Pope Francis Calls for Change to Lord's Prayer (Jewish, Christianity, God)
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.
Yes, allowing is different. He's just calling for a different English phrasing of it. I will disagree and argue with the Pope on many issues, but this really isn't one of them.
But it changes the meaning of the phrase entirely and, in fact, by implication, God's very nature. How dare he do that? So I will argue.
Well, there was Jesus in the desert being tempted by Satan, and presumably God allowed that, but who am I to argue with Pope Francis? Likely (we need our translator), "allowing" is different from "tempting" (in fact, I'm sure it is). More along of lines of not interfering with it -- just as He permits evil on earth when (again presumably), He could theoretically prevent it.
even the poope suggesting anything about changing what Jesus did is a great sign.
pope is a chemist, he gets it. its not about "jesus" for him. Push comes to shove, Its about the memes that Jesus represents. but then again, I like apologetics. it means change what you believe as you learn more. only nikin poops think that a bad thing.
The sense is perfectly accurate when it comes to the Old Testament, I don't see that the New Testament would change the fact that God created, allows, and controls evil/calamity and controls/directly influences people's wills/emotions although it is not at all accurate when it comes to Zoroastriansim (where no evil is created or maintained or influenced by Ahura Mazda but only by proxy of his free creation of a free arbiter) nor Late Hellenism (where Zeus/Theos was omnipresent, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent).
That's because you don't recognize the paradigm shift that iS the "New Testament." The OT is not "words FROM God," but varied perceptions ABOUT God and our relationship. Jesus gave us a whole new perception and James had it right: God does not tempt us, we and our conditions make them.
But it changes the meaning of the phrase entirely and, in fact, by implication, God's very nature. How dare he do that? So I will argue.
He's not changing anything about it. It's what the phrase says in the original language. What he's suggesting is what Jesus said. He's not changing Jesus' words here...he's suggesting we actually more accurately use the words of Jesus. This is no different than a Baptist pastor saying that a particular Bible translation is not the best, but suggesting a BETTER way to more accurately understand the words of the original author is to use a different word or phrase.
The same people probably think there would be no evil in the world if there were a benevolent god. Shouldn't we take God at his word? I didn't realize the prayer Jesus left us was up for debate.
Since when did Jesus offer that prayer in English? And why do you believe that God would lead us into temptation. I'm with the Pope on this and I'm pretty sure the leadership of my church would be, too. I believe Jesus was suggesting that we pray to God that we not be led to follow the tempter.
Harry Diogenes will probably be along. He reads Koine Greek.
Yeshua spoke Aramaic. Greek was hated by local folk there at that time. Even His name was not Jesus. Yeshua. Yeshua Ga-Notsri.
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.
