The Tension of Faith

Matt 5:27-28

quote:

---

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

---

Matt 5 21-22

quote:

---

"You have heard that it was said to an older generation, 'Do not murder,' and 'whoever murders will be subjected to judgment.' But I say to you that anyone who is angry with a brother will be subjected to judgment.

---

I assume this is to what Faith is referring.

It's God's own commentary. He is making clear what the commandments cover. All Christians take "kill" to mean murder and always have. Yes, we ALL either obey them or violate them in any particular instance, the point is those are the only two options, we do not have the option of changing their meaning. And as I already said we all violate all of them them every day.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

dup Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't think you can make such a blanket statement about all witnesses in all circumstances. And there's nothing particularly difficult about what John or any of the NT writers report of the miracles to suppose error through some sort of mental fog.Water turned to wine? How many ways could that be distorted by this supposed mental fog? Do you suppose it really didn't change at all or maybe turned to apple juice? A lifelong lame man walking? A lifelong blind man seeing? Give me a break.The circumstances of Jesus' ministry were electrifying enough to be vividly imprinted on everyone's memory. But the main problem with your argument is that any description that was faulty had dozens or even hundreds of witnesses ready and able to correct it. You seem to be imagining a lone witness such as might be the case in a court trial. The gospels would not have gone down as inerrant unless they passed all these tests.

God knows that when we think we always disobey. Disobedience is really the extent of our free will when it comes to the moral law. But of course I have not agreed with that at all. The commandments themselves are not as rigid as you think of them, they apply differently in different circumstances, not because of human interpretation but because that's God's definition of them. Acts of mercy are not a violation of the Sabbath commandment, by definition, not human determination. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I don't think you can make such a blanket statement about all witnesses in all circumstances. And there's nothing particularly difficult about what John or any of the NT writers report of the miracles to suppose error through some sort of mental fog.

---

It’s pretty much true. Everything written down DOES have to come via the senses and memory. I don’t see how you can deny that. (Maybe you can quibble on memory, but only in special cases that don’t apply). And the case that any Gospel was written by an eye-witness seems weak, which gives at least one more level of indirection.

quote:

---

Water turned to wine? How many ways could that be distorted by this supposed mental fog? Do you suppose it really didn't change at all or maybe turned to apple juice?

---

A trick - or an accident - switching the barrels, or maybe the water barrels only being used to cover while more supplies were obtained is one possibility. Add in the problems of memory and bias and it is quite possible. Or - if the author was not an eyewitness - it might be a parable taken for reality.

quote:

---

A lifelong lame man walking? A lifelong blind man seeing? Give me a break

---

The lifelong is just the sort of exaggeration that can creep into accounts. Whether their complaints were entirely physical (or even genuine) is unknown - if the cures happened at all. The Roman Emperor Vespasian is supposed to have miraculously cured the blind and the lame, too - it’s reported by Tacitus. I don’t believe that either.

quote:

---

The circumstances of Jesus' ministry were electrifying enough to be vividly imprinted on everyone's memory. Besides which, any description that was faulty had hundreds of witnesses ready and able to correct it. The gospels would not have gone down as inerrant unless they passed all these tests.

---

They didn’t go down as inerrant until long after they were written. Papias said that Mark’s Gospel got the order of events wrong. The author of Luke was willing to disagree with Mark - and quite possibly Matthew. The main argument hypothetical source Q is that the author of Luke wouldn’t *intentionally* disagree with Matthew as much as he did.Decades after the event leave plenty of time for legends to develop, for confabulation, exaggeration, confusion, for teachings to change and the changed teachings to be put into Jesus’ mouth.The Gospels just are not reliable sources for many things.

That's just a bunch of BS. For the gospels to have been taken as truth for two millennia means they were not contradicted by the many who could have. THERE WERE LOTS AND LOTS OF WITNESSES TO JESUS' MIRACULOUS ACTS, LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS, WHO PASSED ON THEIR TESTIMONY TO LOTS AND LOTS OF OTHERS.And the minor differences of perspective you insinuate but don't describe (by ONE writer?) --ABE: A different order of events????!!!! /abe-- hardly disqualify the general facts --ABE: THE IMPORTANT FACTS, THE TESTIMONY TO THE MIRACLES /ABE-- Are you kidding an accident? A trick? Switching pots? They were huge heavy clay pots by the way, not "barrels" What would possess anyone to try to invent a miracle out of such a thing and try to palm it off on the many witnesses who were there? -- what a bunch of arrogant creeps today's anti-Christians are --, and besides all you are doing is the usual curmudgeonly speculation, you don't know anything, it's all made up. Blech, yuck.Yes, lifelong.The writings went down as "inspired" in the early years if you don't like "inerrant," because they would not have been accepted into the early canon lists without that attestation of inspiration by the vast majority of the churches.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

That's just a bunch of BS. For the gospels to have been taken as truth for two millennia means they were not contradicted by the many who could have.

---

Since we know that they were contradicted - by quite early believers - it is your response that is BS.

quote:

---

THERE WERE LOTS AND LOTS OF WITNESSES TO JESUS' MIRACULOUS ACTS, LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS, WHO PASSED ON THEIR TESTIMONY TO LOTS AND LOTS OF OTHERS

---

Or so you assume. Let us not forget that - using the generally accepted dates - it is entirely possible that none of the Gospels were written before the Jewish revolt brought a devastating war to Judaea. Let us not forget that none of the Gospels cite any sources. Let us not forget that no independent source records even the most obvious miracles that supposedly occurred during Jesus’ life. Let us not forget that most Christians at they time would not even have been born when Jesus lived. Let us not forget that fiction can come to be taken for fact remarkably quickly as Arthur Machen’s story The Bowmen came to be mistaken as fact, as The Angels Of Mons - surely there were many eyewitnesses who could contradict that miracle - yet the story persisted.I could say more, but that seems sufficient.

quote:

---

And the minor differences of perspective you insinuate but don't describe (by ONE writer?) hardly disqualify the general facYs

---

The differences are quite significant. Enough to convince many scholars that the authors of Luke and Matthew had a common source, rather than Luke incorporating material from Matthew.

quote:

---

all you are doing is the usual curmudgeonly speculation, you don't know anything, it's all made up.

---

I am pointing out things that are likely to happen You are making things up.

quote:

---

The writings went down as "inspired" in the early years if you don't like "inerrant," because they would not have been accepted into the early canon lists without that attestation of inspiration by the vast majority of the churches.

---

It’s not that I don’t like inerrant it’s that they were NOT taken as inerrant in the early years. As for inspired - well why don’t you find out when they got that classification and what it was taken to mean before you start trying to claim that it is significant.

God expects us to think.The gift in Genesis 2&3 was the ability to know right from wrong. I pity the fool that thinks that is true. How utterly sad that position is.

I didn't claim it to be true. Is that what it takes to turn mere words into testimony and attestations, a mere declaration that it is true? Trump is in that case testifying and attesting to lies left and right.I called it an utterance, but when you echoed this back to me it became evidence and an attestation. It isn't.Click on the "Do Nothing Button" (as many times as you like). Evidence? John isn't quality reliable evidence, and then there's a whole diminishing scale of quality and reliability from a Christian perspective (apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, other ancient works, etc.), yet someone is, in your view, giving testimony and attesting to the truth of these words. Why imbue John with more credibility than, say, the Book of Enoch, which is pseudepigrapha for Protestants? I hope it isn't thought that works that say (sic), "I'm writing this to convince you," and, "Many people saw this," and, "Heed my words and you'll achieve eternal salvation," have more credibility than those that don't. I understand probability, but the numbers were invented, so the conclusions were, too.--Percy

As long as it does nothing when you click on it it is evidence that it does nothing. Should I click on it and it actually does something then that is clear and direct evidence that it is not a Do Nothing button regardless of how it is labeled.

Thanks for the Matthew references. I would still tell Jesus, were he a real person and still alive, that "Thou shalt not commit adultery" only mentions committing, not thinking, and "Thou shalt not kill" doesn't mention hate, in your heart or anywhere else. Do Mark, Luke and John echo Matthew's comments?--Percy

This fog wasn't a quality I was assigning to particular people. I described it as an aspect of the human perceptual/cognitive system. "Fog" is just shorthand for imprecision, inaccuracy, expectations overwhelming actual perceptions, post event influences, misremembering, crowd influence, etc. I don't believe any parts of these stories ever happened. But insufficiently electrifying to make any impact on the record of history. Paul, an ordinary person who performed no miracles, had a greater impact on the historical record than Jesus. They're just stories about witnesses. Anyone can write, "Lot's of people saw it." If you believe on faith that lots of people saw something that's fine. I'm actually imagining no witnesses, since nothing happened. You have faith that the gospels passed these tests. There's no indication that they actually have.--Percy

And yet they're not very clear. Jesus had to re-clarify. But they don't agree on what is murder and what is "lawful killing". Then they don't seem to have any "meaning" at all. If everybody is automatically guilty, it doesn't matter what the commandments are.

Good point.Some would argue that everyone intrinsically knows the difference between right and wrong in that it is written on our heart but that we all fall short of carrying out our duty. Thus, The US can justify collateral damage and civilian casualties without calling our government murderers.Any individual or nation can justify whatever they choose to justify.The question is what GOD, if GOD exists (and of course I believe he does and IS ) would likely think of our justification. An authoritarian God may well smite us.
Jesus seems to always forgive us. Perhaps the question is what our responsibility is....to be authoritarians in Gods name or to be honest with ourselves and each other.