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 04-01-2015, 06:46 PM
 
12,918 posts, read 16,805,542 times
Reputation: 5434

Advertisements

Jesus was probably very much like the Old Testament prophets: Jeremiah, Amos, etc. They all opposed the wealthy religious people who didn't take care of the oppressed members of society. He and his followers believed in the sharing of food and in healing for the poor. He tried to tell the wealthy people that their sharing of resources and devotion to the needy would literally open the door to God's kingdom on earth, for those who followed his suggestion.

He might have even come from the Pharisee tradition, and then left after realizing how far it was from God. I take the gospel stories with a grain of salt. They were legends written about Jesus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-01-2015, 07:34 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,073,697 times
Reputation: 32573
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post

I recently watched a movie on Netflix, Apostle Peter and the Last Supper. I absolutely LOVE the way Jesus is depicted, with a big old smile and laughing and teaching God's love.
Can you imagine the joy he felt giving sight to the blind...being with his friends......going to a wedding with his mother (I love that. He escorts Mom...awwww) and she says, "They have no wine." and he keeps the party going?

How he became Stern Jesus .... I do not know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2015, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Free State of Texas
20,400 posts, read 12,711,279 times
Reputation: 2488
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Can you imagine the joy he felt giving sight to the blind...being with his friends......going to a wedding with his mother (I love that. He escorts Mom...awwww) and she says, "They have no wine." and he keeps the party going?

How he became Stern Jesus .... I do not know.
Jesus came in truth and grace. Too much of one or the other is a theology out of balance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2015, 07:52 PM
 
Location: New England
37,337 posts, read 28,175,334 times
Reputation: 2744
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej View Post
Jesus came in truth and grace. Too much of one or the other is a theology out of balance.
Explain what in truth means please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2015, 10:00 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
17,071 posts, read 10,868,694 times
Reputation: 1871
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcamps View Post
Explain what in truth means please.
"All things are lawful, not all things are beneficial?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2015, 10:18 PM
 
45,356 posts, read 26,948,512 times
Reputation: 23738
I read the article in the OP. A couple of comments...

Quote:
Jesus knew God better than anyone, yet he did not live with his thoughts always stuck in Bible verses and theological studies.
Jesus constantly referenced texts and events from the OT. When Jesus was 12 and His parents could not find Him - where was He?

Luke 2:45-47 - When they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem looking for Him. 46 Then, after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers.

-------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Rather, he was present in the moment, right there, happily engaged with a diverse variety of people and enjoying their company.

It was precisely because he knew God better than anyone that allowed him to truly live in the moment. He valued the interaction of people, of all people, and it did not depend on what kind of people they were, or what kind of theology they held, of what kind of social standing they had.
The author does realize that people clamored for His death, doesn't he?

Jesus realized that many people wanted Him for their own desires (healings, food, show of miracles) - not because they wanted Him.


The article is typical of this human form of Christianity (void of the Holy Spirit) that is popular today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2015, 01:52 AM
 
63,530 posts, read 39,819,736 times
Reputation: 7813
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Jesus constantly referenced texts and events from the OT.
Careful, DROB . . . Jesus refuted things in your inerrant and infallible Bible . . . "Ye have heard it was said . . . but I say"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2015, 03:16 AM
 
Location: New England
37,337 posts, read 28,175,334 times
Reputation: 2744
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
I read the article in the OP. A couple of comments...



Jesus constantly referenced texts and events from the OT. When Jesus was 12 and His parents could not find Him - where was He?

Luke 2:45-47 - When they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem looking for Him. 46 Then, after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers.

-------------------------------------------------



The author does realize that people clamored for His death, doesn't he?

Jesus realized that many people wanted Him for their own desires (healings, food, show of miracles) - not because they wanted Him.


The article is typical of this human form of Christianity (void of the Holy Spirit) that is popular today.
Not true, Jesus did not constantly reference scripture, if i am right it's i think a little over 30 times in 3 years that he referenced scripture,i have seen single posts on here that contain as many as that, that is what i would call constantly referencing scripture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2015, 06:53 AM
 
45,356 posts, read 26,948,512 times
Reputation: 23738
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcamps View Post
Not true, Jesus did not constantly reference scripture, if i am right it's i think a little over 30 times in 3 years that he referenced scripture,i have seen single posts on here that contain as many as that, that is what i would call constantly referencing scripture.
That's only what's recorded by the authors - I that does not include general references to OT material such being in a whale for 3 days like Jonah, or references to Noah and the flood. In other words it's indicative of how he carried Himself.

If you want to believe that He rarely referenced Scripture - whatever. Nothing I say will change that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2015, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,678,541 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
300,000 to 400,000 or more textual variants is a bit more than a handful, but most are quite minor and of no significance at all, but even the significant variants don't affect any of the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith. You may have seen me post these quotes before from a few textual scholars concerning the New Testament documents, but in case you haven't, here they are.

F. F. Bruce (1910-1990) was Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester, England. He stated...
Fortunately, if the great number of MSS increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording is not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkably small. The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice. [The New Testament Documents; Are They Reliable?, F.F. Bruce, pgs. 14-15.]

Bruce Metzger (1914-2007) was one of the most highly regarded scholars of Greek, New Testament, and New Testament Textual Criticism. He served on the board of the American Bible Society and United Bible Societies and was a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary. He commented...
But the amount of evidence for the text of the New Testament , whether derived from manuscripts, early versions, or patristic quotations is so much greater than that available for any ancient classical author that the necessity of resorting to emendation is reduced to the smallest dimensions. [The Text of the New Testament, Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, Fourth Edition, Bruce M. Metzger and Bart D. Ehrman, pg. 230]

Daniel B. Wallace (PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) is professor of New Testament Studies. He is a member of the Society of New Testament Studies, the Institute for Biblical Research, and has consulted on several Bible translations. He made these comments...
To sum up the evidence on the number of variants, there are a lot of variants because there are a lot of manuscripts. Even in the early centuries, the text of the NT is found in a sufficient number of MSS, versions, and writings of the church fathers to give us the essentials of the original text. [Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament, Daniel B. Wallace, pg. 40]

Even Bart D. Ehrman who puts a skeptical spin on things when writing for the general public made the following statement in a college textbook as quoted by Dan Wallace in 'Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament' on pg. 24...
"In spite of these remarkable differences, scholars are convinced that we can reconstruct the original words of the New Testament with reasonable (although probably not 100 percent) accuracy."
Ehrman wrote that in a college textbook called 'The New Testament: A Historical Introduction To the Early Christian Writings', 3rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), pg. 481.


In an article by Dan Wallace, he wrote...
'Though textual criticism cannot yet produce certainty about the exact wording of the original, this uncertainty affects only about two percent of the text. And in that two percent support always exists for what the original said--never is one left with mere conjecture. In other words it is not that only 90 percent of the original text exists in the extant Greek manuscripts--rather, 110 percent exists. Textual criticism is not involved in reinventing the original; it is involved in discarding the spurious, in burning the dross to get to the gold.' [The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical?
Study By: Daniel B. Wallace The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical? | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site
You might also want to read Dr. Wallace's article concerning the number of textual variants in the New Testament manuscripts. - The Number of Textual Variants: An Evangelical Miscalculation | Daniel B. Wallace

We can trust that our present texts are reliable. You do want a good translation however.

I have no idea what is kept in archives of the Vatican. It would be interesting to know however.
The thing Mike is hoping you conclude is that if the manuscrpts closely resemble one another that you will buy into his fact that the original manuscripts are both accurate and verbally "inerrant."

None of the four scholars Mike lists reaches his ultimate conclusion that the originals are "inerrant" in the way he believes inerrancy, not even Dr. Wallace, the most conservative of those four. Dr. Wallace flat out calls Mark 16:9-20 and the story of the woman caught in adultery in John later "additions" to NT writings. He also writes freely of the redaction of I John 5:7, which was the strongest foundation of the doctrine of the Trinity. While Dr. Wallace argues other verses point to the Trinity, that one verse many other scholars believe was the foundation stone of the entire doctrine which crumbles without it. The others flat out reject inerrancy as a doctrine.

The earliest existing manuscript dates is actually a fragmentary piece of the gospel of Mark and dates to the early 1st Century---- roughly 100 years after Jesus walked the earth. There has been a discovery in the last couple of years another that Dr. Wallace claims may prove to date into the first century. It is also of Mark. The photo I saw of it looks like perhaps a 1/8 trapezoid shaped tear from a sheet of paper. Very small.

Ultimately, with no existing original manuscripts it is impossible to bring any textual or literary analysis to them in order to determine if there might exist a factual error in an original. Dr. Ehrman NOW asserts it is impossible to be certain of the originals based on the existing copies because if the first copy contained an error, following copies would have the same error. He and Dr. Wallace (and other extremely conservative scholars) have engaged in numerous debates, some of which are available on YouTube.

So, yes, some of the manuscript differences can affect doctrine, and we have no way of knowing if the first copy of any manuscript made a serious error which then became "gospel" in following manuscripts.

Scholarship can never be "simplified," and I'm sure Mike will respond with his usual that he is not trying to "prove" inerrancy, but I assure you since that is his cardinal doctrine there can be no other purpose.

Fundamentalist cardinal doctrines
"Inerrancy." A fallacy among existing manuscripts and unprovable amongst non-existent originals.

"Virgin Birth:" Jesus never claimed to be born of a virgin, the gospel of Mark, the oldest of the gospels, doesn't mention a virgin birth, and the two accounts we have both differ and conflict.

"Bodily Ressurrection." Mark ends abruptly with verse 9, where two women purportedly see a young man, the account does not claim it is Jesus, who tells them Jesus is risen. They go away and say nothing although the young man tells them to go to Peter and the disciples that Jesus will see them in Galilee. The other gospels have much more elaborate and conflicting stories regarding the Ressurrection. Ultimately it is a faith issue like most other doctrines.

"Atonement" the scripture has a lot to say about atonement, but the interpretation of the what and why of atonement is all over the place. Jesus Himself never specifically states how atonement "works."

"Historical reality of Jesus' Miracles." While there is little doubt SOMETHING happened to astonish those early followers, it is unlikely many if any, of the accounts escaped some embellishment. And that's as easy to prove about human writings as looking at the embellishments that have arisen around one of my wife's ancestors, one David Crockett. Yes his legend grew through history, and there is certainly the possibility that in a few hundred years perhaps only the Disney Fess Parker movies will be the picture of Crockett--certainly emphasizing his impact on the early years of our nation, but just as certainly inaccurate in details.

I'm not promoting what one should believe, I promote getting a vast number of views first. Ultimately faith is the foundation of Christianity, not any "proof" coming from two millinia plus documents, none of which Jesus spoke of in more than a cursory way and sometimes not at all. They apparently weren't that important to Him.
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.

© 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