Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


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


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The "Gospel" Of John
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 106 of 215 (167461)
12-12-2004 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by dpardo
12-11-2004 1:13 PM


Although Jesus did forgive sins during his ministry, his death serves as a perpetual atonement for sin.
i've already demonstrated that jesus neither fits the requirement for atonement, nor can sin be forgiven before being committed, nor does salvation depend on being death and/or perfection.
there is no strict judaic base for modern christianity. it doesn't line up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by dpardo, posted 12-11-2004 1:13 PM dpardo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 6:28 PM arachnophilia has replied

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


Message 107 of 215 (167465)
12-12-2004 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by dpardo
12-11-2004 1:21 PM


This is just what we need- a Christian posting alleged contradictions.
i alleged no such thing. i pointed out what the bible says. i never once said that i thought it was contradictory, because i don't think it is. it's not fault that what the bible says about god doesn't fit your frame of mind.
Please post a new thread and I will address all of your "contradictions".
that post was discussed at length in that thread. i'm not really interested in arguing about whether or not god told the israelites to steal, and whether god killed millions of innocent children. any idiot can open bible and read that story.
What strikes me, sometimes, is how people (not referring to you) are able to "google" alleged contradictions but can't seem to "google" answers to their alleged contradictions which takes the same amount of time.
none of those were googled. they all come from reading the bible, and familiarity with the bible. and like i believe i said in the post, 90% of those came from the first 4 books. that's not a lot of reading, you know. it's not my fault that i'm capable of examining the text with a critical mind. god gave me the gift of a brain, i like to use it sometimes.
i've also spent time thinking about the answer to this "problem." but you (and swift) don't seem to like it: god is greater than his own morality, and not bound by the laws of men. it's not our place to judge the actions of god, because he is god.
so what if god lied? or killed people? that's his job, and he does what's in the best interest of whole, often at the cost of the few. that's just the way the world works, and just the way god made things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by dpardo, posted 12-11-2004 1:21 PM dpardo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 6:39 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 130 by dpardo, posted 12-13-2004 6:02 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4678 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 108 of 215 (167466)
12-12-2004 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by arachnophilia
12-12-2004 6:04 PM


Re: separate from God?
There is nothing original in my thought. I'm just representing Buddhist and Advaitist teaching and also non dualist of many persuassions including a few contemplative Christians and Sufis. If that line of though interests you there are lots of resources to explore it further.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 6:04 PM arachnophilia has not replied

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


Message 109 of 215 (167467)
12-12-2004 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by dpardo
12-11-2004 1:28 PM


Joseph's biological father's name is Heli.
quote:
Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
what's the name of (joseph and the technicolor dreamcoat) joseph's father? jacob. interesting. note that you can't hold this "begat" to mean adopted by marriage, otherwise jesus might not be god's biological son.
Note how the genealogy's diverge after David.
note how one is FIFTEEN GENERATIONS longer than the other? note how matthew's doesn't line up with chronicles? sorry, ONE of those three texts has to be in error.
Although Solomon and Nathan are both sons of David, only one is heir to the throne.
the messiah, by tradition (if not text) has to be an heir to david's throne. luke's text only seems to be concerned with being from the line of david, not being an heir. interesting.
This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 12-12-2004 07:38 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by dpardo, posted 12-11-2004 1:28 PM dpardo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by AdminJar, posted 12-12-2004 6:49 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
Swift
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 215 (167470)
12-12-2004 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by arachnophilia
12-12-2004 6:07 PM


i've already demonstrated that jesus neither fits the requirement for atonement, nor can sin be forgiven before being committed, nor does salvation depend on being death and/or perfection.
yes but you miss the point.
Jesus=salvation from etenal seperation from god.
We ask God to forgive or sins when we have sinned and Jesus made this possible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 6:07 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 7:45 PM Swift has replied

  
Swift
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 215 (167475)
12-12-2004 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by arachnophilia
12-12-2004 6:16 PM


laws of men.
the 10 commandments are laws of God.
uh, no, i'm the one sticking to the bible here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 6:16 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by AdminJar, posted 12-12-2004 6:48 PM Swift has not replied
 Message 116 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 7:40 PM Swift has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 215 (167479)
12-12-2004 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Swift
12-12-2004 6:39 PM


Head back towards John Folk
we seem to be wandering fur afield.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 6:39 PM Swift has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 215 (167481)
12-12-2004 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by arachnophilia
12-12-2004 6:23 PM


Back towards John folk
Interesting stuff but is it moving us away from the issue of the Gospel of 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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 6:23 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Nighttrain, posted 12-12-2004 7:06 PM AdminJar has not replied
 Message 117 by arachnophilia, posted 12-12-2004 7:42 PM AdminJar has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 114 of 215 (167489)
12-12-2004 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by AdminJar
12-12-2004 6:49 PM


Re: Back towards John folk
S.O.P. for EvC, Jar. That`s why we pay you those enormous salaries.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by AdminJar, posted 12-12-2004 6:49 PM AdminJar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by lfen, posted 12-12-2004 7:56 PM Nighttrain has not replied

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


Message 115 of 215 (167506)
12-12-2004 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Swift
12-12-2004 12:57 AM


it's a sign delivered to be delivered to ahaz in specific.
Prove it!
glady. i'll break it down nice and simple. (spacing and brackets mine)
quote:
Isaiah 7:10-14
And the LORD spoke again unto Ahaz, saying: "Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God: ask it either in the depth, or in the height above."
But Ahaz said: "I will not ask, neither will I try the LORD."
And he [Isaiah] said: "Hear ye now, O house of David [King Ahaz]: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that ye will weary my God also? Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you [King Ahaz] a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel..."
and then it goes on to talk about assyria.
the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
That means they wont be there when it happens. Good job.
the verse, one more time.
quote:
Isa 7:16 For before the child [Immanuel] shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
i don't know how to make this any more clear. they're saying that before the child even reaches his bar mitzvah, the kings will be gone.
uh, no, i'm the one sticking to the bible here.
but yet you say its harasy.
good luck with that.
the gospel of john, yes. and i will and have defended that position with what? the bible.
i am not giving up anything
Ok. you give him your soul. work for you. probbly not.
give god my soul? he gave it to me. my soul is of god.
[you've chosen one of multiple ways to read this. what sounds more probable to me is that jesus is refering to god by name, and] it got mistranslated [(since god's name does mean "i am")]
prove it
this is not something that can be proven. rather, i was asserting that there other ways to read the text that you seem to have missed.
jesus's life was more important
HOW!
you sir are a discredit to christianity. love your enemy? compassion? do unto others? these aren't important? his teaching and his message meant nothing, so long as he died? jesus is not a lamb, he was a person. he did more than just get led to slaughter.
in fact, there are gospels that don't even record his death. i've read one of them.
He said he was God. and its in the bible.
yes, in john. this is the topic being addressed. look, even if he was god, and became man, being a jewish man, he would still be held to god's law, even if he himself wrote those laws. for him to be the sinless sacrificial lamb christianity claims he is, that would include not breaking god's law, even if he is god. and that includes not walking around claiming to be god. even if he is god.
quite simply, to the letter of the law, it is blasphemy. do you want to believe in a christ who broke the laws of god? john records blasphemy, and this the exact reason we are having this debate.
Ill let people draw there own conclusions.
no you won't. i've drawn my own conclusions, and that's what we're arguing now, isn't it?
It also seems he is talking about someone else besides the king since the king has never fallen from heaven caus no human has came from heaven.
it's called a metaphor. ever read genesis 11, the tower of babel? king nebuchadnezzar, whom is the king in question if i recall correctly, rebuilt that tower during the lifetime of isaiah. the tower was said to reach to the heavens (sky skraper, stairway to heaven, etc) and it was the glory of the babylonian empire.
talking about crushing babylon would mean the tower falling from the heavens it reached to, and the king (refered to as a star) falling with it. see? symbolism.
insert a 911 reference if you like, since that was more or less their goal too.
how does one turn their back on themselves? go practice that for a while.
You put human limitaions on God.
if we're gonna say "throw logic to the wind" then just say it. belief is irrational, after all. but face it, either there is a separation, or their isn't. if jesus was separated from god, then he is separate from god.
. good job. and i didnt mean he leteraly turned his back on Jesus.
it's called a joke. they idea of the humor was me thinking of you spinning in circles on the floor, like homer simpson trying to read the writing on the back of his head.
ya in the KJV! Stay focused!
are we debating translations now?
my text says "blameless." but more over, as i've explained innumerable times, the context indicates that the word means "without sin." read the book. most of it's an argument between job and his friends about whether or not he has sinned. job asserts that he as not, consistent with the first two chapters.
clearly, if job did sin or had sinned in the past, he would have accepted his punishment.
do you read greek?
personally, no. hebrew is the next laguage i need to learn. but i've heard several opinions on meaning of the word we translate as "betray" by people who do speak greek.
Jacob. Today we have son in laws. back then tho when they married into that famly they just called him son. Joseph was Heli's son in law.
take it up with dpardo, he disagrees. although i think you have a better chance at being right than he does. apocryphal literature agress with you, at least, and matthew indicates actual parentage where luke is just a list.
quote:
the son of Joseph, which was [the son] of Heli
now, of heli could mean of the house of heli. but either way, that's not how marriage works. son in law would be a completely different word. rather, it says "ioseph tou eli, tou matthat, tou levi, tou..." etc.
i've seen some opinion that it COULD be saying (because of the lack of the preposition on jospeh) that the genealogical sequence begans at heli, joseph being a paranthetical asside. meaning, the verse would read like this "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed the son of Joseph) of Heli..." etc. which is, btw, what the text says. but the meaning changes completey depending on where you but the parentheses.
i dunno, but this sounds offtopic. make another thread we'll discuss there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 12:57 AM Swift has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by dpardo, posted 12-13-2004 6:05 PM arachnophilia has replied

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


Message 116 of 215 (167507)
12-12-2004 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Swift
12-12-2004 6:39 PM


laws of men.
the 10 commandments are laws of God.
of in the sense of application, not authorship. or, if you like, consider it a typo and replace "of" with the word "for"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 6:39 PM Swift has not replied

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


Message 117 of 215 (167510)
12-12-2004 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by AdminJar
12-12-2004 6:49 PM


Re: Back towards John folk
Interesting stuff but is it moving us away from the issue of the Gospel of John?
i agree. john contains no genealogies, curiously. swift can make a new thread if he wants; i don't feel like discussing it much anymore. i've made my points.
This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 12-12-2004 07:42 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by AdminJar, posted 12-12-2004 6:49 PM AdminJar has not replied

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


Message 118 of 215 (167511)
12-12-2004 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Swift
12-12-2004 6:28 PM


yes but you miss the point.
no, i've been fed "the point" for 8 years, every sunday. it has ceased to make sense. i have not missed any point, rather i am addressing and refuting them.
Jesus=salvation from etenal seperation from god.
no argument at the moment.
We ask God to forgive or sins when we have sinned and Jesus made this possible.
so what you're saying is that god can't just forgive us when we sin? or that forgiveness cannot be granted after some form of personal atonement? is god not all-powerful now? christ, even jesus forgave sins.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 6:28 PM Swift has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Swift, posted 12-12-2004 11:07 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 132 by dpardo, posted 12-13-2004 6:12 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4678 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 119 of 215 (167514)
12-12-2004 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Nighttrain
12-12-2004 7:06 PM


Re: Back towards John folk
S.O.P. for EvC, Jar. That`s why we pay you those enormous salaries.
Har Har! er, um , Hear, Hear. It's a tough job and I thank you Admins all for doing it, better you than me.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Nighttrain, posted 12-12-2004 7:06 PM Nighttrain has not replied

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


Message 120 of 215 (167515)
12-12-2004 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by dpardo
12-11-2004 4:23 PM


who am i?
Who is Arachnophilia that I should take his word over the clear teaching of scripture?
i don't see anything clear about scripture, and i think i've made that perfectly clear. you seem to forget that i've been quoting too. my questions and concerns with the book of john are soundly based in scripture.
i think the question is, who is john that i should take his words over the clear teaching of scripture?
and who knows, maybe i had a vision of jesus in a car accident on the highway to las vegas, and he told me to be his messenger and set the record straight.
i mean, it worked for paul, right?
Are you Arachnophilia's disciple?
and yet, ironically, arachnophilia is a disciple of the scripture.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by dpardo, posted 12-11-2004 4:23 PM dpardo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by dpardo, posted 12-13-2004 6:15 PM arachnophilia 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