|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why did God create the universe, and us?
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Overall I'm agreeing with the points Crœsos and Leo are making, but feel they are exaggerating the impact of those points on the actual trustworthiness of the written record.
My take as well.
Of course, this tangent was off of this comment:
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
How this conversation often goes:
Q: Why is there so much suffering?
A: Because of The Fall (not the band)—God gave us free will…
Q: Will there be suffering in Heaven?
A: No, of course not!
Q: Will there be free will?
A: …uhhh
I said that I think that the answer can be inferred from Jesus' words about freedom.
The issue then became whether or not we have any idea of what Jesus actually said about freedom.
I think that a better discussion would be about what we can infer from Jesus' statements - or, if you will, "supposed" statements. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Every Bible translator has an army of critics breathing down their neck 2nd guessing every choice.
So again, if you're looking for word-for-word perfection, you're not going to get it-- because all translation of any document, much less an ancient one, is fluid and imperfect. But what we have is, I am convinced, a reasonably accurate reflection of what Jesus said & did.
Overall I'm agreeing with the points Crœsos and Leo are making, but feel they are exaggerating the impact of those points on the actual trustworthiness of the written record.
My point was mostly about the chain-of-transmission (fourth hand+ vs. second hand account) rather than the implications for accuracy. A second hand account can be quite inaccurate and it's possible for a fourth hand account to be fairly accurate. However, being sure of the accuracy of an account does not transform a fourth (or more) hand account into a second hand account.
I can see the appeal of trying to shorten the chain of transmission. "These are the words of Jesus" admits a lot less ambiguity than "we're pretty sure that the term 'Βασιλεία τῶν Ουρανῶν' is best rendered as 'Kingdom of Heaven' in English and effectively captures all the underlying meaning and nuances of whatever Aramaic phrase Jesus used to whoever passed it along to the author of the Gospel of Matthew". It's possible that's true, but I can't help but see the desire to erase steps of transmission as a desire to avoid having to make that case at all.
Plus I'm not sure having "an army of critics" necessarily insures accuracy, particularly if many of those critics have a predetermined agenda and a preset notion of the 'right' answer.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Crœsos: Plus I'm not sure having "an army of critics" necessarily insures accuracy, particularly if many of those critics have a predetermined agenda and a preset notion of the 'right' answer.
Perhaps not. I'm not very hung-up on the 'accuracy' of the Gospels, and I'm more than willing to take into account that they are second, third or fourth hand reports, written in a society that didn't have the concept of journalistic accuracy.
But I do think that having these texts studied by an army of critics from diverse viewpoints and backgrounds — and where this army very much includes atheists — is a good thing.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
Do you agree that, since any words of Jesus come to us fourth or more handed at best including multiple transcriptions and translations, it is difficult to say how implicit they are.
Fourth handed? Second-handed at best I would accept, but fourth-handed? What are the intervening steps?
So what we have is a paraphrase of a paraphrase of words that passed through at least one intermediary between the speaker and the writer.
Unless SusanDoris was deliberately restricting her 'we' to people who have no koine Greek and don't intend to try I don't think the last step, from Greek to English really qualifies. There's a difference in kind there. That exact translation between languages is not possible is a valid point under some circumstances, but it's not the same sort of step as the others.
In any case, while Luke is internally presented as a third-hand account, and Mark is according to tradition also third-hand, John is internally presented as second-hand. You might think that problematic, but SusanDoris did specify 'at best'.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
But I think there is good reason to trust that the overall message of the NT and particularly the gospels, is close to the overall message that Jesus preached & taught.
Me too.
Am I the only one who feels that it is something of a contradiction to take seriously accounts of supernatural events and then question the accuracy of the account?
The events recounted are clearly impossible. ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
If I am supposed to accept that miracles happened and God came to earth, why would I balk at whether it is a second or fourth hand description? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Unless SusanDoris was deliberately restrcting her 'we' to people who have no koine Greek and don't intend to try I don't think the last step, from Greek to English really qualifies. There's a difference in kind there.
I suppose I should have left out the words 'at best', but I was thinking about the fact that the authorised version of the Bible was put together several hundred years later; ample time for changes to have taken place, especially bearing in mind the lack of literacy of the majority of the people during and after the lifetime of the man at the centre of things.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
There will be no changes of any significance.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Unless SusanDoris was deliberately restrcting her 'we' to people who have no koine Greek and don't intend to try I don't think the last step, from Greek to English really qualifies. There's a difference in kind there.
I suppose I should have left out the words 'at best', but I was thinking about the fact that the authorised version of the Bible was put together several hundred years later; ample time for changes to have taken place, especially bearing in mind the lack of literacy of the majority of the people during and after the lifetime of the man at the centre of things.
But in fact it wasn't "hundreds" of years, but closer to 100. Which is a significant difference. The date of common sources like Q would be even earlier. By the time we get to "100s" of years, we're already getting canons that include all the NT books, so obviously they were written far earlier. And, as I mentioned above, we've got some very very early fragments that get us very close to the original manuscripts-- not there, but very close-- as well as later docs. The fact that those very early fragments align very closely (not perfectly, but very close) to those later copies indicate that from very early on, there was a sense that what was being transmitted here was important enough to take great care in the transmission, as well as the fact that the 3 synoptics are all using Q in very very similar ways.
The fact that it was a less literate society actually goes to the accuracy. Studies have repeatedly shown that oral transmission in non-literate societies (where people habitually have to rely on memory) is far more accurate than oral transmission in literate societies (where people habitually relay on written records to recall data).
Again, that doesn't go to the truthfulness of the material but does, I believe, give some pretty convincing evidence of the accuracy of the transmission-- that the gospels are a reasonably accurate record of what the historic Jesus said and did.
[ 30. April 2016, 14:06: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
The choice was on apostolic authorship, not on 'accuracy' - I don't think accuracy in writing was a 1st Century concern.
I'm sure you are right about that.
My original point was that Jesus said things about freedom, which was challenged on the basis that we don't really know what Jesus said.
I think that Christianity has always believed that we do have some idea of what Jesus really taught.
But the kerygma of people like Paul said very little about what Jesus taught. It wss all about what he did.
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
The kerygma was about Jesus's death and resurrection.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
cliffdweller
Thank you for your post - very interesting, as always. Yes, it is all too easy to forget that we do not need to commit things to memory the way those in the past had to.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
I suppose I should have left out the words 'at best', but I was thinking about the fact that the authorised version of the Bible was put together several hundred years later; ample time for changes to have taken place, especially bearing in mind the lack of literacy of the majority of the people during and after the lifetime of the man at the centre of things.
The accepted canon was I believe finally agreed in the fourth century. I wouldn't refer to three hundred as several hundred.
Even then the final agreement was over texts such as Revelation and the shorter and more dubious epistles. The group that went on to become modern Christians accepted the standard four gospels by the early third century at the earliest.
The texts of the four gospels themselves go back much earlier than that. If you look at a decent modern Bible, there will be notes at the bottom of the page recording the possible variant readings in the text among ancient manuscripts: they're a fairly small percentage of the total text.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Let me amend that to "an astonishingly small percentage of the text."
speaking as a very minor textual scholar.
[ 30. April 2016, 19:24: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
Od Lord, can you please use the Force to prevent this thread from becoming about how oral accounts are really reliable and that the text of the Bible is, despite all the evidence, really accurate? We're absolutely sure that Paul wrote those letters and also sure that, despite the 400-year gap in attribution that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, wrote those really accurate gospels. Lord, send the magic against those sinners who point out the presence of books we now know to be from the devil and the absence those that we know the devil prevented from being included in those early and really smart few hundred years after you/Jesus died/didn't die. Keep the magic alive, by the power of Grey-Skull!
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
Thank you Chester. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
I think that Christianity has always believed that we do have some idea of what Jesus really taught.
But the kerygma of people like Paul said very little about what Jesus taught. It wss all about what he did.
Now that is a very interesting comment.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Od Lord, can you please use the Force to prevent this thread from becoming about how oral accounts are really reliable and that the text of the Bible is, despite all the evidence, really accurate?
I have the same prayer. Mainly because it is a dead horse and not the subject of this thread.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Od Lord, can you please use the Force to prevent this thread from becoming about how oral accounts are really reliable and that the text of the Bible is, despite all the evidence, really accurate?
I have the same prayer. Mainly because it is a dead horse and not the subject of this thread.
Amen. Be advised that continuing this tangent will a thread move provoke, and you can take that as Gospel.
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
Returning to the OP, my favorite answer to the question was that given by Brenda:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The big theology answer to that question is, so that He could have other beings to love.
And to the objection that if God loves us why do we suffer, my favorite answer, one that is commonly given, is that love wants the object of its love to be free.
And to the follow-up question about whether people are still free in heaven, and if so why is there not suffering there, my favorite answer is that true freedom, as Jesus is reputed to have said, is doing God's will.
I guess that wraps it all up pretty neatly with a bow.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
Not sure what you are getting at
If we don't know what Jesus taught, then how do we know whether it was taught by the rabbis?
And how do we know what the rabbis taught?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Returning to the OP, my favorite answer to the question was that given by Brenda:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The big theology answer to that question is, so that He could have other beings to love.
And to the objection that if God loves us why do we suffer, my favorite answer, one that is commonly given, is that love wants the object of its love to be free.
And to the follow-up question about whether people are still free in heaven, and if so why is there not suffering there, my favorite answer is that true freedom, as Jesus is reputed to have said, is doing God's will.
I guess that wraps it all up pretty neatly with a bow.
(and a pretty neat summation of Open Theism! So of course I agree). To add a step to complete the package I would say I believe our experiences in this life leads us to learn that God's will really is the best way to live, so in the coming Kingdom we will freely and joyfully choose that.
[ 01. May 2016, 22:47: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
[QBScroll down about half way [/QB]
Very interesting document.
I'm guessing that what you want to show is that Jesus repeated what the rabbis were already saying.
The point of the question, though, was that you had suggested that we simply do not know what Jesus said because the sources are unreliable. So why do you have confidence in the sources for the arguably similarly unreliable sources of what the rabbis were teaching?
These things were not written down, as I understand it, until the 2nd century. Are there extant 2nd century documents?
I myself do not have similar doubts. I have confidence in the sources that recount what the rabbis taught. I also have confidence in the sources that describe what Jesus taught.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
The point of the question, though, was that you had suggested that we simply do not know what Jesus said because the sources are unreliable. So why do you have confidence in the sources for the arguably similarly unreliable sources of what the rabbis were teaching?
Not so much 'unreliable' as not intending to be word-for-word utterances. The gospels aren'rt biography - though oral tradition was very strong in later Judaism.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Not so much 'unreliable' as not intending to be word-for-word utterances. The gospels aren'rt biography - though oral tradition was very strong in later Judaism.
Yes, thanks. That makes good sense.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
Not sure what you are getting at
The Jesus of the Gospels taught plenty of things not to be found in any supposed rabbinical sources. Especially the stuff about Himself.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
Not sure what you are getting at
If we don't know what Jesus taught, then how do we know whether it was taught by the rabbis?
And how do we know what the rabbis taught?
Scroll down about half way
That is extremely badly written.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
I agree with Martin. Those are semi-literate ramblings.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
We did. It's extremely badly written.
[ 05. May 2016, 13:47: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
Not sure what you are getting at
The Jesus of the Gospels taught plenty of things not to be found in any supposed rabbinical sources. Especially the stuff about Himself.
That's in the 4th Gospel - which is probably not ipsissima verba
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
Not sure what you are getting at
The Jesus of the Gospels taught plenty of things not to be found in any supposed rabbinical sources. Especially the stuff about Himself.
That's in the 4th Gospel - which is probably not ipsissima verba
And what are your criteria for judging whether Jesus actually said what's attributed to him (other than, apparently, it'd already been said by the rabbis)?
And it's not just in John's Gospel either.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
After all, there is little or nothing in Jesus's teaching that wasn't also taught by the rabbis.
Jesus's teaching as recorded by whom?
Not sure what you are getting at
The Jesus of the Gospels taught plenty of things not to be found in any supposed rabbinical sources. Especially the stuff about Himself.
That's in the 4th Gospel - which is probably not ipsissima verba
And what are your criteria for judging whether Jesus actually said what's attributed to him (other than, apparently, it'd already been said by the rabbis)?
And it's not just in John's Gospel either.
Scholarship,style of Greek, dating. (Unless it is like the Qur'an where the Perophet makes longer speeches in Medina, shorter ones in Maccah.)
And very little in the synoptics.
[ 05. May 2016, 18:00: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
We did. It's extremely badly written.
Well if you did, you didnt communicate your thought about the content.
Er ... it's EXTREMELY badly written. There is no valid 'content'. Do the WORK leo. I just took possession of Hubbard's Grasses. He did the WORK.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Scholarship,style of Greek, dating.
As you must be aware, this issue is an extremely complex, technical and highly contentious area. Please be more specific.
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
And very little in the synoptics.
By any reasonable standard of "very little", that's just not true.
And anyway, how many times would Jesus have to have alluded to a unique, Messianic role for Himself, one that would be way beyond what the "rabbis" were talking about, or to have given teachings never before recorded, for it to count as "authentic" in your book? Just how high are you setting the bar here?
And why do you think that so very many of the Jews of His time rejected his claims if he was just spouting the same stuff they'd already heard from other rabbis?
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
That is rather my point, leo.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So they were all saying render unto Caesar? Cast the first stone?
They weren't eight fold hypocrites?
They entered and let all in to the Kingdom?
They didn't devour widows' houses and for pretence make long prayer?
They didn't make converts worse than themselves to a dead religion?
They weren't legalistic about oaths?
They weren't pious in trivia and anomic in justice, mercy and faithfulness?
They weren't physically spotless and mental and moral running sewers?
They weren't publically pure and interiorly immoral?
They weren't murderers of truth and justice?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
if you'll forgive me, that's another assertion without an argument.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Anti-Semitic Jews. Is that like Judischen Judenhasser?
[ 06. May 2016, 16:53: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Anti-Semitic Jews. Is that like Judischen Judenhasser?
Never heard of him/it and google doesn't help.
It's German that literally means "Jewish Jew hater."
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
That is rather my point, leo.
But Jesus didn't claim to be messiah in the synoptics - messianic secret and all that.
No that this is really what we started talking about - which was whether you were right to claim Jesus taught nothing (or almost nothing) not to be found amongst "the rabbis" (and we weren't carefully excluding John at that stage, either) - but just for the record: quote:
Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus said, “I am.” (Mark 14:62)
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:
if you'll forgive me, that's another assertion without an argument.
I have a whole blog devoted to it - the ourworking of 3 years discussions in the Council of Christians and Jews.
I'm sorry, but in general people tend to argue for their points here on the boards, not by proxy by waving vaguely in the direction of their blogs. That seems a fairly reasonable standard of discourse for a discussion board to me.
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
I thought it was common knowledge that the real Pharisees weren't as they are portrayed in the Gospels?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
