Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8870 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-15-2018 9:52 PM
279 online now:
JonF, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), ramoss, Tanypteryx (4 members, 275 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 840,321 Year: 15,144/29,783 Month: 1,088/1,502 Week: 86/492 Day: 49/37 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
7071
72
73747576Next
Author Topic:   Importance of Original Sin
Phat
Member
Posts: 11300
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1066 of 1129 (840794)
10-04-2018 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1061 by ringo
10-04-2018 11:38 AM


Re: Jaywill first (Faith's points later,but not her ad hominems against unbelievers
Ok explain whom i would hypothetically or actually sign my possessions over to?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1061 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 11:38 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1068 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 12:20 PM Phat has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1067 of 1129 (840795)
10-04-2018 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1065 by Faith
10-04-2018 12:12 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
Faith writes:

I represent the history of Christian thought on this one...


That's an argument from popularity, which is worth nothing.

But as I've said, I don't believe you anyway. There are some apologists who interpret the passage as you do but you haven't given us any reason to think that that interpretation is as popular as you claim.

Faith writes:

... though and you represent nothing but your own misreading of the text.


You have failed to show that I am misreading the text. All you've done is ignore the parts of the text that you don't like.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1065 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 12:12 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1069 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 12:50 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 1068 of 1129 (840796)
10-04-2018 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1066 by Phat
10-04-2018 12:14 PM


Re: Jaywill first (Faith's points later,but not her ad hominems against unbelievers
Phat writes:

Ok explain whom i would hypothetically or actually sign my possessions over to?


There's a book called the Bible:
quote:
Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

It's really frustrating that you so-called "believers" have no clue about the book you pretend to believe in.


And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1066 by Phat, posted 10-04-2018 12:14 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1077 by Phat, posted 10-04-2018 3:15 PM ringo has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 29820
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 1069 of 1129 (840802)
10-04-2018 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1067 by ringo
10-04-2018 12:16 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
I've now looked up four reputable commentaries on this passage and they all disagree with you, saying Ananias and Sapphira had the right to dispose of their property as they pleased and that they were punished for lying to God about it: David Guzik at Blue Letter Bible, Jamieson Fausset and Browne at Blue Letter Bible, Matthew Henry at Blue Letter Bible, and John Gill. Gill and Henry go back a couple of centuries, JF &B go back about a century, and Guzik is a contemporary. I can't link to the commentaries at BLB so you'd have to look them up yourself (go to link and then "tools."), but I can link to John Gill.

This is from J F and B:

4. While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?--from which we see how purely voluntary were all these sacrifices for the support of the infant community.

This is from John Gill:

Whiles it remained, was it not thine own
Before it was sold, it was his own proper estate; he had the sole propriety in it, and could have kept it, or disposed of it as he pleased: he was not obliged to sell it, he might have kept it as his own property; for selling of possessions at this time was a voluntary thing; it was what no man was forced to; it was a pure act of liberality, and what was not enjoined by the apostles; every man was left to his liberty.

And after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?
that is, the price for which it was sold: before he had declared that he sold it, in order to give the whole of it to the church, had brought it to the apostles as the whole; it was in his own power to dispose of, as he pleased, whether to give the whole, or a part of it, or it. He might have kept it all if he had thought fit, or have given what portion he pleased.

The point has been clear enough all along but with these notable Christian opinions you really need to concede the point.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1067 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 12:16 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1070 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:00 PM Faith has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1070 of 1129 (840804)
10-04-2018 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1069 by Faith
10-04-2018 12:50 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
Faith writes:

I've now looked up four reputable commentaries on this passage and they all disagree with you, saying Ananias and Sapphira had the right to dispose of their property as they pleased and that they were punished for lying to God about it: David Guzik at Blue Letter Bible, Jamieson Fausset and Browne at Blue Letter Bible, Matthew Henry at Blue Letter Bible, and John Gill.


What you quote doesn't disagree with me. I have already said that Ananias and Sapphira had a legal right to do what they chose with their property - i.e. they had the free will to obey God or disobey Him. They freely chose to disobey - and the disobedience was clearly in holding back the money and lying about it.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1069 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 12:50 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1071 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 1:10 PM ringo has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 29820
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 1071 of 1129 (840807)
10-04-2018 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1070 by ringo
10-04-2018 1:00 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
Obviously you do NOT agree with them as all the commentaries clearly say they were NOT in disobedience in holding back the money. I'm done with this.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1070 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:00 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1072 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:17 PM Faith has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1072 of 1129 (840809)
10-04-2018 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1071 by Faith
10-04-2018 1:10 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
What you quoted said that they had a legal right to hold back the money. I agree with that, I always have and I have said so explicitly. But legality is irrelevant, as I have also said, and you seem to agree.

The only thing we disagree on is that you insist on ignoring the bloody obvious fact that Ananias and Sapphira were punished for holding back the money and lying about it. It's right there in the text. I've quoted it so many times that everybody reading this thread will have it memorized by now. I don't know how you can pervert the Bible by just pretending it isn't there. It is there. Why would it be there if you're just supposed to ignore it?


And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1071 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 1:10 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1073 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 1:21 PM ringo has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 29820
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 1073 of 1129 (840810)
10-04-2018 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1072 by ringo
10-04-2018 1:17 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
YOU ARE MISREADING THAT AND ALL THE COMMENTARIES DISAGREE WITH YOU ABOUT IT. THEY WERE NOT PUNISHED FOR HOLDING BACK THE MONEY, AS ALL THE COMMENTARIES EXPLICITLY SAY. THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR THINKINJG AND I'M FED UP WITH IT.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1072 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:17 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1074 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:33 PM Faith has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1074 of 1129 (840811)
10-04-2018 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1073 by Faith
10-04-2018 1:21 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
Faith writes:

THEY WERE NOT PUNISHED FOR HOLDING BACK THE MONEY...


Why did Peter say, "and to keep back part of the price of the land"? Why do you keep pretending that he didn't say it? Nothing that you quoted from your precious commentaries addresses that.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1073 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 1:21 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1075 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 1:59 PM ringo has responded
 Message 1078 by Phat, posted 10-04-2018 3:21 PM ringo has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 29820
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


(1)
Message 1075 of 1129 (840812)
10-04-2018 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1074 by ringo
10-04-2018 1:33 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
In context it cannot possibly mean that they were punished for it whatever Peter meant. All he could have meant is that they were morally wrong to hold back the money, but since they were not legally wrong to do it; since they were "under no obligation" to give it all; since Peter goes on to insist on their having complete authority over their possessions; since the giving was voluntary and not obligatory as the commentators all agree; and since Peter explicitly says their sin was lying to God, then it simply does not mean their holding on to some of the money was the cause of their punishment. Their pretending they weren't holding on to it and llying about it was the cause of their death. You are insisting on your own interpretation of one phrase that is contradicted by the whole context.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1074 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:33 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1076 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 2:15 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1076 of 1129 (840815)
10-04-2018 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1075 by Faith
10-04-2018 1:59 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
Faith writes:

since Peter explicitly says their sin was lying to God...


But he doesn't. He explicitly adds, "and to keep back part of the price of the land." He makes no distinction between the two transgressions. Why would he say it if you're just supposed to ignore it?

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1075 by Faith, posted 10-04-2018 1:59 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11300
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1077 of 1129 (840820)
10-04-2018 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1068 by ringo
10-04-2018 12:20 PM


Giving It All Away
ringo writes:

It's really frustrating that you so-called "believers" have no clue about the book you pretend to believe in.

I also believe in reality. I have yet to meet even one Christian (or anyone, for that matter) who has simply given everything away. I'll concede the point to you, but agree with Faith that what was told to the rich young ruler was not something that everyone needed to literally do. He had great wealth and it was this wealth and attitude towards it that was keeping him from the 100% goal. Did Jesus ever tell the Roman Centurion to sell everything? Apart from His Disciples, did He even need to preach such a message to crowds of largely poor folks? Most of them had nothing anyway.

I wont argue with you on this one, however. I dont plan on selling the only house I have anytime soon, however. Based on your interpretation, no Christian would ever own anything.Thank God my Dad never believed that way!


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1068 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 12:20 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1079 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 3:26 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11300
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1078 of 1129 (840825)
10-04-2018 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1074 by ringo
10-04-2018 1:33 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
There really are two ways to look at this.
I: The believers were in communion and agreement.
Acts 2:44-46 writes:


44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts.

Thus to be a member of the club, one couldn't own anything apart from the needs of that group. That much I can see. Faiths argument, if I interpret it correctly, is that God does not expect every Christian on Earth to have everything in common and own nothing. That's just the wishes of a dreamy Canadian Socialist.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1074 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 1:33 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1080 by ringo, posted 10-04-2018 3:34 PM Phat has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1079 of 1129 (840827)
10-04-2018 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1077 by Phat
10-04-2018 3:15 PM


Re: Giving It All Away
Phat writes:

Did Jesus ever tell the Roman Centurion to sell everything?


Does every storry have to make every point? If you can find one story in the Bible that doesn't condemn sin, is that enough of a loophole to satisfy you?

Phat writes:

Apart from His Disciples, did He even need to preach such a message to crowds of largely poor folks? Most of them had nothing anyway.


Exactly.

Isn't the fact that the early churches practiced communal ownership enough to suggest that that was Jesus' message?

Phat writes:

Based on your interpretation, no Christian would ever own anything.


quote:
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1077 by Phat, posted 10-04-2018 3:15 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1080 of 1129 (840829)
10-04-2018 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 1078 by Phat
10-04-2018 3:21 PM


Re: This is how it is supposed to be interpreted
Phat writes:

Faiths argument...


is in direct contradiction of what the Bible says. Apologists can try to weasel out of it but it says what it says.

In all fairness, the early church apparently expected to be zapped up to heaven in their lifetime, so you could use that as an excuse to treat it as a short-term measure. If you can ignore what Peter said, you should also be able to double-think yourself into believing that two thousand years is too long for communal ownership but long enough for one generation.


And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1078 by Phat, posted 10-04-2018 3:21 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1081 by Phat, posted 10-04-2018 3:40 PM ringo has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
7071
72
73747576Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018