Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
GDR writes:
My thought isn't that they were executed and the story evolved from there, but that the apostles claimed it to be God's will that they be executed, and so it isn't that great a stretch to see it evolving to the idea that God killed them.
The apostles murdered a married couple?
Well, true or not, whatever really happened, the story paints a horrible and murderous picture of the early church.
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
The fact that Luke the writer of Acts says Ananias lied and that Peter is quoted saying he lied are the evidence.
Why are you having trouble understanding that Peter is just a character in Luke's story? Author and character are not two different witnesses. When Luke relates that Peter said such and so, that doesn't mean that two people affirm what Peter said. And when you say that Luke said that Peter said such and so, that doesn't mean that three people affirm what Peter said. Why is this so difficult for you?
The point we were discussing, the one you're ignoring, is that you cannot quote any Biblical passage where Ananias lies. All you can do is make up things that aren't there. Your reasoning is, "The Bible is inerrant, this passage would make no sense unless Ananias lied, so therefore he must have lied but Like chose not to mention it." But we know the Bible we have is not inerrant, and there is no evidence that the originals were free of error, either (and in any case they are not available) - that's just something you believe, or in the case of the Chicago Statement, something they affirm without evidence. Your fantasy that there's such a thing as inerrancy causes you to ignore other possibilities, such as that Ananias didn't lie and Peter was wrong to say he did, or that the author erred, or that the account is a work of fiction.
The story itself gives a horrible impression of the early church, where breaking a promise to the church community is punishable by death carried out personally by God himself. These are two reasons for not believing it: it's obviously made up to scare church members, and if there were such a thing as a loving God he wouldn't murder people, and especially not for minor transgressions. He set a pretty low bar - if the penalty for breaking a promise is death, then what greater penalty could he find for major transgressions like murder?
Lying to the Holy Spirit is no minor offense.
You can't quote a passage where Ananias lied to anyone, and Sapphira lied to Peter, not the Holy Spirit:
quote:Matthew 5: 7About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8Peter asked her, Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?
Yes, she said, that is the price.
I affirm to the Holy Spirit that I accept Jesus Christ into my heart as Lord and Savior. Gee, I'm still here.
Every time your religious beliefs are tested in the real world, such as claiming the rapture will occur on a certain date, or that lying the Holy Spirit is a capital offense, they fail.
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
People who think the Bible is fictional have no sense whatever of what it takes to write fiction, no sense of the different qualities of fiction versus reportage etc.
That's ironic coming from somebody who thinks a talking snake is "reportage".
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Phat writes:
Im just telling you that messenger and message are equally important...
ringo writes:
Think about what you're saying. The letter and the envelope are equally important?
The envelope contains the letter. The letter is from someone who put it in the envelope.
The messenger contains the message. The message is from Someone Who put It In The Messenger.
You cant simply claim that any envelope can just as easily hold your letter. One envelope addressed to YOU was sent.
One Messenger sent to "whosoever" was sent. The messenger is the message, for the messenger contains the message. Now that we have that out of the way......
Sounds like a club I wouldn't necessarily favor joining...kinda like joining the Navy Seals or the Marines. You claim that I want to belong to a club where I don't even accept the message. But this is not true.
I'm not as stingy as you think...I'm just selective over how I give. Granted I don't give enough. I'm scared of being broke. I don't trust that I will be taken care of.
I'm curious what your little town is like up there in Canada. Is the library within walking distance from your house? Where do the locals gather to socialize?
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Percy writes:
The apostles murdered a married couple?
I know, but I don't find it that surprising. We see in Acts 1 that the first apostles were still thinking that now that Jesus is back that he would lead a revolution to get rid of the Romans. As we can see all through the Gospels these guys were very slow to understand that a revolution was to be fought with entirely different weapons that what they envisioned. As I said earlier this still around the time that Saul was involved in the stoning of Stephen.
Don't forget, the culture at the time wasn't that much different than what we can see in the ISIS today. However when it comes to revolution Jesus taught that the Romans simply embodied the real enemy, and that the real enemy behind it all is evil and the weapon against evil is what Paul writes about in Ephesians 6
quote:10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. 18 And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.
Percy writes:
Well, true or not, whatever really happened, the story paints a horrible and murderous picture of the early church.
Agreed
He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
I thought you merely chose to base your Christian beliefs on what you think the Bible says about Jesus as The Word of God. But there's a lot more you change to suit yourself than that, isn't there? The passage says clearly that Ananias and Sapphira simply fell down and died, nobody killed them.
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
I thought you merely chose to base your Christian beliefs on what you think the Bible says about Jesus as The Word of God. But there's a lot more you change to suit yourself than that, isn't there? The passage says clearly that Ananias and Sapphira simply fell down and died, nobody killed them.
I could say simply that it is raining cats and digs. The simple explanation isn't always the right one. I replied to Percy a little earlier in the thread about this.
He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Luke and Peter are separate individuals, both referred to in other books of the New Testament.
I don't need to have Ananias tell a lie, it is quite enough that Luke reports it and Peter chides him for it.
Your horrible impression of the early church is ridiculous. First of all it's based on your refusal to accept what the account actually says, that lying to the Holy Spirit is the reason the couple died. Second their death is said to have had a salutary effect on the church in that it increased fear of God which is the beginning of wisdom.
A and S lied to God in the context of claiming to be believers during the formation of the Church of Jesus Christ. Other people lie to God all the time. If you don't repent you'll eventually have to see that it's not a trivial sin.
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
It is only when you leave it to speak for itself and don't impose your own opinions on it that you have any chance of understanding it.
I know you can't see this Faith, but you are imposing your opinions on the Bible. It is your opinion that the Bible is inerrant and you use that opinion to understand scripture. It is you who are doing what you accuse me of doing.
You're right that I can't see this at all. Very strange that an attitude of refusing to impose one's own will on the text is interpreted as imposing one's will on the text.
I understand scripture based on the opinion that the Bible is correct when it says that it is Jesus that is the Word of God. The bible says that the Word was made flesh not a book. Therefore I understand scripture by reading it through the lens of the teachings of Jesus.
Odd that you can think there's anything legitimate about that approach to scripture. Odd that you can so easily ignore that the scripture itself identifies itself as "God breathed." Odd that you don't care a whit what the main teachers of the Church have to say about it, you are willing to put your own opinion above theirs. Odd that you think you believe in God but haven't a shred of fear of God in any of your dealings with His Word.
He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
There's no justice in your attitude to the scripture; there is no love either since you don't mind preaching your own opinion to other people who might be misled by it, and you certainly haven't the slightest humility toward the history of Christianity. the majoirty of believers, or God Himself. With Whom you most certainly do not "walk."
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
You're replying to Ringo's Message 754 but actually quoting and responding to his Message 283, which you already replied to twice about a month and a half ago. Way to be confusing.
Phat writes:
Phat writes:
Im just telling you that messenger and message are equally important...
ringo writes:
Think about what you're saying. The letter and the envelope are equally important?
The envelope contains the letter. The letter is from someone who put it in the envelope.
The messenger contains the message. The message is from Someone Who put It In The Messenger.
You cant simply claim that any envelope can just as easily hold your letter. One envelope addressed to YOU was sent.
One Messenger sent to "whosoever" was sent. The messenger is the message, for the messenger contains the message. Now that we have that out of the way......
Except in the case of a person speaking his message, such as in your Churchill video, or in the case of a person writing a message and then delivering it himself, the composer of the message is not also the messenger. A common saying makes the other context clear: "Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger."
Given that you're responding to a message from so long ago, I can't figure out what you're getting at.
Sounds like a club I wouldn't necessarily favor joining...kinda like joining the Navy Seals or the Marines. You claim that I want to belong to a club where I don't even accept the message. But this is not true.
I'd say it another way than Ringo. Significant parts of your religion's message are toxic for you, but you're sticking with it anyway because you can't imagine doing anything else. Imagine no religion, no heaven, no hell, no arbitrary rules of right and wrong.
I'm not as stingy as you think...I'm just selective over how I give. Granted I don't give enough. I'm scared of being broke. I don't trust that I will be taken care of.
Financial stuff is no joke. Take care of yourself first. You probably give too much, half the charities out there are probably mismanaged, and a good proportion of the ministries out there asking you to send them money are frauds. You are old enough to remember the heyday of the religious fraudsters, like Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert. If you're giving away any meaningful amount of money then you're probably being played.
AbE:
If you haven't already watched this, watch it now:
Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
quote:
You've never heard of One and Two Peter? You've never noticed him being quoted in the gospels?
None of those mention the story of Ananias or Sapphira, do they ? Not that quotes in the Gospels can be counted as coming direct from Peter (Mark may be based on material derived from Peter but it is still not direct). Nor can 1 and 2 Peter be safely accounted to be actually written by the disciple.
If you want to claim Peter as a source you certainly need something that came direct from him - not a story that came from an unknown source.
quote:
And do you really need me to reword this to say that I don't need the Book of Acts to REPORT Ananias telling a lie etc etc etc.
I certainly think that if you simply failed to understand how evidence was assessed you should at the least have a direct statement that Ananias lied in the Book of Acts to claim Luke as a source independent of the statement attributed to Peter. To imply that you did have such a statement when the fact that there is none had been an important point in the recent discussion seems suspect at best.
If you were honest you would admit that you only have the Book of Acts as a source for the story, and that only has Peter saying that Ananias lied. Even the absurd rules of Biblical Inerrancy allow that Peter could be wrong. So you have neither the Book of Acts reporting that Ananias has lied, nor do you have any report from Peter concerning the matter.
So, yes, I think you should reword both parts of your claim. You have neither Peter nor the Book of Acts reporting that Ananias lied. Only that the Book of Acts says that Peter accused Ananias of lying - without any mention of what Ananias is supposed to have said.
™ Version 4.2
