Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The "Gospel" Of John
dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 215 (165981)
12-07-2004 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by arachnophilia
12-07-2004 10:06 AM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
Arachnophilia writes:
look, genesis 1 and 2 may completely contradict each other.
It has been shown, on this forum, that it is completely reasonable to accept Genesis 2 as elaboration, in part, of Genesis 1. The narrative style of the author is used again in Genesis 5:1-2:
1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Is it logical to deduce that this is yet another creation account?
No. It is plainly a continuation of the story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by arachnophilia, posted 12-07-2004 10:06 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by arachnophilia, posted 12-08-2004 2:04 AM dpardo has replied

  
dpardo
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 215 (165985)
12-07-2004 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by arachnophilia
12-07-2004 3:30 AM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
Arachnophilia writes:
although, on a similar point, dpardo still hasn't answered my quotes in another thread. he wanted to know why quoting the new testament to jews was unacceptable, and so i quoted the koran to him. i think i'll try the book of mormon next. and if that doesn't work, dianetics.
I already addressed your point when I said that the New Testament is not required for there to have been an offer by Jesus and the Apostles to the Jews of that time.
If you are interested in debating material in the Koran I suggest you create a new thread. I would be interested in participating if you are prepared to defend the Koran as divine revelation by God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 12-07-2004 3:30 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by arachnophilia, posted 12-08-2004 1:56 AM dpardo has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 33 of 215 (166004)
12-07-2004 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by dpardo
12-07-2004 4:48 PM


quote:
I have already pointed out to you, in another thread, that you are equating, erroneously, following Christ with acknowledging that Jesus was the Christ.
Don't just tell me, show me!
Show me, somewhere other than the Book of John, that Jews who acknowledged that Jesus was the messiah were put out of the synagogue during the ministry of Jesus.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by dpardo, posted 12-07-2004 4:48 PM dpardo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by purpledawn, posted 12-09-2004 7:41 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 215 (166008)
12-07-2004 7:43 PM


What is the TOPIC FOLK!!!
Let's move back towards John.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

Change in Moderation? (General discussion of moderation procedures)
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
or
Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum

  
Swift
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 215 (166040)
12-07-2004 10:36 PM


From the start.
Arachnophilia your question "can God die?" is a good question. Jesus was God in the flesh(hint:flesh) he died and rose so that the world might belive that he was who he said he was. And God the Father since he was the God head it makes perfect since why Jesus refered to him as father even though they are the same. And you mentiened condemnations. If you are refering to my comment on sin it is because it is the truth, everybody does sin. And dpardo was right I did mean sinless when i said perfect. Thanks dpardo. And what propaganda? Could you expalian? And how do these books condeme Judisam? And also qouting the koran and other books that go aginst the bible(dont know what dianetics is thogh)? And yet you said in another couple threads that you where a christian? It sounded by what you said that you belived those books. That to me is like saying your on a diet yet have a snikers bar hanging out of your mouth.
Anyway back to John.
You said that the bible does not have to be all truthfull and that you dont worship it. Well nethier do I, but I would not follow a religon if its teachings were part wrong and part right just like I would not put a celling fan up over my bed if part of the directions to put it up where wrong. It is also like a bridge. You cant go over a bridge that is half built. The Bible says that god is truthfull. Deu 32:4 "a god of truth and without iniquity". The Bible is Gods WORD. And if even just a part of the Bible is wrong that means God lied. But he dosent lie because he is a God of truth. I also dont think that the apostles would have lied or made something up. Why? Because they would have had nothing to gain from it. Unlike Mohammed who lived the rich and carefree life after he proclaimed himself as a prophet of Allah, but the apostles died terrable deaths just like Jesus and where not anywhere close to rich or even middle class. And i dont think they would have gone along with it if they were making it up. They probobly would have renounced there beleifs if they had made it up. Plus these guys were Jews and i dont think they would be hatefull or antisemistic.
This message has been edited by Swift, 12-08-2004 12:02 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by AdminAsgara, posted 12-07-2004 10:47 PM Swift has not replied
 Message 42 by arachnophilia, posted 12-08-2004 2:52 AM Swift has replied
 Message 44 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-08-2004 2:59 AM Swift has replied
 Message 45 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-08-2004 3:14 AM Swift has replied

  
AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 36 of 215 (166042)
12-07-2004 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Swift
12-07-2004 10:36 PM


Hi Swift, welcome to EvC. Glad you found someplace to sit and put up your feet. I'd like to suggest a few links that most newbies should find informative. Please take the time to read them.
The most important link is to our Forum Guidelines.
Two more that are helpful are:
Assistance w/ Forum Formatting (please pay special attention to the section on reply buttons) and
Style Guides for EvC

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe


http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Swift, posted 12-07-2004 10:36 PM Swift has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 37 of 215 (166092)
12-08-2004 1:56 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by dpardo
12-07-2004 5:37 PM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
If you are interested in debating material in the Koran I suggest you create a new thread. I would be interested in participating if you are prepared to defend the Koran as divine revelation by God.
you missed my point. i am not prepared to defend the koran as divine revelation. if i was, i'd be muslim.
my point is that you don't accept it because it is of another religion that distorts the foundation of your beliefs in such a way that you can plainly see it's "problems."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by dpardo, posted 12-07-2004 5:37 PM dpardo has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 38 of 215 (166094)
12-08-2004 2:04 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by dpardo
12-07-2004 5:30 PM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
It has been shown, on this forum, that it is completely reasonable to accept Genesis 2 as elaboration, in part, of Genesis 1. The narrative style of the author is used again in Genesis 5:1-2:
we've been over this before, but this not the place. it is the standard academic position that gen 1 and 2 are separate accounts.
Is it logical to deduce that this is yet another creation account?
No. It is plainly a continuation of the story.
you want the proper position? yes and no. it's not another creation story, but it is a separate account. gen 1 is from source e, gen 2+3 are from j, and gen 5 is from p. they are all separate and DISTINCT styles of writing, serve separate functions, and refer to god in different ways.
why does gen 6:9 repeat 5:32? why does 6 contain a new introduction and reference point if it's a story continued from gen 5 and 4?
try skipping the genealogies next time, you probably do anyways. heck, most of us do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by dpardo, posted 12-07-2004 5:30 PM dpardo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by dpardo, posted 12-08-2004 2:00 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 39 of 215 (166095)
12-08-2004 2:08 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by dpardo
12-07-2004 4:42 PM


this is gonna get silly in a hurry
I didn't say he said "sinless", I said he implied "sinless".
i never said that you said he said "sinless" i just said that he did not say "sinless" and reading things the bible didn't say into it merely interpretation, when in fact what i said was that the bible said that we can be perfect without being "sinless" so to speak.
*breathes*
ok, now which end is which?
my point is that the bible says the perfection in the eyes of god is realistically attainable to any human being, but that god doesn't expect us to be perfect in the "like god" respect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by dpardo, posted 12-07-2004 4:42 PM dpardo has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 40 of 215 (166101)
12-08-2004 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by arachnophilia
12-06-2004 11:16 PM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
yes *scrunches nose*

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by arachnophilia, posted 12-06-2004 11:16 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by arachnophilia, posted 12-08-2004 2:52 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 41 of 215 (166103)
12-08-2004 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Swift
12-07-2004 12:06 AM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
i've been a christian for eighteen years. i am not afraid of hellfire or your accusations that i neither know my god nor the book by which he shows himself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Swift, posted 12-07-2004 12:06 AM Swift has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 42 of 215 (166105)
12-08-2004 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Swift
12-07-2004 10:36 PM


Arachnophilia your question "can God die?"
don't thank me, thank neitzsche. oh wait, nevermind...
was it "god is dead" -- neitzsche or "neitzsche is dead" -- god. i forget?
Jesus was God in the flesh(hint:flesh) he died and rose so that the world might belive that he was who he said he was.
1. why did jesus need to prove it?
quote:
John 20:29
blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.
2. why did jesus need to die?
quote:
Psalm 40:6
Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
3. why is jesus resurrection significant in conquering death?
quote:
John 11:43,44
And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.
And God the Father since he was the God head it makes perfect since why Jesus refered to him as father even though they are the same.
actually, it doesn't. i bought into the trinity idea for many years, and i don't anymore. read any gospel's record of the events in gethsemane. jesus is not some remote extention of diety, he's very separate and small compared to god.
And you mentiened condemnations. If you are refering to my comment on sin it is because it is the truth, everybody does sin.
no, i'm talking about threats of hellfire. jesus ame to tell us how to live our lives, loving one another. the kingdom of god on earth. religion out of fear is stupid. just in case, right? focus on the afterlife, ignore this one?
And dpardo was right I did mean sinless when i said perfect. Thanks dpardo.
who is righteous when compared to god?
god does not expect us to be god. just the person he made us to be. being sinless is almost inhuman. i say almost, because perfect in the context of job certainly does mean without sin. otherwise, we have no book.
And what propaganda? Could you expalian? And how do these books condeme Judisam?
the verses after the last john verse i quoted:
quote:
John 11:45-48 Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him. But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done. Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all [men] will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
see also the all the external references (the Jews, "YOUR law," etc.) who does it blame for the death of jesus at roman hands?
And also qouting the koran and other books that go aginst the bible(dont know what dianetics is thogh)? And yet you said in another couple threads that you where a christian? It sounded by what you said that you belived those books. That to me is like saying your on a diet yet have a snikers bar hanging out of your mouth.
calling me a hypocrite, eh? nice try though.
i quoted the koran to demonstrate a point about why quoting outside the religion (or lack thereof) isn't redily accepted. dpardo wasn't supposed to accept the verses, he was supposed to reject them.
although, ironically, i do agree with the intent of those verses: strict monotheism, none comparing to god. but no, i do not believe the koran, or the book of mormon. but i do find it useful to compare religions, various sects, and the literature of surrounding nations (as well as extra-biblical literature such as the apocrypha and pseudepigraphica) for a sense of context. i like to make my choices from all available possibilities.
and "dianetics" is a book by l. ron hubbard, regarding scientology, which is very obviously bogus to very many people. but don't tell that to john travolta.
You said that the bible does not have to be all truthfull and that you dont worship it. Well nethier do I, but I would not follow a religon if its teachings were part wrong and part right just like I would not put a celling fan up over my bed if part of the directions to put it up where wrong. It is also like a bridge. You cant go over a bridge that is half built.
yet you do.
want another one of the top of my head? give me the name of jesus's (earthly) grandfather on joseph's side. what does luke say? what does matthew say? moreover, compare matthew's early half of the genealogy to chronicles. why does matthew skip a few? and why is luke's 15 whole generations longer (not counting pre-david)?
both of these authors though this point was important enough to include, and ONE of them HAS to be wrong. now compare that to paul's view:
quote:
1Ti 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: [so do].
which do you agree with? all three can't be right. two have to be wrong. personally, and it sickens me to no end to say this, i agree with paul here, at least in part. i differ in that i think questions are useful. they let us know to take the bible with a bit of a grain of salt.
so now suppose that both genealogies are just made up as paul implies. does that affect the truth that god loves us?
The Bible says that god is truthfull.
it also reports god in a lie, and quotes god as sending a lying spirit to speak on his behalf. which do you believe?
The Bible is Gods WORD.
nope. guess again?
the bible is a collection of documents regarding and relating to one specific god, whom you and i hold to be the only god. it is composed of many different sources, all written down by fallible men, combined and compiled and editted by fallible men, and translated by fallible men. if you really want i can point out scribal mistakes in the masoretic hebrew thousands of years old...
the bible may contain inspiration from god, or even some of his words, but being his word, definitive and complete and inerrant? well, i've already proven that wrong 3 or 4 times in this thread alone. you should pay more attention.
And if even just a part of the Bible is wrong that means God lied. But he dosent lie because he is a God of truth.
quote:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
that was a lie, wasn't it? adam didn't die that day, he lived another 590 years. and don't tell me it's not, because i am VERY thankful for that lie. don't get me wrong, i'm not implying god's judgement was wrong, or that lying to his children is somehow bad. it was obviously the right thing to do. but god is very much above our morality. so what if god lies?
doesn't mean doesn't exist or that we shouldn't have faith in him. what choice do we have?
I also dont think that the apostles would have lied or made something up. Why? Because they would have had nothing to gain from it.
actually, churches are the best tax-exempt sources of income (ask l. ron hubbard). paul had EVERYTHING to gain by lying.
Unlike Mohammed who lived the rich and carefree life after he proclaimed himself as a prophet of Allah, but the apostles died terrable deaths just like Jesus and where not anywhere close to rich or even middle class.
saul was rich before he became paul. yeah, the romans executed christians and such. but apparently the biblical accounts are a little distorted. the roman were well known for tolerance: they let jewish observers refrain from roman temple tributes, let them use their own coinage in their own temples, allowed them certain things for their holy laws, etc. while they didn't view the new christian church as legitimate, there were no practices that outright provoked attack other than refusal to observe roman practices. people were never killed just because they were christians, but because they didn't pay their taxes.
this is why the nt takes a very apologetic view on the romans, and tries to convince followers to go with rome (give unto caeser). in a judaic view, a true messiah would have lead a military uprising against roman occupation. but it was really only the dissidents and not the majority that were looking for any such messiah at all.
And i dont think they would have gone along with it if they were making it up. They probobly would have renounced there beleifs if they had made it up. Plus these guys were Jews and i dont think they would be hatefull or antisemistic.
don't look at me, i didn't write the books.
and they were not jews, they were FORMER jews. the antisemitism began when the christian church separated from the judaism. it would not have been around at the time of christ.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Swift, posted 12-07-2004 10:36 PM Swift has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Swift, posted 12-08-2004 11:35 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 43 of 215 (166106)
12-08-2004 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by macaroniandcheese
12-08-2004 2:41 AM


Re: The one whom Jesus loved....
yes *scrunches nose*
ashtar too. he started it, actually.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-08-2004 2:41 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 44 of 215 (166109)
12-08-2004 2:59 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Swift
12-07-2004 10:36 PM


identifying the koran and the book or mormon as religious texts that many people believe in does not in any way state a belief in the texts. the point of his comment was that using new testament verses to prove to a jew that jesus is the messiah is about as useful as using verses in the mormon text to prove to you that joseph smith actually had scrolls that weren't just pages from the egyptian book of the dead.
oh and since when does the financial well-being of the members of a religion have any bearing on the verity of that religion? i know a whole lot of really rich christians. in fact. there's this one christian who is so rich that he ran an oil company into the ground but could still afford to run for president, TWICE!
oh yes. btw. if you paste your posts into word or another word processor, you can spellcheck them and then seem just that much more credible.
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 12-08-2004 03:09 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Swift, posted 12-07-2004 10:36 PM Swift has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by arachnophilia, posted 12-08-2004 3:15 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied
 Message 53 by Swift, posted 12-08-2004 11:42 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 45 of 215 (166116)
12-08-2004 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Swift
12-07-2004 10:36 PM


i thought jesus was god's word... that's what john says...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Swift, posted 12-07-2004 10:36 PM Swift has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by arachnophilia, posted 12-08-2004 3:17 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied
 Message 54 by Swift, posted 12-08-2004 11:47 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024