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.
Hi Katiemygirl; I’m back in town and saw your post #361
1) The operations of the Holy Ghost seem be involve guidance and teaching and witnessing to truth more than a specific remission of sins.
Katiemygirl said : "What I don't see in the scriptures is that remission of sins was evidenced by manifestations of the Holy Spirit."
Clear replied : I agree that manifestations of the spirit given to Christians does not seem to involve remission of sin so much a role as a guide and teacher.
2) Of the many kinds of evidence to religious truth, the testimony of the Holy Ghost to the heart of a person is the strongest in power and motivation.
Katiemygirl said : I believe a christian can know today that their sins have been forgiven because the scriptures say that if we repent and are baptized, we will be saved (Acts 2:38)
Clear replied : Sacred texts are one type of evidence among several types of evidences of a religious principle. For example, We may view verbal testimony, or written testimony as evidence that God exists. Some may view the natural world or some other type of data as evidence of God’s existence. However, I believe that communication from God such as a witness of the Holy Ghost (revelation) has always been the strongest evidence of a religious truth and the greatest motivator to change the characteristics of our lives.
3) If God ONLY communicated through the Christian biblical text, then it is an arbitrary situation where millions lacked and still lack the opportunity to communicate with God and sacred texts are not specific enough for some types of individual guidance.
Katiemygirl said : Everything that we ever need to know about how to be saved, and how to live a good christian life is written in the Bible.
Clear replied : I understand the claim that the bible “tells us all we need to know”. However if this were truth, still, the bible can only communicate this knowledge to those who’ve had a bible or who’ve been able to read or have it read to them.There are millions historically and geographically who’ve never seen a christian bible during their lived, and who cannot read, or who can read but cannot interpret correctly. The argument such as we have with Mike555 is strong evidence. Mike seems to have biblical texts, he is familiar with them yet comes away with a different set of requirements for salvation than you (regarding baptism specifically).
One must have some understanding of the importance of the text before the text makes any impact in their lives. The bedouins who found the dead sea scrolls used some of the scrolls for tender to start fires before someone pointed out to them that they were valuable (interestingly, some of the pages of Sinaiticus of the OP suffered similar burning as tender for a fire)
If your presumption that it is the reading of the biblical text alone through which moral truth will be spread, this excludes and continues to exclude untold millions who have not had the access to a bible that you have had. If God continues to influence individuals though his spirit, then access to moral truth is less dependent upon arbitrary conditions.
Also, the bible is non-specific in many ways that are important to meet the individual needs of a Christian.
For example : My friend Reed, owned a small engine shop at christmas time. There was very little money in the til and their bank account and the day is so cold, no customers are showing up. In dire need, he prays that God will bless him that he might sell something so as to have money enough to meet his needs. Within the hour another Christian shows up telling Reed he felt the spirit tell him that he needed to come in and buy a chain saw. He bought the saw, blades, and other supplies.
Neither Reed, nor the other christian needed to be “Prophets of God” to feel the guidance of the Holy Ghost. They made no great predictions nor proclaimed any new doctrine. Reed had a need, the other man listened to the guidance of the spirit. Both saw their encounter as evidence that God existed, would communicate with them and that he was merciful and good. However, reading the bible could not have told the woodcutter to go in and buy the chainsaw, it’s too non-specific to meet such needs.
Consider another experience of two Christian brothers, living on different continents who have written back and forth almost weekly to make plans and commitments for a mutual endeavor over a period of more than a year and, each receives a separate revelation. In their separate revelations, each are told NOT to do as they plan, but are each told to take different paths than they planned for so long. Both have the same revelation, directing them to drastically change their plans, on the same day, at the same time.
They each write a letter to one another on the same day describing the experience as the reason to change these plans. The letters cross in the mail on the same day. One brother starts his letter with the sentence: "Dear Larry, I hope you are not disappointed, but the Lord has told me we are not supposed to go to school together." And then he writes what he feels he was told to do. The other brother writes "Dear Gary, I hope you are not disappointed, but the Lord has told me we are not supposed to go to school together." And then he writes what he feels HE was told to do.
The bible cannot tell one brother to go into the medical field rather than study law or some other endeavor. The biblical text could not tell the brother that to change his plans meant making multiple converts to christianity that might not have been made otherwise. Etc, etc, etc. The revelations received are generally NOT “prophetic level doctrines which are proclaimed to the world as “new doctrine” but are for the personal guidance of those receiving the revelations. I am not simply offering anecdotal stories. I am one of the brothers katie.
As with the small engine shop, authentic revelations carry with them, objective evidence that they are not mere delusions. Having said that, i also VERY much agree that all of us have mild delusions at times (I think my jokes are more funny than they are sometimes....), MUCH of the christian theories floated about the forum are partial delusions. The fact that delusions exist, some of them famous delusions, doesn't mean that there isn't some authentic inspiration within Christianity as well. Occassionally the inspiration itself will contain evidence that it is not merely delusional.
For example : The brother is asleep having a dream that is "different" than the normal dream types. He's in a house and his father is standing over a pile of the things the son will inherit when he dies. The son is explaining that he does not want the "things" but rather he wants the father to stay. During the dream, the son realizes the father is going to die; is given some other detail and then awakens.
He describes the dream and the information he is given to his wife, he writes it in his diary and, being very early in the morning, he goes back to sleep with difficulty as he considers what happened. He is able to call his dad (who lives in another state), discuss his love, respect etc, but does not tell the father about the dream for reasons outside this discussion. 48 hours later, the father indeed dies suddenly of a heart attack while digging a post hole. He had no known heart disease.
Again, the nature of the revelation is for the specific guidance and experience of the individual who might never relate the experience to anyone else. None of this creates a “prophet” with “new doctrines to announce to the world”. One great benefit to such experiences is that they enhance the nature of trust in God and in his existence and strengthen faith in and experience with God. Such experiences, over time, change the nature of the life the christian lives. Also, the nature of the revelation itself, contains evidence that it is not mere delusion. The man can examine a tangible diary entry and confirm the experience and story with his wife.
To be given information that no one could possibly have generated within their own psyche is a powerful, faith promoting experience. One such experience can be simply “luck”, but as such experiences continue to happen, over, and over and over. At some point, the experiences themselves are powerful evidence of God’s love and willingness to answer our prayers today in an unchanging manner as he did anciently.
4) Katie said :
a) I don't believe that spiritual gifts are for today. I don't believe there are any new revelations from God.
b) I have never heard anyone who claims to have spiritual gifts today give a revelation of anything new we need to know on how to be saved or to live a good christian life that isn't already written in God's Word. So if our friend Mike would ever make the claim, which I don't think he would do on the forum, it would be false because prophesies, tongues, and the other spiritual gifts have ceased.
Clear replied : I understand you may lack faith that the holy ghost communicates and reveals truth today just as mike555 doesn’t believe baptism is necessary. Perhaps the fact that you’ve never experienced revelation is evidence to you that no one else has either.
Communication in some form between God and man has always characterized authentic Judao-Christian religion. To the degree that one departs from early judao-christian principles (such communication with God), then to that degree it is no longer authentic judao-christian religion. In your description, you seem to be mixing spiritual manifestations that all are capable of receiving with those manifestations typical of a “Prophet of God”.
In your quote,when the apostle Peter said : “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”, those who repented, were baptized and then received the gift of the holy Ghost, did not suddenly turn into an authorized “Prophet of God” who was authorized to speak for God to the world, but rather they were to have the Holy Ghost to be with them as a guide; a teacher; to enhance and quicken the process of sanctification and civility and the development of moral characteristics.
Katie, I hope the explanation clears up some misconceptions as to the type of individual revelation that I am referring to.
In any case, good luck in your spiritual journey katiemygirl.
Clear
viacfuacnm
Last edited by Clear lens; 05-25-2011 at 02:03 AM..
I agree with you Kids. I think we are in a saved condition, so to speak. Be faithful unto death and you will receive a crown of life. You're right. We must endure till the end. Geesh! Twice in one day that we agree. This is scary!
It is kind of weird and scary that we agree on something. I mean Yikes!
Quote:
Originally Posted by katiemygirl
I'm not exactly sure what you meant by "first resurrection." I know that when Jesus comes again, the dead in Christ will rise first. Then will follow those who are alive at the time of His second coming. They will be changed in the twinkling of the eye. Then Jesus will gather His church together and bring them back to heaven with Him.
I don't believe in the idea that Jesus will set up a physical kingdom on earth and reign for a thousand years. But it's not something I ever argue about because I really don't care and it has nothing to do with my salvation. I plan on going with Jesus when He comes. I want to be part of that group that either rises, or gets changed in the twinkling of the eye.
That works for me!
Katie
Katie at Christ’s return, "the kingdoms of this world (will) become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Rev. 11:15). The kingdom of â€god’ will only be fully established in reality upon Christ return on earth. The kingdom of â€god’ will be on earth not heaven. I mean, really, you should studying this subject.
It is kind of weird and scary that we agree on something. I mean Yikes!
Katie at Christ’s return, "the kingdoms of this world (will) become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Rev. 11:15). The kingdom of â€god’ will only be fully established in reality upon Christ return on earth. The kingdom of â€god’ will be on earth not heaven. I mean, really, you should studying this subject.
On this we disagree. I believe all of the earthly kingdoms belong to the Lord NOW, and He is reigning NOW. I don't buy into the millenial theory. Sorry. And to be honest, it's not something I want to debate on this thread because it's off topic. I appreciate knowing your opinion, but honestly, it has nothing to do with our salvation. I find that people put way too much emphasis on Christ setting up a physical kingdom on earth, and not enough on what is really important. People need to make sure that when Jesus does come again, that they are right with him. That's what is important!
On this we disagree. I believe all of the earthly kingdoms belong to the Lord NOW, and He is reigning NOW. I don't buy into the millenial theory. Sorry. And to be honest, it's not something I want to debate on this thread because it's off topic. I appreciate knowing your opinion, but honestly, it has nothing to do with our salvation. I find that people put way too much emphasis on Christ setting up a physical kingdom on earth, and not enough on what is really important. People need to make sure that when Jesus does come again, that they are right with him. That's what is important!
Kate
I won't derail the thread topic. I just wanted to give a brief answer.
=Clear lens;19300446]POST 371
Hi Katiemygirl; I’m back in town and saw your post #361 1) The operations of the Holy Ghost seem be involve guidance and teaching and witnessing to truth more than a specific remission of sins. Katiemygirl said : "What I don't see in the scriptures is that remission of sins was evidenced by manifestations of the Holy Spirit." Clear replied : I agree that manifestations of the spirit given to Christians does not seem to involve remission of sin so much a role as a guide and teacher.
Hi Clear, Welcome back! Thanks for your post. I don't know if I can respond to it all in one sitting, but if I can't, I'll get back to you.
I absolutely agree that the role of the Holy Spirit is as guide and teacher. He also convicts a person of their sins.
Quote:
Of the many kinds of evidence to religious truth, the testimony of the Holy Ghost to the heart of a person is the strongest in power and motivation.
Quote:
Katiemygirl said : I believe a christian can know today that their sins have been forgiven because the scriptures say that if we repent and are baptized, we will be saved (Acts 2:38)
Clear replied : Sacred texts are one type of evidence among several types of evidences of a religious principle. For example, We may view verbal testimony, or written testimony as evidence that God exists. Some may view the natural world or some other type of data as evidence of God’s existence. However, I believe that communication from God such as a witness of the Holy Ghost (revelation) has always been the strongest evidence of a religious truth and the greatest motivator to change the characteristics of our lives.
2)
If you mean a personal revelation from the Holy Spirit, then I disagree. As I said before, He convicts us of sin. He guides us. He comforts us. And of course He teaches us through the word, but He does not speak to people personally. I do think that there are times when we are moved to do things we normally would not do, and then later wonder what made us do those things. I do think that God leads us into situations if it will accomplish His purpose whatever it be. But again, I don't believe He actually speaks to people personally as some claim.
Quote:
3) If God ONLY communicated through the Christian biblical text, then it is an arbitrary situation where millions lacked and still lack the opportunity to communicate with God and sacred texts are not specific enough for some types of individual guidance.
Quote:
Katiemygirl said : Everything that we ever need to know about how to be saved, and how to live a good christian life is written in the Bible.
Clear replied : I understand the claim that the bible “tells us all we need to know”. However if this were truth, still, the bible can only communicate this knowledge to those who’ve had a bible or who’ve been able to read or have it read to them.There are millions historically and geographically who’ve never seen a christian bible during their lived, and who cannot read, or who can read but cannot interpret correctly. The argument such as we have with Mike555 is strong evidence. Mike seems to have biblical texts, he is familiar with them yet comes away with a different set of requirements for salvation than you (regarding baptism specifically).
One must have some understanding of the importance of the text before the text makes any impact in their lives. The bedouins who found the dead sea scrolls used some of the scrolls for tender to start fires before someone pointed out to them that they were valuable (interestingly, some of the pages of Sinaiticus of the OP suffered similar burning as tender for a fire)
If your presumption that it is the reading of the biblical text alone through which moral truth will be spread, this excludes and continues to exclude untold millions who have not had the access to a bible that you have had. If God continues to influence individuals though his spirit, then access to moral truth is less dependent upon arbitrary conditions.
Also, the bible is non-specific in many ways that are important to meet the individual needs of a Christian.
I don't know how God will deal with the people who have never seen a Bible. I only know how he will deal with those who have. I can't set my standards by unknowns. People like Mike555 have been taught a particular doctrine, and refuse to let it go. IMHO, if a person reads all of the scriptures concerning salvation, leaving his own preconceived ideas behind, and he takes them for exactly what they say, then he will come to the same conclusion you and I have come to. You need to repent and be baptized to be saved. The only way you can get around those scriptures it to change the word order, or apply your own translation, which is exactly what Mike555 and other "faith only" people do.
Quote:
For example
Quote:
: My friend Reed, owned a small engine shop at christmas time. There was very little money in the til and their bank account and the day is so cold, no customers are showing up. In dire need, he prays that God will bless him that he might sell something so as to have money enough to meet his needs. Within the hour another Christian shows up telling Reed he felt the spirit tell him that he needed to come in and buy a chain saw. He bought the saw, blades, and other supplies.
Quote:
Neither Reed, nor the other christian needed to be “Prophets of God” to feel the guidance of the Holy Ghost. They made no great predictions nor proclaimed any new doctrine. Reed had a need, the other man listened to the guidance of the spirit. Both saw their encounter as evidence that God existed, would communicate with them and that he was merciful and good. However, reading the bible could not have told the woodcutter to go in and buy the chainsaw, it’s too non-specific to meet such needs.
Consider another experience of two Christian brothers, living on different continents who have written back and forth almost weekly to make plans and commitments for a mutual endeavor over a period of more than a year and, each receives a separate revelation. In their separate revelations, each are told NOT to do as they plan, but are each told to take different paths than they planned for so long. Both have the same revelation, directing them to drastically change their plans, on the same day, at the same time.
They each write a letter to one another on the same day describing the experience as the reason to change these plans. The letters cross in the mail on the same day. One brother starts his letter with the sentence: "Dear Larry, I hope you are not disappointed, but the Lord has told me we are not supposed to go to school together." And then he writes what he feels he was told to do. The other brother writes "Dear Gary, I hope you are not disappointed, but the Lord has told me we are not supposed to go to school together." And then he writes what he feels HE was told to do.
The bible cannot tell one brother to go into the medical field rather than study law or some other endeavor. The biblical text could not tell the brother that to change his plans meant making multiple converts to christianity that might not have been made otherwise. Etc, etc, etc. The revelations received are generally NOT “prophetic level doctrines which are proclaimed to the world as “new doctrine” but are for the personal guidance of those receiving the revelations. I am not simply offering anecdotal stories. I am one of the brothers katie.
As with the small engine shop, authentic revelations carry with them, objective evidence that they are not mere delusions. Having said that, i also VERY much agree that all of us have mild delusions at times (I think my jokes are more funny than they are sometimes....), MUCH of the christian theories floated about the forum are partial delusions. The fact that delusions exist, some of them famous delusions, doesn't mean that there isn't some authentic inspiration within Christianity as well. Occassionally the inspiration itself will contain evidence that it is not merely delusional.
For example : The brother is asleep having a dream that is "different" than the normal dream types. He's in a house and his father is standing over a pile of the things the son will inherit when he dies. The son is explaining that he does not want the "things" but rather he wants the father to stay. During the dream, the son realizes the father is going to die; is given some other detail and then awakens.
He describes the dream and the information he is given to his wife, he writes it in his diary and, being very early in the morning, he goes back to sleep with difficulty as he considers what happened. He is able to call his dad (who lives in another state), discuss his love, respect etc, but does not tell the father about the dream for reasons outside this discussion. 48 hours later, the father indeed dies suddenly of a heart attack while digging a post hole. He had no known heart disease.
Again, the nature of the revelation is for the specific guidance and experience of the individual who might never relate the experience to anyone else. None of this creates a “prophet” with “new doctrines to announce to the world”. One great benefit to such experiences is that they enhance the nature of trust in God and in his existence and strengthen faith in and experience with God. Such experiences, over time, change the nature of the life the christian lives. Also, the nature of the revelation itself, contains evidence that it is not mere delusion. The man can examine a tangible diary entry and confirm the experience and story with his wife.
To be given information that no one could possibly have generated within their own psyche is a powerful, faith promoting experience. One such experience can be simply “luck”, but as such experiences continue to happen, over, and over and over. At some point, the experiences themselves are powerful evidence of God’s love and willingness to answer our prayers today in an unchanging manner as he did anciently
It sounds to me that Reed simply had his prayers answered, a far cry from a personal revelation. Did the Holy Spirit lead the man to Reed? He very well could have. God may have used the man as a way to answer Reed's prayer. Did the HS speak to the man personally? I don't believe so. I don't believe scripture supports that the Holy Spirit speaks to people personally today unless it's through His inspired Words.
As for the other stories, that is exactly what they are, stories. I could easily attribute every good decision I made in my life to the Holy Spirit telling me to do such and such. I don't believe that's the way it works. Like I said before, I believe God does put us in certain situations in order to accomplish His purpose, but He does not speak to us personally as those in your stories claim.
[/quote]
4) Katie said :
a) I don't believe that spiritual gifts are for today. I don't believe there are any new revelations from God.
b) I have never heard anyone who claims to have spiritual gifts today give a revelation of anything new we need to know on how to be saved or to live a good christian life that isn't already written in God's Word. So if our friend Mike would ever make the claim, which I don't think he would do on the forum, it would be false because prophesies, tongues, and the other spiritual gifts have ceased.
Clear replied : I understand you may lack faith that the holy ghost communicates and reveals truth today just as mike555 doesn’t believe baptism is necessary. Perhaps the fact that you’ve never experienced revelation is evidence to you that no one else has either.
Communication in some form between God and man has always characterized authentic Judao-Christian religion. To the degree that one departs from early judao-christian principles (such communication with God), then to that degree it is no longer authentic judao-christian religion. In your description, you seem to be mixing spiritual manifestations that all are capable of receiving with those manifestations typical of a “Prophet of God”.
In your quote,when the apostle Peter said : “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”, those who repented, were baptized and then received the gift of the holy Ghost, did not suddenly turn into an authorized “Prophet of God” who was authorized to speak for God to the world, but rather they were to have the Holy Ghost to be with them as a guide; a teacher; to enhance and quicken the process of sanctification and civility and the development of moral characteristics.[/quote]
Here's the thing Clear. If someone today can receive revelations from the Holy Spirit, then that also means we have authentic healers today just like they had at the beginning of the early church. Tell me, can anyone raise someone from the dead such as the apostle Paul did? Oh sure, someone out there will make the claim, but there is no absolute documented proof. Will someone be healed or have his limbs restored just because someone's shadow falls on him or someone drops a hankerchief nearby, or the touch the hem of someone's garment? That's what happened with the apostles. You see, it's very easy to validate speaking in tongues, and telling people about revelations you receive, but NO ONE, NOT ONE SINGLE person has been able to raise someone from the dead, or restrore someone's limbs. Oh sure, there will be stories, but I don't believe a single one. I don't believe I base my beliefs on not having had any of these experiences myself. I base them on the scriptures.
9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.
(2 Thessalonians 2:9-12)
The scriptures also tell us that "prohecies will cease."
Clear said, Katie, I hope the explanation clears up some misconceptions as to the type of individual revelation that I am referring to.
In any case, good luck in your spiritual journey katiemygirl.
Yes, I understand what you are saying, and I do see the difference in what some people claim to be revelations from God, and what it is you are saying. I just don't agree that the Holy Spirit speaks to people personally, unless it's through His inspired Word. But the good news is that our salvation is dependent upon this. We both know that we must believe Jesus is the Son of God, we must repent, confess Him before men, and be baptized for the remission of our sins. We also know we need to remain faithful to Him unto death to receive our crown of life. That's what's important! I also wish you the best in your spiritual journey. Again, I do thank you for all of the effort you put into your posts about what the early church fathers thought and wrote. I've enjoyed learning and talking with you.
I won't derail the thread topic. I just wanted to give a brief answer.
I know and I appreciate your answer.
So you still haven't told me what verse in the Acts 2 narrative show where the people were saved. If you prefer to say they are temporarily saved or in a saved condition, that's okay by me.
Hmmm great stuff. I have to say though it seems like a lot of "legalism". Did Jesus get baptized in order to get into heaven and would that then mean that John was the vehicle? This strikes me as ludicrous. Instead I believe Jesus baptism specifically marks the beginning of his ministry (how else would we know exactly when it started?). SO in this case baptism with water is a public declaration by Jesus that his ministry is started.
Why did Jesus ask to be baptized? It was obviously part of his mission in coming to earth. Like previous priests of God--Moses, Nehemiah and Daniel--Jesus was confessing sin on behalf of the people. He was also endorsing John's ministry of baptism. In addition, Jesus was identifying with those who were repenting. He was also setting an example for his followers. He was foreshadowing his death, burial and resurrection. And lastly, Jesus was announcing the beginning of his ministry on earth. (aboutChristianity.com)
So it appears he was making a declaration. Hmmm........
Hmmm great stuff. I have to say though it seems like a lot of "legalism". Did Jesus get baptized in order to get into heaven and would that then mean that John was the vehicle? This strikes me as ludicrous. Instead I believe Jesus baptism specifically marks the beginning of his ministry (how else would we know exactly when it started?). SO in this case baptism with water is a public declaration by Jesus that his ministry is started.
Why did Jesus ask to be baptized? It was obviously part of his mission in coming to earth. Like previous priests of God--Moses, Nehemiah and Daniel--Jesus was confessing sin on behalf of the people. He was also endorsing John's ministry of baptism. In addition, Jesus was identifying with those who were repenting. He was also setting an example for his followers. He was foreshadowing his death, burial and resurrection. And lastly, Jesus was announcing the beginning of his ministry on earth. (aboutChristianity.com)
So it appears he was making a declaration. Hmmm........
Hello Joe,
First off, Jesus didn't have sin so no he didn't need to get baptized to get to heaven. Secondly, the Bible tells us Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. And finally, the scriptures do not support your view that Jesus' baptism was a public testimony. If I've missed that scripture please point it out to me. No Joe, you have drawn a conclusion based on your prior teachings that baptism is not done for salvation. Yet Jesus himself said, "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved. He who does not believe will be condemned." Do you think Jesus was only making a suggestion? Faith alone does not save. That is the doctrine of men like Luther, Calvin and Zwingli. It's up to you who you choose to belive, Jesus or guys back in the 1500's. By the way, people were baptized for the forgiveness of sins for the first 1500 years of church history according to the early church fathers, but I figure if you don't take by faith what Jesus said, you sure won't listen to what the church fathers said either.
Mark 16: 15 And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Some say this passage doesn’t belong in the Bible. There are two Greek manuscripts, (Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) that were written around 350 AD which do not contain the last twelve verses of the gospel of Mark (along with many other verses including the 1000 year reign of Christ (Rev.20:1-6). All other Greek manuscripts (about 500 of them) do contain them.
Katie
RESPONSE:
Mark 16:9 on is the "longer ending" of Mark's Gospel. It appeared in the second century so obviously wasn't in the original Mark.
From the New American Bible footnotes:
"Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark."
>>All other Greek manuscripts (about 500 of them) do contain them.<<
This is an untrue claim. See below.
From Wikipedia:
"Most scholars, following the approach of the textual critic Bruce Metzger, hold the view that verses 9-20 were not part of the original text. Textual critics have identified two distinct endings—the "Longer Ending" (vv. 9-20) and the "Shorter Ending," which appear together in six Greek manuscripts, and in dozens of Ethiopic copies.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 05-25-2011 at 09:08 AM..
Reason: typo
Mark 16:9 on is the "longer ending" of Mark's Gospel. It appeared in the second century so obviously wasn't in the original Mark.
From the New American Bible footnotes:
"Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark."
>>All other Greek manuscripts (about 500 of them) do contain them.<<
This is an untrue claim. Many Greek manuscripts don't contain it either.
Many verses were left out of the two manuscripts I mentioned, but no one ever questions those. So what are the names of these other manuscrips you mentioned, and how many were there? Also earlier documents than the two manuscripts I referred to mention Mark 16. That in itself makes it valid. The only people who seem to argue about this passage are the "faith only people." See I do believe what Jesus said, and I chose to listen. Considering there are many other verses that support Mark 16, I can't imagine anyone taking the chance of not obeying the words of Jesus. If Jesus told me to spin around 50 Times, I would do it. You see the thing is He tells us over and over we have to abide in his word. I take that seriously.
Kate
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.
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.
