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 06-16-2014, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Florida -
10,213 posts, read 14,832,045 times
Reputation: 21847

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
Your paradox is that your "authoritative" book says that the Spirit will guide, but you deny authority to that spirit and vest it all in the book that tells about rhat Spirit. Does not compute.
Add: If the Spirit is authority then it does not need the book and the history of the production of that book warrants the denial of authority TO that book.
God's Holy Spirit does not need the book; WE need the book to verify that the 'spirit' we are listening to is the Spirit of God or a false spirit. Even God's Holy Spirit, like Jesus did when He was on earth, operates within the parameters provided by God through the prophets and recorded in the written Word of God.

The great danger facing many who claim ONLY to be led by 'the spirit' - is the presumption that 'the spirit they are listening to is God's --and the Bible is wrong,... whenever the Bible says something that they or their denomination disagree with!

ADD: "God is not the author of confusion"; also "All scripture is inspired by God ...." and "no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation ....." The history and production of the Bible as God’s written Word of Truth, absolutely support God's inspiration and authority.

Last edited by jghorton; 06-16-2014 at 03:31 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-16-2014, 03:48 PM
 
Location: The Mid South
304 posts, read 472,278 times
Reputation: 242
The Gospels did not exist at the time of the book of Acts yet they came to rely on the spirit with a constant hammering out of doctrine with each chapter. They relaxed what they could eat, who they could except into the fold and if circumcision was necessary all the time having to move about because of persecution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 04:36 PM
 
18,172 posts, read 16,395,091 times
Reputation: 9328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortoggie View Post
The Gospels did not exist at the time of the book of Acts yet they came to rely on the spirit with a constant hammering out of doctrine with each chapter. They relaxed what they could eat, who they could except into the fold and if circumcision was necessary all the time having to move about because of persecution.
Yep and where did that spirit direct them?


KJV Acts 15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:

Yep the spirit led them to .............. Amos 9:11

Scripture.


They relied on Scripture to show the leading of the spirit was God's spirit, they did not rely on any claim simply to have God's spirit.

Spirit led is scripture led.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 04:52 PM
 
18,250 posts, read 16,917,013 times
Reputation: 7553
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Written by their authors and Matthew was first. Not Mark. I know modern thought, to support new ideas, claims Mark first, but history doesn't.
Absolutely wrong. All reputable Biblical scholars are unanimous in asserting that Mark was the first gospel written, shortly after the fall of Jerusalem circa 70-75 AD. The fact that Matthew and Luke lifted whole parts out of Mark is indisputable evidence of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,722,926 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Written by their authors and Matthew was first. Not Mark. I know modern thought, to support new ideas, claims Mark first, but history doesn't.
RESPONSE:

Then how does Matthew contain 95% of Mark's gospel but with the grammar improved and the geographical errors Mark made corrected?

And who is Matthew precisely and where and when did he write?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,722,926 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by trettep View Post
The version of Matthew that is derived from Greek texts would be a later addition most likely. The book was first given in Hebrew text according to the historian of the time which was Josephus. Therefore, Mark could certainly have been known in the Greek before Matthews text. I have what some scholars think could be the earliest form of that Hebrew text in the George Howard version of the translation from Shem Tov's version that he used to quote and remark on it in arguments against Christians. The book is no longer in print and has some very interesting deviations from the Greek text.
RESPONSE:

Whoa there! I very much doubt that Josephus said any such thing. Please give your reference. Name dropping isn't evidence.

And please name the "scholars" you are referring to and cite your references.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,722,926 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
If the message is confirmed by the Spirit that is all the authority you should need. After all, the Book says that the Spirit "will guide."
RESPONSE:

So any book which says that "the Spirit will guide" is all the authority we need?? A self-confirming claim, right?

Don't you see the problem with that sort of reasoning?

Last edited by ancient warrior; 06-16-2014 at 05:20 PM.. Reason: omission
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,722,926 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by trettep View Post
To my understanding there is no "original" texts.
RESPONSE:

The oldest extant copies of Mark's gospel end at Mark 16:8. The present "Longer Ending" was added in the second century and the "Freer Login" was added in the fourth. The Freer Login has been dropped from modern bibles. But I believe Augustine quoted it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 05:30 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,722,926 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortoggie View Post
The Gospels did not exist at the time of the book of Acts yet they came to rely on the spirit with a constant hammering out of doctrine with each chapter. They relaxed what they could eat, who they could except into the fold and if circumcision was necessary all the time having to move about because of persecution.
RESPONSE:

Are you claiming that the Book of Acts was written after the Gospel of John written later than 95 AD?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2014, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,722,926 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton View Post
God's Holy Spirit does not need the book; WE need the book to verify that the 'spirit' we are listening to is the Spirit of God or a false spirit. Even God's Holy Spirit, like Jesus did when He was on earth, operates within the parameters provided by God through the prophets and recorded in the written Word of God.

The great danger facing many who claim ONLY to be led by 'the spirit' - is the presumption that 'the spirit they are listening to is God's --and the Bible is wrong,... whenever the Bible says something that they or their denomination disagree with!

ADD: "God is not the author of confusion"; also "All scripture is inspired by God ...." and "no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation ....." The history and production of the Bible as God’s written Word of Truth, absolutely support God's inspiration and authority.
RESPONSE:

ADD: "God is not the author of confusion"; also "All scripture is inspired by God ...." and "no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation

Can't anyone write that in any book if they want to claim it is divine in origin?
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:32 AM.

© 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