|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,468 Year: 3,725/9,624 Month: 596/974 Week: 209/276 Day: 49/34 Hour: 0/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Choosing a faith | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Tangle writes:
It's not so much the material, although in some cases it is helpful, but the increased understanding of the early Greek and Hebrew languages.
The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1940s and 50s, in biblical terms this might be "new" but not in normal scholastic terms. What's new in scholastic terms is that a few non-Christians have started researching and providing alternative interpretations of the same "data". But what we're talking about here is not new. Exactly what information has been revealed about that passage by the Dead Sea Scrolls? Tangle writes: "Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." You completely ignored the verses prior to that clearly show that this is about a revolutionary war with the Romans.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18310 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes: You are so literal it hurts. You have absolutely no intrinsic insight into scripture, do you? The "king" made bad choices in whom he invited. Then he behaved childishly toward the man who wasn't wearing wedding clothes. (Considering that the guests were rounded up from the street corners, it's surprising that ANY of them were in wedding clothes.) That "king" needed a good spanking. The King invited common people (Gentiles) because the chosen people (Jews) ignored the wedding request.(To marry their Messiah, in effect)The clothes symbolize a covering, much as God needed to sew clothes (a covering) for Adam * Eve after they ate the fruit of knowledge and metaphorically "woke up" to the false fact that they could have the knowledge of their Creator. (which humans will never come close to having) This was why they became aware of their nakedness (lack of covering) and why God sewed them clothes that they previously had no need of. As for the naked guy at the wedding, perhaps he symbolized a commoner with an ego (such as you?) who thought he could come to a wedding little knowing that he was metaphorically the Bride (Bride of Christ) and thought so little of the messenger (despite thinking highly of the message and giving out spare change) and the King cast him out as a symbol and warning to secular humanists who feel no need to commune with nor be covered by a higher power than their chemistry books."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Percy writes: Firstly, the Bible is a library of books written by men for a number of purposes. (In sone cases to justify the evil they were doing.) Most of it though, particularly in the OT was about what they had observed and what Jesus taught. We can look at the Bible as evidence but then we can make up our own minds as to whether or not we accept the Bible as being an historical account. For the supernatural? I never. Either you're having a hard time keeping people's positions straight, or you're being purposefully irritating. I'll agree that I'm replying to a number of people and it is sometimes difficult to keep everyone else's positions straight. I am trying hard not to be irritating.
Percy writes: I would like to see an example of that. If it is a belief it can't be an objective reality.
No one objects to anyone forming their own beliefs, but you've gone way beyond that. You've claimed objective reality for your beliefs, that there's evidence for them. GDR writes: ...as well as the various philosophical or theological books that in turn don’t have material evidence to support what is written in them.Percy writes: I'm not going to dig through this whole thread to find the quote and as far as I was concerned was that what I wrote was in agreement with what you had posted earlier. You began this message by mistakenly asserting that I'd acknowledged that the Bible is evidence, and you're concluding it by conceding that it isn't. So are you saying that the Gospel accounts aren't evidence? Can you then explain why they are not. They are obviously written to be believed as can be attested to by the fact that many at the time and still now do believe the accounts to be accurate to one degree or another.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Because that’s what the Christians did. Jesus will rule - after the Second Coming. The Lost Tribes will return - after the Second Coming.
quote: And Jesus failed and died, so Christians put off the fulfilment until the Second Coming - which never happened.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18310 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Phat writes:
The messenger is inerrant and His message is inerrant (pure and unadulterated) Nope. You're making that up. So? Are you suggesting that the Bible was not made up? Why do you always fail to provide a rational argument that proves that I made it up, rather than deny deny deny?
With church tradition and two dollars, you can buy a cup of coffee. With a chemistry book, you can make a cup of coffee without beans. So what's your point?
Phat writes:
One could argue that only GOD and the Holy Spirit were around since the beginning, but even then Jesus was likely the only human who embodied it (the Spirit) perfectly.ringo writes: Most of your Christian friends wouyld likely agree that He was around from the beginning. Only a contrarian with a love of chemistry books would challenge such a belief.
Which has nothing to do with Him being around from the beginning. ringo writes: The jury is still out on that one. It just demonstrates that you are neither rational nor Christian. Must I turn the other cheek? (I will, you know) ringo writes: Look in the mirror. You're the one who refuses to ever change his mind. I tried, but the mirror cracked. ringo writes: Contenders for what? Will The Real God Please Stand Up?Message 7 ringo writes: "It's customary to ask for two pieces of ID." I add, "Photo ID." Im wondering what we actually see in this courtroom! Are any naked guys in there? Edited by Phat, : fixed broken link "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
PaulK writes: Yes and he did so by inventing Q and discounting the work of all the early Christians and that was still true right up until his time. There are as you know other arguments for Luke using Matthew that don't require the invention of an unevidenced documentPaulK writes: And how do you know that the early Christians didn't do a lot of work to support their claims? You make these statements without any support. I have no idea where that remark on hostility comes from. You should try sitting on this side of the fence.
It is not as if the early Christians seem to have done a out of work to ensure the accuracy of their claims - or even that their claims are entirely clear. And indeed, you discount the claims about Mark. So drop the hostility. PaulK writes: The Didache does include some of Jesus' sayings but primarily it was an instruction manual on ho wthe church should be run. It evolved, apparently considerably over a period of time. The sayings of Jesus in the Diadache are just as likely to have come from the Gospels as the other way around. Garrow doesn't seem to have gotten much if any support for His view. Interestingly it has come to my attention that Garrow proposes that the Didache is Q, so perhaps it is neither lost nor invented.However even if he is correct it doesn't impact the dating or the order of the synoptics. PaulK writes: Also Jerome wrote this. So, we have no real evidence that the Aramaic document referred to by Papias has any connection to the Gospel associated with Matthew.quote: PaulK writes: Just off the top of my head: It is your argument that makes no sense. First there is no need to mention an event so widely known. Second, separating the Christians from the Jews would point to a later time of writing, not earlier, when Christianity had ceased to be a Jewish sect.1/ The destruction of the Temple would have confirmed Jesus' forecast of the event. They would clearly want to have included that. 2/There would be no point to focus as much as they did on His opposition the the Temple culture and authorities as neither still existed after 70AD. 3/This was a major catastrophic event and they could hardly have ignored it, even when it supported their message. GDR writes: Also the Jewish nation at had two particular hopes for the future. One was the return of Yahweh to their nation and the other was that of a messiah who would be a man anointed by God to lead them against Rome. The Gospels story essentially sees Jesus as fulfilling both of those hopes but in a very different way than what the Jews expected. Jesus used the term "son of man" which combined both hopes. PaulK writes: They were already combined. And “son of man” does nothing to combine them. Well it does. As John said in Chap 1 "the Word became flesh". Jesus the man embodied God's nature and revealed that nature to the world thus embodying the return of Yahweh. He also fulfilled the messianic role but by preaching and teaching non-violent revolution as opposed to a violent one.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I said “seem to”, which is entirely proper in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
quote: Your characterisation of Streeter’s work certainly seemed hostile to me.
quote: The Griesbach hypothesis is something of a minority view, too.
quote: Which apparently was NOT about the book we call Matthew, but about the “Gospel of the Hebrews” Jerusalem Perspective quote: Far from answering the question of why they would do this given that the destruction was so widely known, the first and third points can be answered by the fact that it was so widely known it would not be necessary. The second is also already answered in my reply.
quote: Obviously it is not the phrase itself but Christian theology that does the work. You have just said exactly that. Edited by Admin, : Fix closing quote of second quoted section.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
GDR writes: It's not so much the material, although in some cases it is helpful, but the increased understanding of the early Greek and Hebrew languages. We were talking specifically about the passage in Matthew about the second coming.You said that the Dead Sea scrolls gave us a new understanding. I asked "Exactly what information has been revealed about that passage by the Dead Sea Scrolls?" Your answer is none. So please don't throw that chaff anymore.
You completely ignored the verses prior to that clearly show that this is about a revolutionary war with the Romans.
I didn't ignore it, I discarded t as irrelevant. The historical facts are that there were numerous cults around at the time preaching the end times as the 1st century was supposed to fulfil earlier apocalyptic prophecies. According to Josephus there were at least half a dozen messianic cults around preaching it and your Dead Sea scrolls mentions more. It was expected in their life time. You can't honestly negotiate your way out of these facts and the actually words said. Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
GDR writes: So are you saying that the Gospel accounts aren't evidence? Can you then explain why they are not. Because they have no historicity; they fail all evidential tests. We've done this. We don't know who wrote them. They are full of contradictions, They bear all the hallmarks of myth including antecedents. They have no external confirming evidence. There are multiple frauds, redactions, interpolations and political interference in their construction. They were written at least 40 years after the supposed death of the main character by people who never met him let alone witnessed the events. Major elements that are core to the Christian belief are known to have never happened - eg the sermon on the mount. The list is almost endless. If you can find real historicity in there somewhere, please show us.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Tangle writes: I wasn't referring to any specific passage but to your comment that there had been 2000 years to figure this stuff out.
We were talking specifically about the passage in Matthew about the second coming.You said that the Dead Sea scrolls gave us a new understanding. I asked "Exactly what information has been revealed about that passage by the Dead Sea Scrolls?" Tangle writes: You are going to believe what you are going to believe but in the context of the whole passage it is clearly about what is going to happen when the revolution comes.
I didn't ignore it, I discarded t as irrelevant. The historical facts are that there were numerous cults around at the time preaching the end times as the 1st century was supposed to fulfil earlier apocalyptic prophecies. Tangle writes: Certainly there were other messianic movements during that period however I have never come across any evidence about end times predictions by them or Josephus. Can you give me an example. According to Josephus there were at least half a dozen messianic cults around preaching it and your Dead Sea scrolls mentions more. It was expected in their life time. You can't honestly negotiate your way out of these facts and the actually words said. I do agree that many of the early Christians believed that it would happen soon, and you can still read about people claiming that for today. INHO it, like the first coming, which wasn't at all what people expected and I doubt the 2nd one will be either. My personal opinion for what it is worth, (which is very little I agree), is that it happens individually as we shuffle off this mortal coil.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
PaulK writes:
How many people predicted WWII prior to it happening. Jesus would know, that a revolution was a popular idea, and that a rebellion was going to happen at some point in time. He actually gave it a very wide period of time with His prediction.
n that case Jesus would only be pretending to answer the question instead of honestly admitting that he doesn’t know where in the sequence of events that destruction would actually happen. I don’t think that’s very likely. PaulK writes: No, it is simply about the vindication of His message and the confirmation of it, giving His message authority.
Since the Temple is not destroyed in Daniel that can’t be true. GDR writes: Yes I've read Maccabees. It was 100 years of Jewish reign that didn't go as well as the Jewish nation hoped. I really don't get your point.PaulK writes: This makes no sense. If they ruled for 100 years how can it be that the movement died when the “seven brothers” did? And in fact Judaism is still around and still influenced by those events (eg the celebration of Hanukkah). Of course it was an earthly event and I don't understand why you thought I said it wasn't. However, the Jewish government in the Hasmonean did not bring about what had been hoped for. There ere a number of factions that simply didn't work well together and it was what was essentially a civil war that made it easier for the Herodians, backed by the Romans. to take over and bring that era to a close.
PaulK writes: Daniel was written near the end of the Hasmonean dynasty and the fact that He is writing the material in Chap 7 is an indication that he wasn't all that happy about things as they were.
No. The author of Daniel 7 was a supporter of at least the aims of the Maccabean revolt, writing around that time. PaulK writes: Yes, it was used as being about a human being but it was also used as Daniel used it here to have a heavenly significance. How many times do I have to point this out? The figure in Daniel is implicitly not a son of man. The term usually refers to a human being. He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Percy writes:
Essentially, correct but we can observe that enough people testified about it that the early church was formed in contrast to all of the other messianic movements of the era. Some of the other movements even had some military success but when the Romans executed them their movements always ground to a an immediate halt. This movement didn't end in spite of the humiliating cruel death at Roman hands.
You have evidence in the Bible but no evidence it is accurate? What would you say about a researcher who said this: "All I have for evidence is my data, but there is nothing to indicate my data is accurate. I only believe it is accurate." How strong a case do you think this researcher has for having discovered something likely true about the real world? He has nothing, right? Well, that's what you have. Percy writes: Certainly Paul was the greatest evangelist but he was hardly alone. Also of course Paul was under the tuition of the Apostles prior to going to the Roman/Greek areas, that also did include the Jewish diaspora.
Paul created the Christian church by evangelizing about Jesus in the Jewish diaspora. None of those who joined his churches or even wrote about Jesus had even seen or heard him, let alone met him. Percy writes: Luke provides a good example right in the beginning of the lack of evidence pervading all of Biblical scholarship. Luke begins by naming Herod, a figure of well established historicity, but then goes on in 1:9 to describe how Zechariah, a priest of the temple, was "chosen by lot, according to the custom of the priesthood, to go into the temple of the Lord and burn incense." Zechariah was alone. Luke then describes in 1:11 how "an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense." Luke tells us the angel was Gabriel. There could only have been only a single witness to this event, Zechariah, but he was rendered speechless until the day of his prophesized son's birth. How convenient that he only gets to tell the other husbands of his village of the prophecy after the fact. And how could Luke know about Zechariah's vision, including what appears to be every word Gabriel said. If we presume Luke or his community didn't make the story up out of whole cloth then the story was passed orally down through the decades. Do you see an ounce of real evidence in any part of this? Luke continues on in the same manner, the next part describing in detail Gabriel's appearance to Mary who, just like Zechariah, was the sole witness. There is some factual basis in that he clearly describes specifically who the account is about. With the amount of detail given I would say that there is a basis for the story, which I agree could have been fabricated by one of the characters. However, I would still contend that Luke was given that account and believed it.
Percy writes: There is a difference between using mindless particles to facilitate consciousness as opposed to evolving from mindlessness.
Your entire body is made up of "mindless particles". Obviously consciousness, morality and sentience have no trouble coming from "mindless particles". GDR writes: I realize that we can see it working its way through societies but that does nothing to answer the question of whether or not that is happening because of a pre-existing intelligence or not. That too is belief without evidence.Percy writes: The it is empathy or even just consciousness. What is "it" in this paragraph? Whatever "it" is, you are correct that your beliefs are not backed by objective evidence.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Well that completely ignores the point. Again. The point was that - despite being asked - Jesus does not say where in the sequence of events the Temple will be destroyed. I conclude that Jesus meant that would be at the end of those events. You apparently object but won’t give any reason why.
quote: Well, that is completely meaningless.
quote: I pointed out that Daniel was about a successful revolt - as is well known - and you insisted that it wasn’t about an earthly revolt,
quote: Daniel’s predictions failed, but the Maccabees substantially reduced the Seleucid yoke and were able to expand the kingdom. They were also rather successful against the Hellenising faction in Judaism.
quote: An interesting redating, but it’s your invention. Daniel is dated prior to the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, since he’s a major part of it - and Daniel gets his death wrong. So before 164 BC, not more than 100 years later, (ABE Daniel 7 “predicts” that the Seleucid Empire - the 4th Beast - will be destroyed under Antiochus - the “little horn” - and the Jews will take over. It seems an odd way to criticise the Hasmoneans about a hundred years later.)
quote: No, Daniel uses a different phrase - like a son of man. A being who appears human - but implicitly is not. I’ve already pointed this out, so I don’t see why you persist in this error. Edited by PaulK, . Edited by PaulK, : Fix minor errors Edited by PaulK, : Add material on Daniel 7
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
GDR writes: I wasn't referring to any specific passage but to your comment that there had been 2000 years to figure this stuff out. We were talking about the passage in Matthew that tells those listening that the Messiah will return in their lifetime. As the many messianic Jewish cults did at the time. You said that we know more now because of the Dead Sea Scrolls and gave me a pile of apologetics to explain it away. I asked what they have to say about the passage we were talking about and the answer was? You are going to believe what you are going to believe but in the context of the whole passage it is clearly about what is going to happen when the revolution comes.
I don't believe a word of any of it! It's quite plainly pure myth from end to end. But I am capable of reading what it actually says. Certainly there were other messianic movements during that period however I have never come across any evidence about end times predictions by them or Josephus. Can you give me an example. I don't have an online source but you'll find it in 'Pseudo-Philo's Biblical Antiquities, the 'Fourth Philosophy' and the Political Messianism of the First Century CE. D Mendels. p261-75. Amongst others. Fill your boots.(That and two other references are from 'On the historicity of Jesus' by Dr Richard Carrier which you should read if you haven't already. One of the very few peer reviewed non-Christian biblical authors. Josephus has four messiahs some called Jesus (Joshua). Plus yours, makes at least five. In fact there were probably dozens.
I do agree that many of the early Christians believed that it would happen soon, In the first century CE. Hence Jesus saying it (allegedly).
and you can still read about people claiming that for today.
Not some, the majority of American Christians as I've pointed out. Surely you can see the psychological need here?
INHO it, like the first coming, which wasn't at all what people expected and I doubt the 2nd one will be either. My personal opinion for what it is worth, (which is very little I agree), is that it happens individually as we shuffle off this mortal coil. But you're just making stuff up that you feel comfortable with aren't you? That belief has no biblical basis at all - it's not even apologetics. But that's fine by me, believe whatever you like, our only grievance here is your attempt to evidence your beliefs. Edited by Tangle, . Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tangle writes:
There was no such prophesy .... you've misunderstood the Scripture. We were talking about the passage in Matthew that tells those listening that the Messiah will return in their lifetime.You've also ignored a Scripture such as this one - "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come (Matt 24:14) - which suggests it could be a long time before the Messiah returns. But you want to believe that the Bible contains falsehoods and false prophecies, so nothing I say will change your closed and darkened mind.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024