Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-06-2014, 05:56 AM
 
Location: On the Edge of the Fringe
7,619 posts, read 6,136,061 times
Reputation: 7067

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rstrats View Post
JasenB,

re: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

The trick is in knowing what is scripture and what isn't.
Anything written by Paul is NOT scripture.
The referenced material was written by Paul
THEREFORE
The referenced statement about scripture is NOT SCRIPTURE, and therefore useless in and of itself.
Q.E.D.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:28 PM
 
23 posts, read 18,461 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeKingCat View Post
Anything written by Paul is NOT scripture.
The referenced material was written by Paul
THEREFORE
The referenced statement about scripture is NOT SCRIPTURE, and therefore useless in and of itself.
Q.E.D.
Peter considered Paul to be his beloved brother:

CLV 2Pt 3:15 And be deeming the patience of our Lord salvation, according as our beloved brother Paul also writes to you, according to the wisdom given to him,

CLV 2Pt 3:16 as also in all the epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things hard to apprehend, which the unlearned and unstable are twisting, as the rest of the scriptures also, toward their own destruction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 11:01 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,755,658 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougj7 View Post
Peter considered Paul to be his beloved brother:

CLV 2Pt 3:15 And be deeming the patience of our Lord salvation, according as our beloved brother Paul also writes to you, according to the wisdom given to him,

CLV 2Pt 3:16 as also in all the epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things hard to apprehend, which the unlearned and unstable are twisting, as the rest of the scriptures also, toward their own destruction.
Except there are literally dozens of scholars that, based on language and linguistically style, don't believe Peter authored Peter. Someone came along later, better educated, almost as erudite as Paul, and wrote a letter claiming to be Peter. Reading Acts and Paul's letters show a bit of rub between the two men. The author of Peter had an interesting change of heart considering Paul's ever present ego and the older Peter's relatively humble upbringing.

I'm not going to cite any references because anyone can look them up. And it's not a stretch of the imagination because a couple of Paul's letters weren't written by Paul. Using someone else's name to make what one wrote sound more credible was not uncommon, though still considered spurious.

Wikipedia gives a nice summary:

Most biblical scholars have concluded Peter is not the author, and consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.[4][5] Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support.[6]

The questions of authorship and date are closely related. For Petrine authorship to be authentic, it must have been written prior to Peter's death in c 65–67AD. The letter refers to the Pauline epistles and so must post-date at least some of them, regardless of authorship, thus a date before 60 is not probable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 05:38 AM
 
529 posts, read 352,036 times
Reputation: 41
Wardendresden,

re: "Except there are literally dozens of scholars that, based on language and linguistically style, don't believe Peter authored Peter."

Shouldn't that be: "don't believe Peter authored second Peter"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Red River Texas
23,295 posts, read 10,608,745 times
Reputation: 2359
Pesach
Shavuot
Yom Kippur
Tabernacles


Not only did Jesus have to die on Nisan 14, but it had to be prophesied that all the sacrifices would take place on Nisan 14.


How did the sacrifices of Shavuot, Yom Kippur, Sukkot and even the red heifer take place on Nisan 14?


Ezekiel prophesied that they would all take place on a single day.

He moved them all to Nisan 14.

If a Christian says that Jesus did not die on Nisan 14, then Jesus could not have been the Messiah.

Ezekiel 45
 ‘In the first month on the fourteenth day you are to observe the Passover, a festival lasting seven days, during which you shall eat bread made without yeast. On that day the prince is to provide a bull as a sin offering for himself and for all the people of the land. Every day during the seven days of the festival he is to provide seven bulls and seven rams without defect as a burnt offering to the Lord, and a male goat for a sin offering. He is to provide as a grain offering an ephah for each bull and an ephah for each ram, along with a hin of olive oil for each ephah.
“ ‘During the seven days of the festival, which begins in the seventh month on the fifteenth day, he is to make the same provision for sin offerings, burnt offerings, grain offerings and oil.



I can understand an Atheist or an Orthodox Jew saying that Jesus did not die on Nisan 14, but for the Christian to make this claim is to prove Jesus could not have been the Messiah.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 11:38 AM
 
Location: US
32,533 posts, read 22,155,922 times
Reputation: 2229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
That is your opinion. It is widely recognized that each gospel writer emphasized a different aspect of Jesus and that it is only by taking all four gospel accounts as a whole that a complete picture of Jesus is seen.

Matthew presents Jesus as King.
Mark presents Jesus as a servant.
Luke presents Jesus as the Son of Man - Jesus in His essential humanity.
John presents Jesus as the Son of God emphasizing His deity.


Excerpt:
The Four Gospels work together to provide a complete testimony of Jesus, a beautiful portrait of the God-Man. Although the Gospels differ slightly in theme, the central Subject is the same. All present Jesus as the One who died to save sinners. All record His resurrection. Whether the writers presented Jesus as the King, the Servant, the Son of Man, or the Son of God, they had the common goal—that people believe in Him.

Read more: Why do the four Gospels seem to present a different message of salvation than the rest of the New Testament?

Excerpt:
Question: "Why did God give us four Gospels?"

Answer: Here are some reasons why God gave four Gospels instead of just one:

Read more: Why did God give us four Gospels?
There were over 350 gospels....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 11:40 AM
 
Location: US
32,533 posts, read 22,155,922 times
Reputation: 2229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasen B View Post
2 Timothy 3:15-17 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Which is the Tanakh...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,755,658 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstrats View Post
Wardendresden,

re: "Except there are literally dozens of scholars that, based on language and linguistically style, don't believe Peter authored Peter."

Shouldn't that be: "don't believe Peter authored second Peter"?
You are absolutely correct. I Peter is still in play!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,755,658 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannibal Flavius View Post

I can understand an Atheist or an Orthodox Jew saying that Jesus did not die on Nisan 14, but for the Christian to make this claim is to prove Jesus could not have been the Messiah.
No, it proves that men are caught up in "prophecies" rather than in observing and following in the steps of Jesus. Prophecies prove nothing one way or the other. It is Godlike action that makes the tell-tale difference between claiming to be a Christian---and being one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2014, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Red River Texas
23,295 posts, read 10,608,745 times
Reputation: 2359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
No, it proves that men are caught up in "prophecies" rather than in observing and following in the steps of Jesus. Prophecies prove nothing one way or the other. It is Godlike action that makes the tell-tale difference between claiming to be a Christian---and being one.

I don't really know what all that means, I do however know that the Messiah had to be the fulfiment of many things or he was not the Messiah.


We can snap our fingers as fast as we can on both hands and make claims about a Messiah, but what is written is written, and the law is recorded.

It's not a thing that maybe this happened or that happened, things had to go just as the law and prophets say they are to go, and so they went.


Many people make claims that Jesus was the antichrist who came to do away with the law and the prophets, but this Jesus is not up for negotiations and opinions, he had to fulfill things according to the law or he was not the Messiah.

Many people can say,'' Jesus Jesus.'' but many people do not know Jesus because they don't tend to have the interest to look up all that was said and prophesied concerning him.

He had to be the Passover Sacrifice, the Shavuot sacrifice, the Yom Kippur sacrifice, the Sukkot sacrifice, the red heifer, and he was all these things.

Christians may blurt out a claim saying,'' Jesus was all the sacrifices.''

And while this is true, it is just said in general with the person unaware of what he is talking about.


Knowing Jesus is knowing what you are talking about, the feast days and Sabbaths and laws are God's instructions about his son.

There is no gray area, he either fit the bill, or he didn't.


Some Christians will actually try and prove that he didn't fit the bill, but some Christians do not know what they worship.

I know what I worship, I know the laws and feast days in order to have an opinion what Jesus was, or what he wasn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:41 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top