I bet you have never investigated these
supposed errors because you wanted to believe they were really errors. 😏